Northern Ireland

Privy Council Considers Commission Conundrum – On This Day in 1924

Judicial Committee of Privy Council was asked whether Boundary Commission can legally function without a commissioner appointed by Northern Ireland government

The Boundary Commission convened in 1924, but a year later its report had been shelved and the 'provisional' border adopted - an outcome that pleased Ulster unionists
The Boundary Commission would convene in 1924, but a year later its report had been shelved and the 'provisional' border adopted
By Cormac Moore
July 23 1924

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council had under its consideration yesterday morning the question of the Irish boundary, which has been referred to it in consequence of the deadlock caused by the refusal of the Government of Northern Ireland to appoint a commissioner to represent it on the Boundary Commission, set up by the Act of Parliament which conferred the status of a dominion.

The matter was referred to their lordships by the Crown, and came before them in the form of a series of questions, asking – (1) Whether a Boundary Commission of less than three members can legally function; (2) If not, whether the Imperial Government can nominate a representative for Ulster; (3) If not, whether the Ulster Governor can be instructed to do so; (4) In the last resort, whether any other constitutional means exist whereby the commission can be enabled to function?

The court was composed of Lord Dunedin, Lord Blanesburgh, Mr Justice Duff (of Canada), Sir Adrian Knox (of Australia), and Sir Lawrence Jenkins (a retired Indian judge).

The Attorney-General, Sir Patrick Hastings MP, opened the case on behalf of the Crown, and said that before the matter was referred to the Privy Council Committee an effort had been made to settle this question of the boundaries between the Free State and Northern Ireland, but he regretted to say that these conditions had not been fulfilled, and a settlement had not been arrived at.

The matter had been referred to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council for their advice. A question might arise as to the effect of this reference to their lordships. Counsel then cited cases brought before the Privy Council Judicial Committee from Australia and Ontario (Canada).

The first of these related to the power of one of the Houses of Parliament in Australia to alter a money Bill, and the other dealt with a question of the alteration of boundaries.

“In regard to a matter of such widespread importance as this,” said Sir Patrick, “it is desirable that there should be no doubt at all as to the object for which your lordships have been called together and the effect of any advice that your lordships may think it fit and proper to give his Majesty”.

Due to the northern government refusing to appoint its Boundary Commissioner, the British government sought the advice of the Privy Council Judicial Committee on what courses were open to it.