Post on 18-Jan-2017
Canadian Journal of Irish StudiesCanadian Association of Irish Studies
Tho' Changed Be Your Climate, Unchanged Are Your Hearts: Support for Irish Causes in St.John's, Newfoundland, 1840-86Author(s): Caroline LambertSource: The Canadian Journal of Irish Studies, Vol. 34, No. 2, Ireland and Newfoundland /L'Irlande et la Terre Neuve (Fall, 2008), pp. 47-55Published by: Canadian Journal of Irish StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25515719 .
Accessed: 13/06/2014 19:11
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Canadian Journal of Irish Studies and Canadian Association of Irish Studies are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to The Canadian Journal of Irish Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Caroline LAMBERT
Tho' changed
be your climate,
unchanged are
your hearts Support for Irish Causes in St.John's, Newfoundland, 1840-86
Unlike other parts of the North American Irish diaspora there is no detailed study of Irish Catholics in St. John's,
Newfoundland in the nineteenth century, even though they
comprised a significant portion of the population. There is
no comprehensive work that traces their activities as exists
for Toronto, New York and other cities.1 Support for Irish
causes, in particular those of a political nature, is a
major
aspect of Irish Diaspora studies and is the subject of this
article.
Support for Irish causes among Irish Catholics in St.
John's had two main, and perhaps surprising, characteristics
in the period 1840-86. The first characteristic is that Irish
Catholics were committed constitutional nationalists and
would remain so unswervingly. There was never so much as
a hint of anyone, at anytime, supporting violence in Ireland
to achieve Irish freedom. Respect for the British Constitution
and the rights afforded by it, as well as their commitment
to the British Empire, fueled Irish Catholic commitment to
non-physical, parliamentary and law-abiding agitation on Ireland's behalf. These were Daniel O'Connell's guiding
principles, and ones the Irish Catholics in St. John's did not abandon. The more radical forms of Irish nationalism,
including republicanism, which were supported in other
parts of the North American Irish Diaspora in the second
half of the nineteenth century, were not found in St. John's.
The second characteristic is that Irish Catholics did not
always present a unified front on issues relating to Ireland.
Such lack of unity was due to domestic politics and fighting over who controlled the ethnic group in St. John's. These
problems would affect support for Repeal and Home Rule,
in the later case disastrously.
Irish Catholics in St. John's In 1857 the population of St.John's was almost 25,000
of which 73% were Catholic, with only 4007 Irish-born. By 1891 the population of the city had increased to 29,000, but
only 57% were Catholic. There were now only 623 Irish
born in the city.2 The community was not being replenished
by an abundance of new
migrants, and was dominated by second and third generation Irish CathoUcs who were now
well established in St. John's. The fact that St. John's did not receive large numbers of Famine Irish is important to note because had this occurred, the city may well have
experienced the social upheavals and violence that occurred
in New Brunswick, for example.3 Such an influx might also
have driven the community towards a more aggressive stance
on Irish issues.
It is safe to say that Irish Catholics were to be found
amongst all social groups and were well integrated in the
political, social and economic fabric of the city. They made
up the bulk of the Liberal Party and many prominent Irish
Catholics held office.4 They were also leading merchants and
lawyers.5 Irish Catholics had a strong presence in the local
press via two long-running newspapers: the Shea family's
Newfoundlander and Presbyterian RJ. Parson's Patriot and Terra
Nova Herald. This later paper and its editor was pro-Irish
Catholic, to the point where the Patriot can be called a de
facto Catholic paper. In addition to local news and editorials
on Irish issues, the papers carried extensive reprints from
British and Irish papers, which arrived regularly with the
mail packets.
The only Irish society in St. John's in the nineteenth
century was the Benevolent Irish Society. Established in
1806, it was the first fraternal society established in the
colony, and many of its members were part of the colonial
elite. The BIS was non-sectarian and the majority of the
members were Protestants until the 1820s when Catholics
began to dominate.6 This society contained some of the
most important and influential middle-class Irishmen in the
city, and it was these men who took the lead in garnering
support for Irish causes. It is in their addresses that one
gets an idea of how the BIS and its members identified as Irishmen. In 1855 for example,
on the occasion of the
Consecration of the Cathedral, the address to the visiting Catholic Archbishop Hughes of New York proclaimed that
"Loyalty to their sovereign is an instinct and a tradition of
Irishmen [...] Our present gracious Queen fills the throne
she adorns with Imperial dignity and womanly virtues, may she long reign over her boundless Empire, in the affections
of her subjects." The members then drank to her health.7
Toasts to the Queen were annually given at the BIS on St.
Patrick's Day, as well as to Prince Albert and the rest of the
royal family. Interestingly, the toast to the Queen was before
the toast to "Old Ireland as She Ought to Be."8 There was
a strong attachment to the British Empire and evidence of
identifying not only as Irishmen but also as loyal imperial citizens, the latter being seen as entirely compatible with the former. This sentiment was also generally expressed by the
Irish Catholic community in St. John's.
