Talk:Executive Authority (External Relations) Act 1936

message: The following comments have been moved from the main article, where they had been inserted by an anonymous user [IP address 24.152.168.24].
The article text which was commented on has been shown by blockquotes, with the comments themselves being shown in italics.
While de Valera sought later to suggest that the new king was not actually 'King of Ireland', as shown above in the line "the king for those purposes shall henceforth be the person..." George VI was unambigiously declared 'king of Ireland' by the Act
How so, there is no such quote in the act, or any Irish act? Rather, he was delared to be "king," the same wording as in, say, the 1922 consitution, which no one reads as "King of Ireland."
The only change was that his kingship was more limited than had been his brother's. This point was conceded by then Taoiseach John A. Costello in a speech to the Seanad Éireann a decade later.
though he also affirmed the opposite position in the Dail.
The only functions left for the king to carry out were to 
* accept credentials of foreign ambassadors to Ireland;
This is incorrect - a glance at relevant historical works shows that credentials were accepted by the Government in Dublin, not by the King, a practice that started in 1933
These role had all belonged to the king previously via the Free State constitution.
except as just noted that the King did not have the first role from 1933.
Silverhelm 02:26, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments by anonymous user

message: Much of what you read about this act basically boils down to de Valera using the abdication crisis to do what he already kind of wanted to do.  I wonder, though, with such short notice on the abdictation, did de Valera already have something planned along these lines for the constitutional changes that were already under way?  Or was this scheme really cooked up over the course of a few weeks? --Jfruh (talk) 17:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Based on some other articles, the 1937 constitution has already been drafting at this point; de V already notified the Foreign Office of a new constitution half an year ago. The 27th amendment practically embodies most of the 1937 constitution on a 1922 constitution framework as long as the political system is concerned. So, I would say, the 27th amendment, this act, and the Consequential Act effectively made parts of the 1937 Constitution effective in late 1936. So, yes, de V "already have something planned along these lines for the constitutional changes that were already under way."--Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 15:17, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  There're now citations for this claim: As of 1935 the de V administration already planned to do something like that.--Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 19:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  On such short notice? 

message: The article doesn't explain why Dev had an opportunity to bring in this law due to the abdication crisis. Could he not have brought it in just as easily a month or a year beforehand? 2A02:8084:6A22:4980:5D53:18FB:61B:6F24 (talk) 19:12, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: How, exactly, did an abdication crisis enable this Act?