'Timid and Ungenerous Liberalism and Stupidly Unrelenting Toryism'

'Treacy had stated to me that the only way of starting a war was to kill someone and we wanted to start a war, so we intended to kill some of the police whom we looked upon as the foremost and most important branch of the enemy forces which were holding our country in subjection. ... The only regret we had, following the ambush, was that there were only two policemen in it instead of the six we expected, because we felt that six dead policemen would have impressed the country more than a mere two.'1 The Irish War of Independence began on 21 January 1919 with an Irish Republican Army (IRA) ambush on a delivery of explosives escorted by two policemen. That same day, Dáil Éireann (the Irish republican parliament) met for the first time, mobilising both the political and military wings of the republican movement. After over two years of conflict, a truce took effect on 11 July 1921, leading to negotiations that resulted in the Anglo-Irish Treaty, signed on 6 December and ratified on 7 January 1922 The war saw diverse tactics from both sides. The IRA relied on guerrilla warfare, including ambushes, attacks on rural barracks and assassinations. In response, British Crown forces conducted reprisal attacks and implemented martial law, internment and censorship. Martial law was declared on 10 December 1920 in four particularly affected south-western counties Cork, Kerry, Limerick, and Tipperary before being extended to Clare, Waterford, Kilkenny, and Wexford. This thesis examines how the use of martial law was portrayed in The Times and The Manchester Guardian. Employing text analysis and close reading, it explores stereotypes of the Irish and editorialisation to understand how these newspapers portrayed the policy. By analysing linguistic choices, recurring themes, and ideological underpinnings, this thesis investigates how newspapers shaped discourse of the conflict. Special attention is given to representations of Irish identity and nationalism, as well as British policy and Crown force violence. This analysis contributes to broader discussions on media influence, colonial discourse, and the press's role in perpetuating or challenging stereotypes.