CJIS/RCfcl 34:2 47
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
O'Connell and Repeal The first major Irish nationalist movement in America
was the Repeal movement of the 1840s and as in other
parts of the Diaspora, the Irish Catholics of St. John's took
up the cause.9 Daniel O'Connell was already well known
in Newfoundland as he was the good friend of Catholic
Bishop Michael Fleming, which led to his involvement in
Newfoundland's political issues in the 1820s and 1830s,
specifically regarding Catholic Emancipation for the colony and political reform.10 O'Connell also became embroiled in
opposition to the Newfoundland Bill in 1842.11 Being their
political champion was not the only
reason Catholics in the
city admired him. They had great respect for the peaceful and constitutional principles that guided O'Connell's politics,
his admirers terming him "the moral King of Ireland," and
"the greatest benefactor of Irishmen and their descendants,
the friend of civil and religious liberty all over the world."12
His means and his political message resonated with Irishmen
in the city who believed themselves to be amongst the most
loyal colonists in the Empire.
Despite such admiration for O'Connell, organized
public support for the Repeal movement took time to build
in Newfoundland. There was apathy towards the issue in
1842 and it would take an external push to spur action. In
May 1843, the Waterford Chronicle remarked that no action had
yet taken place on
Repeal in Newfoundland, arguing that a
place with so many Waterford Irish could do better.13 This
indeed shamed many Waterford Irish' and the following month the cause was
officially taken up in the capital city.
However, only one large meeting was held. On 29 June 1843
about 200 people gathered at an outdoor venue and sums of
money were collected for the cause.14 It was decided at the
meeting that an organization to be named the Loyal Repeal Association of Newfoundland be founded. The donation,
with a letter of introduction and an address to O'Connell,
was promptly
sent to Ireland. An official thanks from the
Loyal National Repeal Association was received by the end
of August along with extracts from a meeting in Ireland
where O'Connell praised supporters in Newfoundland for
their contribution.15
Although there were not many meetings in the city regarding Repeal, the Irish Catholics of St. John's showed
their support by becoming involved in Repeal activities in
other parts of the Diaspora. In early 1844 efforts were made
to co-ordinate Repeal support in the other colonies and
Newfoundland was not left out.16 Communication between
Repeal associations already existed, as in the summer of
1843 when prominent Repealers from Newfoundland
accompanied by Halifax Repealers went to Charlottetown,
PEI, to establish a Repeal organization. Their efforts were
successful, including holding a large meeting of 300 people.17 Now there were
plans for something bigger. On 3 January
1844 the Patriot printed the minutes of the proceedings of
the Halifax Repeal Association along with a letter from their
chairman to the Secretary of the Repeal Association in St.
John's. Repealers in Halifax and Albany, New York, jointly arrived at the idea of holding
a universal demonstration of
the Friends of Repeal, which would consist of all of the
North American Repeal associations holding "simultaneous
meetings" on the third Monday in January
to express
continent-wide support for Ireland's cause.
On Monday 15 January 1844 a meeting did in fact
take place in St. John's at Kielty's long-room.18 Resolutions
were passed that supported O'Connell and Repeal, that
condemned Her Majesty's Ministers' mismanagement of
Ireland's affairs, and that thanked their fellow Repealers in
Halifax for proposing Ireland's Monday.' Unfortunately, the
texts of the speeches given were not
printed in the papers.19
Collection for the Repeal Fund was undertaken and the list
of contributors of that day was
printed with amounts, and
additions to this list were printed thereafter.20 The creation
of petitions to the House of Commons and to the Queen,
as well as an address to the people of Ireland were discussed
at the Repeal meeting the following Monday.21 The dominant theme of all Repeal activities in the city
was loyalty to the Crown and the Empire. At the Repeal
meeting in 1843 it was reiterated that despite rumours abroad,
Repealers wished to remain a part of the British Empire, a
desire not incompatible with "Justice to Ireland." This drew
cheers from the crowd. The meeting ended with cheers not
only for O'Connell, Repeal and Bishop Fleming, but also
for the Queen and Governor Sir John Harvey.22 Imperial
loyalty was also evident at a meeting held on the occasion of
O'Connell's sentencing to prison that summer. A resolution
passed stated: "the people of Newfoundland distinguished as they have ever been for their loyalty to the Throne and
their attachment to the laws and Constitution of the country,
in supporting the Repeal agitation, will govern themselves
by these patriot principles."23 This resolution clearly reveals
loyalty to the Monarchy, belief in constitutional nationalism
as expressed by their affection for the British Constitution, and determination to support Irish liberty, which, to them,
was not incompatible with support of the Empire. When O'Connell was released from prison that same
fall, the Irish community saw it as a vindication of these very
principles. John Nugent, an Irish-born teacher, politician
and proprietor of the short-lived Newfoundland Indicator,
made the point: "it establishes the right of freemen to
meet for legitimate purposes -
for the considering of
subjects connected with their political condition [...] the
privileges of British subjects recognized and guaranteed
by the Constitution." This was the heart of constitutional
nationalism: using peaceful and legal assemblies as a means
to achieve their goals could not be denied by law.
Even the Colonial administration in St. John's
recognized Irishmen's respect for British laws. Writing to
London, Governor Harvey described Irish Catholic Repeal
agitators in St. John's "as quiet, orderly, and well disposed
and as I firmly believe as any Royal Subjects as any one to
be found in any part of Her Majesty's Dominions."24 This was
certainly an indication of the character and leadership
of Repeal activities in the city, but more broadly Harvey's comments say something about the position of Irish
Catholics in Newfoundland society. Several Irish Catholics were part of the Colonial Government and were
respected not only by Catholics, but also by many in the Protestant
elite. Loyalty to the Crown and British Constitution was not
just a
requirement of the positions they held as part of the
political administration, but it was a genuine sentiment.
