Editing Constitution of Ireland (section)

===Response===
When the draft new constitution was published, the ''[[Irish Independent]]'' described it as one of de Valera's "finest tributes to his predecessors".<ref name="Dermot Keogh pg. 237">The Vatican, the Bishops and Irish Politics 1919–39 by Dermot Keogh, pg. 237</ref> ''[[The Irish Times]]'' criticised the constitution's assertion of a territorial claim on Northern Ireland, and the absence in its text of any reference to the British Commonwealth.<ref name="Dermot Keogh pg. 237"/> The London-based ''[[The Daily Telegraph|Daily Telegraph]]'' included in its criticism the special position assigned to the Church of Rome under the new constitution.<ref name="Dermot Keogh pg. 237"/> ''[[The Sunday Times]]'' concluded it would only help to "perpetuate division" between Dublin and Belfast. ''[[The Irish Catholic]]'' concluded it was a "noble document in harmony with papal teachings".<ref name="Dermot Keogh pg. 237"/>

When the new constitution was enacted, the British government, according to ''[[The New York Times]]'', "contented itself with a legalistic protest".<ref>[Ulster's Inclusion Barred by Britain; London Protests Claim That Belfast Eventually Must Be Ruled by Dublin; Little Change Is Seen; Premier of Northern Ireland Attacks Constitution as an 'Affront to His Majesty' – New York Times, 30 December 1937]</ref> Its protest took the form of a communiqué on 30 December 1937, in which the British stated:<ref name="circular">{{cite web |url=http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/webarchives/20061111070400/http://www.international.gc.ca/department/history/dcer/details-en.asp?intRefid=9449 |title=Circular dated 1 April 1949 from the Canadian Secretary of State for External Affairs to Heads of Post Abroad (Circular Document No.B38, 836. DEA/7545‑B‑40) |publisher=Lac-bac.gc.ca |access-date=2018-04-09 |archive-date=10 January 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160110093406/http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/webarchives/20061111070400/http://www.international.gc.ca/department/history/dcer/details-en.asp?intRefid=9449 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>[http://century.guardian.co.uk/1930-1939/Story/0,,127133,00.html The Manchester Guardian, 30 December 1937 ''Britain accepts new name for the Free State''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110723234019/http://century.guardian.co.uk/1930-1939/Story/0,,127133,00.html |date=23 July 2011 }}. Full text of British Government's communiqué cited in Clifford, Angela, ''The Constitutional History of Eire/Ireland'', Athol Books, Belfast, 1985, p. 153.</ref><ref>In May 1938 the British government enacted the [[Eire (Confirmation of Agreements) Act 1938]].</ref>

{{blockquote|His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom has considered the position created by the new Constitution ... of the Irish Free State, in future to be described under the Constitution as 'Eire' or 'Ireland' ... [and] cannot recognise that the adoption of the name 'Eire' or 'Ireland', or any other provision of those articles [of the Irish constitution], involves any right to territory ... forming part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ... They therefore regard the use of the name 'Eire' or 'Ireland' in this connection as relating only to that area which has hitherto been known as the Irish Free State.}}

The other governments of the British Commonwealth countries chose to continue to regard Ireland as a member of the British Commonwealth.<ref name="ReferenceA">I.S.C. (32) 129; Cabinet. Irish Situation Committee. Relations With the Irish Free State. General Constitutional Position. Memorandum by the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs The devolved Northern Ireland; December 1937</ref> A proposal by the Northern Ireland government that Northern Ireland be renamed "Ulster" in response to the new Irish constitution was aborted after it was determined that this would require Westminster legislation.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

The Irish government received a message of goodwill from 268 United States congressmen, including eight senators. The signatories expressed "their ardent congratulations on the birth of the State of Ireland and the consequent coming into effect of the new constitution", adding that "We regard the adoption of the new constitution and the emergence of the State of Ireland as events of the utmost importance."<ref>{{cite news |url=http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article2450025?searchTerm=%22Irish+Free+State%22+AND+%28Constitution%29 |title=Irish Free State: American messages of goodwill: Congratulations on New Constitution |newspaper=The Canberra Times |date=1938-01-13 |access-date=2018-04-09 |archive-date=22 September 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210922130943/https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/2450025?searchTerm=%22Irish+Free+State%22+AND+%28Constitution%29 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Feminists such as [[Hannah Sheehy Skeffington]] claimed that certain articles threatened their rights as citizens and as workers. Article 41.2, for example, equated womanhood with motherhood and further specified a woman's 'life within the home'. The Women Graduates' Association, the Joint Committee of Women's Societies and Social Workers, together with the Irish Women Workers' Union mobilised a two-month campaign seeking the provisions' amendment or deletion.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Murray|first=Thomas|date=2016|title=Socio-Economic Rights and the Making of the 1937 Irish Constitution|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07907184.2015.1095738|journal=Irish Political Studies|language=en|volume=31|issue=4|pages=502–524, p. 518|doi=10.1080/07907184.2015.1095738|s2cid=146146322|issn=0790-7184|access-date=4 January 2021|archive-date=8 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210108053403/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07907184.2015.1095738|url-status=live}}</ref>

The Republican Congress also critiqued the constitution's "stone-age conception of womanhood". Writing in the Irish Democrat, Peadar O'Donnell and Frank Ryan condemned the 1937 Constitution for upholding private property as a sacred, 'natural right' and declaring that capitalism was 'something ordained by Providence forever, amen!' The Congress further opposed the Roman Catholic Church's position as a 'State or semi-State church' in violation of republican principles and an offence to Protestants throughout the island. The 'Roman Catholic Bishops of the South', O'Donnell claimed, now functioned as 'the watchdogs of the private property classes'.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Murray|first=Thomas|date=2016|title=Socio-Economic Rights and the Making of the 1937 Irish Constitution|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07907184.2015.1095738|journal=Irish Political Studies|language=en|volume=31|issue=4|pages=502–524, p. 518|doi=10.1080/07907184.2015.1095738|s2cid=146146322|issn=0790-7184|access-date=4 January 2021|archive-date=8 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210108053403/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/07907184.2015.1095738|url-status=live}}</ref>