48 LAMBERT Support for Irish Causes in St. John's
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
There was, of course, more than the purely political at work here. Nostalgia
was a powerful factor in support
of Irish causes. In a speech given when O'Connell was
sentenced, Patrick Kough, a builder and prominent
member of the BIS, recounted to those assembled his own
experience of migrating from Ireland. Although he had left
Ireland some forty years before, he stated that leaving did
not mean forgetting the land of his birth and that he still
dreamt of visiting Ireland some day. He appealed to others
in the audience who dreamt the same and who, like him,
remembered Ireland's history of trouble: "shall we not all,
however, show that separation has not created forgetfulness
of our fatherland and that we are ready to
sympathize with
those who suffer for Ireland."25 It was a powerful speech
and his professions of sympathy and sentimentality can
be accurately held up as representative of a
general feeling
towards Ireland.
Disunited Community On the surface it would appear that the Irish Catholics
of St. John's were a unified body supporting their beloved
Erin. Beneath the surface, however, there were tensions in
the community that often prevented unified action on Irish
causes. What was happening
was the inevitable by-product
of being an established ethnic group: local differences were splitting the group into rival factions fighting over
domestic power.26 In the 1830s the Liberal party became
dominated by immigrant Irishmen and closely allied with
the ecclesiastical hierarchy. Bishop Fleming was well known
for his ultramontane, controlling manner (the importance
of this association is discussed below). There was another
group of Catholics, however, most of whom were native
born and who did not care for the Bishop's and his followers'
attempts to direct the community. The complicated politics of this inter-Catholic warfare have been examined by several
historians, and the turbulent 1830s coloured much of the
decade that followed.27
In relation to Irish nationalist activity in St. John's, this
power struggle was evident in 1843 over who was
going to
lead Repeal agitation in the city. The Mechanics' Society
had been the driving force behind the Repeal Association of Newfoundland. The Society, established on 3 March
1827, was a fraternal and benefit organization that provided
compensation to the families of deceased or injured
members who were mostly drawn from the working class,
the vast majority of which were Irish Catholic. The executive
consisted of some of the better-known Catholics in the city and its membership
was made up of what one might call
'independently minded Catholics.'28 This latter point was the
reason Bishop Fleming condemned them from the pulpit
twice, calling on Catholics to
keep away from the Repeal
meetings.29 The Repeal Association's executive members
made clear that they would not be bullied by the prelate, although two of them resigned their officer positions for this very reason. The chairman of the Repeal Association,
Thomas Meagher, who was also President of the Mechanics'
Society, stated that nothing would make him resign.30 He
and others sniped that those Liberals around Fleming had no need for the people now that they had been elected, and
that "unlike the patriotic magistrates of Ireland, who yielded
place and pension to their country's weal, the sham patriots
of Newfoundland clung to the parlieurs of Government
house and pitched Repeal to the winds." A resolution to
proceed with their activities was passed unanimously.31 It
is unclear what effect Fleming's dictate had on the Catholic
congregation, but Repeal meetings continued.
This rift in the Catholic community was not healed
until the imprisonment of O'Connell in 1844. That event
was so traumatic to Irish nationalists in St. John's that local
differences appear to have been forgotten. Public speeches on this occasion called for a
burying of the hatchet at home
for the greater good of Ireland. Many of the speakers
acknowledged the division in the community and were
pleased that all had been forgiven. These included three of
Bishop Fleming's closest associates: politicians John Kent,
Laurence O'Brien and John Nugent. A member of the BIS,
John O'Mara, summed up the mood stating "he saw around
him the friends of Ireland of all shades of local politics [...] friends who ought
never have been separated from
them [...] they had not allowed any petty differences to
prevent the amalgamation of all lovers of their fatherland." 32
Unfortunately, shared sentiment had not been strong
enough to prevent the rift in the first place and would not
be enough to prevent problems in the future.
Young Ireland
In the late 1840s things were changing in Ireland. News of O'Connell's death reached St. John's in late June 1847
and Catholics in the city were devastated. For two days the
Patriot was published with thick, black lines on its columns as a
sign of mourning.33 Friends and admirers of O'Connell
gathered on the evening of 26 June 1847 to pay tribute to
him. Leading Catholic politicians and leaders of the Catholic
community attended, offering their condolences to the
O'Connell family and the Irish nation. A Mass was held on
1 July for the repose of O'Connell's soul. On that day it was
resolved to close businesses, blind the windows of private
houses, and to wear crepe upon the hats of supporters for
a period of one month starting from the Mass.34
Thereafter the news of the day was no longer Repeal,
but Young Ireland. The reaction of Irish Catholics in St.
John's to the movement was characterized by a condemnation
of its violent methods, followed by an immediate forgiveness
of those involved: forgiveness fuelled by the belief that love of country had motivated their actions. As tension built
in Ireland in 1848, the Newfoundlander made its position clear: "We do not deny that the state of things in Ireland
[necessitates] the enforcement of stringent measures for
the protection of life, and the punishment of violence
and outrage."35 In the face of violence, even constitutional
nationalists in St. John's could support coercion. However,
when John Mitchel, the editor of the United Irishman, was
convicted of treason, a meeting of sympathy
was held in St.
John's, which established a Mitchel Fund to support his wife and family. Within two weeks ?150 had been raised.36
Despite the geographically imposed delay in obtaining the news from Ireland, the feeling that matters were
coming to a head must have been unmistakable in St. John's. In July 1848 citizens were able to read William Smith O'Brien's
CJIS/RCfcl 34:2 49
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
address to the Irish people on the occasion of Mitchel's
sentencing. By 2 August news of the arrest of leading Young Irelanders had reached the city including Thomas Francis
Meagher, grandson of the famous Newfoundland merchant
Thomas Meagher.37 In mid-month a sensational rumor
circulated that fighting had broken out in Ireland, apparently started by
a letter written by a Harbour Grace merchant
who claimed to have read of it in a London paper. The St.
John's papers denied it. Nevertheless, rumors abounded in St.
John's of possible outbreaks of violence and confirmation
was finally received in St. John's at the end of the month.38
It was all over that quickly.
The failure of the Young Ireland rebellion came as
no surprise
to the Newfoundlander, "this insane encounter"
being now over, Ireland "is again well-nigh consigned
to
the Slough of Despond." The paper stated that there was
no support for such an endeavor, thus the inevitability of
failure. However, the paper optimistically announced that
Repeal was still possible, and that agitation
on that question
would quickly resume.39 The editor of the Times and General
Commercial Gazette, a Protestant and conservative newspaper,
not surprisingly also denounced the Young Ireland rebellion -
minus any encouragement for Repeal, of course - as "a
mad and wicked measure [that] has brought confusion and
ruin upon the leaders of the insurgents."40 That the Irish
Catholic and Protestant Conservative papers held the same
opinion reveals just how conservative Catholic opinion in
the city was
concerning Irish political issues.
Disapproval of Young Ireland's actions did not mean
that there was a lack of understanding of their plight.
When other members of Young Ireland were sentenced
to transportation after their failed rebellion, the St. John's
Catholics offered sympathy. While having never
supported their actions, the Newfoundlander now took a
highly
sympathetic view of what had occurred. "They aimed at
an issue which success would have sanctioned," the editor
wrote, "
[...] but they failed, they miscalculated means
and resources ? they erred in judgment [...] The crime was
not in the views which they entertained, but in the want
of power to bring them to an
accomplishment."41 Given
the undeniable commitment to constitutional nationalism
amongst supporters of O'Connellism and Repeal in St.
John's, such forgiveness was generous. It is unknown if this
sentiment was widespread, but given the press' own desire
not to alienate their readers, one must assume that sympathy for the Young Irelanders was common
enough in the capital
city. They were, after all, fighting for Ireland no matter how
misguided they may have been.
William Smith O'Brien's Visit to St. John's That Young Irelanders could be forgiven by the St.
John's Irish Catholics for their use of violence was proven in 1859 when William Smith O'Brien, traveling by the steamer Prince Albert from Galway to New York, arrived in
the colony. The city was abuzz and the Irish Catholics in
particular were eager to see him, given that he was the most
famous Irishman to ever set foot on the island. As such he
received special treatment, staying as the guest of Catholic
Bishop John Thomas Mullock at the Episcopal Residence
during his one-day unscheduled visit. On the evening of his
arrival, Smith O'Brien spoke with representatives from the
BIS and other Catholic societies, along with the Colonial
Secretary.42 The BIS and the Mechanics' Societies formed a
procession followed by thousands of people and marched
to the schoolroom of the Presentation Convent. The crowd
enthusiastically greeted Smith O'Brien with "loud and hearty cheers." The tone of a BIS address was almost worshipful, and certainly contained no hint of the violent actions of
which he had been a part of in Ireland:
To us, Irishmen, some by birth, and others by descent, the name of
William Smith O'Brien has long been intimate and venerated. We
have deeply sympathized with you in your struggles and misfortunes.
We have mourned for you during your eight years of penal exile at
the Antipodes and we rejoice with that warmth which true devotion
and love can only excite.43
In fact, the BIS discreedy circumvented the more illegal parts of Smith O'Brien's political career by focusing on
his personal merits: "We refrain from any expressions of
opinion as to your political career, but we tender to you our
warm admiration of your private virtues and of your self
sacrificing devotion to your opinions and principles."44 The
Mechanics' Society presented an address as well, in which
they too extolled his personal virtues. "As Irishmen and sons
of Irishmen," the Society offered "respect and admiration,"
as well as regret that his time here was so short, as they
would have wished to have given him a grander welcome.
These were strong words of praise for a man whose methods
were denounced by the Irish Catholic community in general.
Nevertheless, the BIS assured O'Brien that "you will ever live
in the hearts of the Members of this Society," greeting him
"in the true spirit of Irish Verse, Ceade-Mille-Failtha."45
Standing next to Bishop Mullock, Smith O'Brien was
visibly affected by the addresses presented to him. In reply, he too avoided direct references to
Young Ireland, stating
only that the Irish in St. John's were
clearly aware of his past
political career. He was
impressed with the warm welcome
and strong Irish spirit he had found here, and declared that he saw in the city "all the best characteristics of the Irish
race."46 Late that night, Smith O'Brien was accompanied
back to the ship by the Bishop and his clergy. An immense crowd followed him down to the harbour.47 The visit was
demonstrative of a strong, continued attachment to Ireland
and those who fought for her independence ?
although the Irish Catholics in the city were careful not to focus
on the 'fighting' part of Smith O'Brien's career. What was
important, as with the other Young Irelanders, was that
although their methods were misguided, their intentions
were admirable. Smith O'Brien was redeemable in the eyes of
Irish Catholics in St. John's because his actions were guided by a love of Ireland.
The Fenians
Reaction to the Fenian activities of the 1860s was the same as with Young Ireland. The Fenians were
republican,
revolutionary, and in favor of an independent Irish
republic, which they believed was attainable by physical force. Not surprisingly, their tactics and reasoning found
no visible support amongst Irish Catholics in the capital
city. Their use of violence to achieve Irish independence 50 LAMBERT Support for Irish Causes in St. John's
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
was viewed as a "wretched conspiracy" that had no chance
of success. Violence was not the means to freedom, and
whatever outbreaks occurred would serve only to show
"the worthlessness of all concerned in the movement."48
Ambrose Shea, a leading Catholic politician, summed it up
in the House of Assembly when he referred to Fenians as
being "the vilest of the vile."49
As in British North America, St. John's experienced its
own Fenian scare. Rumor of a Fenian presence was causing
much excitement amongst citizens and led Imperial officials
to double the guard on barracks. The guns were double
manned and the pomp and circumstance of military display was
underway.50 These were only rumors, however, and the
loyalty of the Catholic population of the city "has been
often proven and never doubted," affirmed the Patriot on 17
January 1865. The Newfoundlander protested that "A baser or
more diabolical calumny upon the Catholic community could
not have been forged or conceived [...] Not only is there
no such society here [...] were it proposed, it would be met
with universal reprobation." To accuse Irish Catholics here
of being Fenians, "the enemies of peace and good-will," was offensive.51
News of the Fenian raid on Canada reached St. John's
in June 1866.52 The raid was summarized as "practically
nothing more than a
hopeless, insane waste of human life."53
In October, the Protestant newspaper Telegraph and Political
Review reported with alarm that "midnight meetings" and
"solemn conclaves" of Fenians were being held in St. John's
for the purposes of revolution where violence would "hold
high carnival." The Patriotwzs swift to condemn the paper for
spreading rumors at a time when sister colonies were under
real threat of invasion. "[Creating] fearful apprehension in
the public mind," wrote the editor, "[would] disrupt the
harmony which now happily prevails in this community among all classes and creeds."54 There is no
proof that any
such meetings ever occurred and Newfoundland remained
safe from any real Fenian threat.
The O'Connell Centennial
Shortly after such a strong repudiation of violence,
Irish Catholics in St. John's showed their support for the constitutional and peaceful wing of Irish nationalism. In
1875 Irish Catholics in St. John's once again professed their love for the Liberator by joining their fellow Irishmen at
home and abroad in celebrating the centennial anniversary of Daniel O'Connell. The festivities spanned two days, 5-6
August and included processions, fireworks, a picnic with
public amusements, and an oration on the life of O'Connell
delivered by Philip Little, an Irish Catholic who had served as the colony's first Premier from 1855-8. Thousands
attended.55
In preparing the celebrations, a circular addressed
to all fellow countrymen referred to O'Connell's great
humanitarian efforts within the Empire and for the benefit
of mankind in general, in addition to his undying love for Ireland.56 Interestingly, the circular contained two
warnings
implicitly referring to past events during the time of
Repeal in the 1840s. First, it was urged that Newfoundland should not lag behind other parts of the British Empire in
commemorating O'Connell's achievements. Given the
slowness with which support for Repeal took hold, one
could read this as a gende warning
not to appear apathetic
yet again or to be outdone by any other part of the Irish
Diaspora. Second, the circular featured a reminder not to
repeat past follies, in particular to put aside "all differences,
forgetful of everything" in order to honor the Liberator.57
This was undoubtedly a reference to the infighting and
struggle for leadership had that surrounded the Repeal
campaign in St. John's.
The Home Rule Debacle
The importance of domestic politics was again evident
in the 1880s over the issue of support for Home Rule,
just as it was in the time of Repeal but with far greater
consequences. The problems during the 1840s impeded unified action but did not stop it altogether. With Home
Rule, however, the resulting discord was disastrous, and it
was certainly not due to a lack of support among the general
Irish Catholic population. In April 1886 the Irish Home
Rule Bill was introduced in the House of Commons and
the news was met with joy in St. John's. The Evening Telegram
reported "even through the cold fogs of Newfoundland
the shout for Ireland's freedom was lifted heavenwards last
night by the children of the wide-scattered race." Ireland, it
was said, was now finally going to enjoy the privileges that
Irishmen in Newfoundland had enjoyed for so long.58 This was a reference to
Responsible Government, granted to
Newfoundland in 1855. In fact, the Irish Catholics of St.
John's were opposed to Confederation with Canada because
they would lose their 'Newfoundland Home Rule.' At an
anti-Confederate rally in 1873 the candidates marched under
the green flag of Erin with harp and the words 'Home Rule' woven into it. In addressing the electors Parsons pointed out that Newfoundlanders already had what Ireland was
fighting to attain.59
In early May the local press printed resolutions
supporting Home Rule that had been passed in other parts of the Diaspora, and the Catholic-supporting Colonist asked its more
distinguished readers to send in their views regarding the Home Rule Bill.60 Thomas Talbot, High Sherriff of
Newfoundland, wrote the paper expressing his support for
the cause. An Irish Catholic schoolteacher, and apparentiy the only Irish Catholic politician to contribute an
opinion, he believed "that nothing short of a free Parliament [...] can
ever satisfy the just and honorable aspirations of the Irish
people [...] By a free Parliament I mean not a Parliament
severed from, but resting upon the Crown and Parliament of
England [...] [it is] a policy at once of justice to Ireland, and of increased strength and stability to the British Empire."61 This is the same constitutional nationalist rhetoric that was
in evidence during the time of Repeal. On 10 May 1886 George Emerson, a Protestant MHA
for Placentia St. Mary's, gave notice that he would introduce
into the House of Assembly a series of resolutions supporting
Gladstone and Home Rule. The editor of the Colonist stated that he was right to do so because of the support for the issue among the local press and the clergy.62 Oddly enough, some Irish Catholics did not agree. The Liberal leadership took exception to Emerson's plans and called a
meeting, at
CJIS/RC6I 34:2 51
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
which Irish Catholic leaders Ambrose Shea and Robert Kent
passed a resolution not to support Emerson in the House
of Assembly. One hour before the meeting of the House
on 13 May, Irish Catholic party member Michael Carty let
Shea know that he would second Emerson's resolutions. No
doubt Carty's decision was due to an ultimatum from his
father, a native of Ireland, who had apparently advised his
son that "you need not return to this House if you do not
show yourself to be an Irishman."63
Emerson opened his address by noting that legislatures
in other colonies had passed similar resolutions in support
of Home Rule. He was, however, dismayed to learn that
there were Irishmen and descendants of Irishmen in this
colony who were opposed to Newfoundland doing the same. He hoped that their patriotism would win out over
jealousy and the resolutions would be supported. If rejected, Newfoundland would be the only Colonial legislature not to
send its support for the cause.64 His reference to jealousy is
an interesting one, and would seem to refer to the fact that
he, a Protestant who was already distanced from the party
over a previous clash with Edward Morris, had beaten great
Catholic leaders Shea and Kent to the table with a pro-Home
Rule motion. The latter had claimed that they planned to
pass a motion themselves at some point.65
Emerson's resolutions were moderate, simply supporting
the principle of Home Rule and asserting that such a measure
would strengthen the Empire, there seeming to be nothing
objectionable in them. As Emerson was speaking, the
government party members left, with only five members
of their party remaining behind. Carty then seconded
Emerson's motion. While Carty was speaking, Shea left
the House taking the entire opposition Liberal party with
him.66 Without sufficient numbers House business could
not proceed,
so the resolution failed. Carty declared that this
humiliating behavior was "an insult to both to Ireland and
this Colony, and they [the members] will have to account for
it in their constituencies [...] As a member of this legislature, and an Irishman, I have much pleasure in seconding the
motion."67
Irish Catholics in St. John's were shocked. It was
thought that the representatives in the House "would feel an
honest pride in following the example of Canada, America
and Australia."68 Enraged at the actions of their elected
representatives in confounding support for Home Rule, calls
were put out for the resignation of Robert Kent from the
Presidency of the BIS. The day after derailing Emerson's
Home Rule resolution, the BIS held a meeting at which all
the leading Catholics were present. It was agreed that two
pro-Home Rule measures would be adopted within the
society, one sent to Parnell and one to Gladstone. It was
damage control, but in spite of trying to smooth things
over
Carty was still expelled from the Liberal party for seconding the motion.69
As some noted, it was not Emerson and Carty who were
hurt, but "it was Ireland and her cause that were humiliated."
The failure of leading Irish Catholic politicians to support Home Rule was viewed by many as a
slap in the face to the
Irishmen and descendants of Irishmen in Newfoundland
who felt a deep connection to the land of their forefathers.70
One letter to the editor expressed disgust, vowing that
it would not soon be forgotten: "This is an act that the
thousands of Irish descent and all the liberal minded men
of the colony shall look upon with feelings of unfeigned
disgust, and shall shrink back from in lively horror." These
men were put in the House by these Irishmen and their
descendants, and all they had done was "proved themselves
recreants to the land of their forefathers in her hour of
anxiety and misgiving!"71
The whole notion of the connection between the
old Catholic Liberal party and Irish causes was being
questioned.72 Reverend M.A Clancey, a Catholic priest in
Placentia, wrote a letter expressing his dismay at what had
occurred: "We should have hoped that broader and more
enlightened views would have characterized any party
pretending to profess Liberal principles." The actions of
the Liberals were, in his opinion, not in accordance with any
Irish feeling in the colony.73 Those who strongly supported Home Rule railed against the Liberals and their leader, Ambrose Shea, arguing that he had acted out of "personal
pique." Letters to the editor branded them as "traducers,"
the "Shea-avenging, ever-twisting, vacillating, compromising,
office-seeking party." It was asked how Irishmen who had
fought for Responsible Government could turn their backs on Home Rule. One letter barked, "I'd rather be a
dog and
bay at the moon than such an Irishman [...] their smallness
and spleen are such as to lead them into a
political bungle which will stand forever as a blot on their names and a
reproach to this country."74 It is hard to believe that it was all because of petty
jealousy over who tabled the resolution, as Emerson himself
believed it was. Yet that is what appears to be the case. There
is, however, another possible reason, one that Shea and Kent
as Catholic leaders may have had on their minds. On 26
December 1883 there was ugly clash between rival mobs of
Protestants and Catholics in Harbor Grace, wherein several
people were killed and multiple Catholics placed on trial and later acquitted. This is known as the Harbor Grace Affray, the fallout of which strained politics during the decade.
One result of this was the 1885 general election victory of Robert Thorburn, a Protestant Conservative, elected on a
promise that he would not make an alliance with Catholics.
By the summer of 1886, Thorburn was preparing to do just
that, and in fact Catholics were brought into the fold by that
July.75 At this time of increased tension, perhaps the Liberal
leadership felt that supporting a
pro-Home Rule resolution
would be too inflammatory. At least a few people
at the time
suspected that political intrigue was behind the Home Rule debacle. In a letter to the editor, a BIS member pointed to
the Society's concealment of the replies to the resolutions
sent to Parnell and Gladstone. They were dated 6 June, but the executive had denied receiving them, and only produced them to the members in late August, after the Liberals had
backed Thorburn's government. In the opinion of the
unnamed BIS member, they were concealed because they
"might mitigate against the Shea, Winter, Fenelon & Co.
Amalgamation Bubble Scheme," Shea and the others named
being key players in the political dealing that took place that summer.76 The
leadership, however, was not reflective of the
will of the majority of Irish Catholics, as seen by the anger at
52 LAMBERT Support for Irish Causes in St. John's
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
their actions. Had it been left to the ordinary Irish Catholic
citizen, the results would have been different.77
Conclusion
Despite some internal conflicts, the St. John's Irish
Catholics became involved in all the major Irish causes
from 1840 through to the end of the 1880s as dedicated
constitutional nationalists. In the case of the O'Connell
Centenary it was through celebration. In the case of Repeal
it was by offering moral and financial support. In the case
of Young Ireland and the Fenians it was by repudiation and
fear, respectively. Only in the case of Home Rule did support falter, and then only due to domestic political squabbling, not any lack of loyalty to the land of their forefathers.
Despite that unfortunate incident, Irish Catholics in the city
maintained a constant attachment to Ireland and an interest
in its affairs. Even William Smith O'Brien, a stranger to
Newfoundland, could remark of the St. John's Irish Catholics
that "the rigor of this climate has not chilled the warm pulses
of the Irish heart."78
Notes:
1 The tide quotation is from a pro-Repeal poem entided "Ireland
- Repeal!" written by "A Lady," published in the Patriot and Terra
Nova Herald, 17 May 1843. This poem specifically links Ireland and
Newfoundland in a plea for involvement in the Repeal cause. My
forthcoming thesis seeks to address this lacuna.
2 Newfoundland Census, 1857, 1891.
3 See Scott See, Riots in New Brunswick: Orange Nativism and Social
Violence in the 1840s (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993).
4 From 1832 Newfoundland had Representative Government, which
consisted of an elected Assembly of 15 seats and a Governor
appointed Legislative Council. Almost all men had the right to vote,
but not women. The majority of the Assembly was comprised of
Irish Catholics, while the appointed positions were dominated by
Anglicans who controlled patronage, causing much resentment. In
1855 Newfoundland was granted Responsible Government that
lasted until 1933. Under this system the Executive Council was
comprised of elected members of the Assembly appointed to it by the Governor. The Executive Council had to maintain the support of the majority of members in the Assembly. The Government
served a 4-year term. The head of the Government was referred
to as the Premier. In 1855 the majority Catholic Liberals attained
power and held it until 1861. The only detailed political history of
Newfoundland in this period is Gertrude E. Gunn, The Political
History of Newfoundland, 1832-1864 (Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 1966).
5 Men such as John Kent, Laurence O'Brien, Patrick Morris, Phillip
Littie, Robert Kent, John Valentine Nugent, and Ambrose Shea
were all leaders of the Irish Catholic community.
6 John Fitzgerald, "Conflict and Culture in Irish Newfoundland
Roman Catholicism, 1829-1850," (PhD. Thesis, University of
Ottawa, 1997): 46-7.
7 BIS Minutes, 11 September 1855.
8 See for example, BIS Minutes, 17 March 1846, which saw the Queen
in the second position after St. Patrick, while "Old Ireland as She
Ought to Be" was seventh after toasts for the Army, Navy and the
Lord Lieutenant. O'Connell was fifteenth well after the Protestant
Bishop and Clergy of St. John's.
9 Kevin Kenny, The American Irish (New York: Pearson, 2000):
86-7.
10 The Relief Act of 1829 did not apply to Newfoundland because
the laws that the Act repealed were never applied officially in the
colony, "leaving Newfoundland as the only British colony still
under penal rule." Petitions were sent to the House of Commons
through O'Connell, and Fleming lobbied on the issue as well.
Emancipation and the fight for a local legislature were the two
main issues in the colony in 1830-31. In 1832 Newfoundland was
granted a local legislature like that of the neighbouring provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Fitzgerald, "Culture and
Conflict," 88-9,104,106,110-113, 363.
11 The British Government undertook a review of the 1832
Newfoundland Constitution in 1841, and in 1842 a new constitution
was implemented resulting in an Amalgamated Legislature, which
lasted until 1848. See Gertrude E. Gunn, The Political History, 77-86;
Fitzgerald, "Culture and Conflict," 361-3.
12 Newfoundlander, 6 September 1832,1 July 1847.
13 The Weekly Waterford Chronicle, quoted in the Patriot, 24 May 1843;
Patriot, 31 May 1843.
14 Patriot, 5 July 1843; Public Ledger, 30 June 1843.
15 Patriot, 23 August 1843. On the 30th the Patriot reprinted another
letter from the Loyal National Repeal Association to Rev. J.P. Gleeson of Harbour Grace thanking him for the ?10 in donations
that he passed on to them. In return contributors received Repeal cards.
16 There were efforts to establish a
Repeal campaign in Halifax, but there too it was slow to start and only a minority of the
Irishmen seemed to have supported it. It did, however, manage to
send donations back to Ireland. See Terrence Punch, Irish Halifax
(Halifax: St. Mary's University, 1981): 32-4.
17 Terrence Punch, "Larry Doyle and Nova Scotia," Talamh an Lisa
Canadian and Irish Essays (C.J. Byrne and M. Harry, eds. Halifax: St.
Mary's University, 1986): 175.
18 In addition to Halifax and New York, Charlottetown held a similar
meeting the following Monday with the same purpose in mind.
Brendan O'Grady, Exiles and Islanders (Montreal and Kingston:
McGill-Queen's University Press, 2004): 190.
19 Patriot, 17 January 1844.
20 Patriot, 17, 24, 31 January 1844.
21 Patriot, 24 January 1844.
22 Patriot, 5 July 1843.
23 Patriot, 3 July 1844.
24 CO 194/120, 236-7.
CJIS/RC?l 34:2 53
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
25 Newfoundlander, 4 July 1844.
26 For discussion of this concept see Jeffrey Reitz, The Survival of
Ethnic Groups (Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1980): 24-5,127-8.
27 The workings of this in the 1840s will be explored in depth in
my forthcoming thesis. Ample examples of the conflicts can be
found in: Fitzgerald, "Culture and Conflict"; John R Greene, Between
Damnation and Starvation: Priests and Merchants in Newfoundland Politics,
1745-1855 (Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1999); and
Patrick O'Flaherty, Old Newfoundland: A History to 1843 (St.John's:
Long Beach Press, 1999.)
28 Fitzgerald, "Irish Fraternities in 19th Century St. John's."
29 Ledger, 3 and 7 November 1843.
30 Patriot, 8 November 1843. This is the son of the famous
Newfoundland merchant, also named Thomas. His own son,
Thomas Francis Meagher, would become 'Meagher of the Sword'
of Irish nationalist fame. John Mannion has dealt extensively with the Newfoundland connections of the Meagher family
in two articles: "Migration and upward mobility: The Meagher
family in Ireland and Newfoundland, 1780-1830," Irish Economic
& Social History, 15 (1988), 54-70; and "From comfortable farms
to mercantile commerce and cultural politics: the social origins and family connections of Thomas Francis Meagher," Decies, 59
(2003), 1-29.
31 Patriot, 8 November 1843.
32 Newfoundlander, 4 July 1844.
33 Newfoundlander, 24 June 1847; Patriot, 24 June 1847.
34 Newfoundlander, 1 July 1847. Though suggested at the meeting,
nothing seems to have come of the idea of common colonial
activity on O'Connell's death.
35 Newfoundlander, 6 July 1848.
36 Newfoundlander, 6 July 1848; Times, 1 and 12 July 1848.
37 Times, 8 July and 2 August 1848; Patriot, 2 and 16 August 1848.
On Meagher's Newfoundland connections see fn.30 here. On 22
April 1848 Meagher was named in an article in the Times with Smith
O'Brien; both were charged with seditious libel for speeches at the
Music Hall in Dublin. News of his arrest came on 2 August. A short
biography article did not mention the Newfoundland connection,
nor did the Times, 30 August 1848 list of prisoners.
38 Patriot, 18 August 1848; Times, 19, 23 and 26 August 1848.
39 Newfoundlander, 7 September 1848.
40 Times, 13 September 1848.
41 Newfoundlander, 9 August 1849 (original emphasis).
42 Newfoundlander, 21 February 1859.
43 BIS Minutes, 18 February 1859; Newfoundlander, 21 February 1859.
44 BIS Minutes, 18 February 1859.
45 Newfoundlander, 28 February 1859.
46 BIS Minutes, 18 February 1859; Newfoundlander, 21 February 1859.
47 Newfoundlander, 21 February 1859.
48 Newfoundlander, 5 October 1865. On the Fenians see R.V.
Comerford, The Fenians in Context (Dublin; Wolfhound Press, 1998) and John Newsinger, Fenianism in Mid-Victorian Britain (London: Pluto P, 1994).
54 LAMBERT Support for Irish Causes in St. John's
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
49 Spoken by Ambrose Shea in reference to the Fenians during a speech
in the House of Assembly, quoted in the Times, 14 April 1866.
50Newfoundlander, 19 January 1865.
51 Newfoundlander, 12 January 1865.
52 Patriot, 16 June 1866. In addition to the well-known attack on
Canada, there was also a series of smaller clashes in New Brunswick
during that spring; Gary W Libby, "Maine and the Fenian Invasion
of Canada, 1866," They Change Their Sky: The Irish in Maine (Michael
C. Connolly, ed. Maine: U of Maine P, 2004).
53 Newfoundlander, 21 June, 1866.
54 Patriot, 20 October 1866.
55 BIS Minutes, no date given but found after the entry for 25 July
1875; Newfoundlander, 10 August 1875; Patriot, 21 August 1875.
56 Newfoundlander, 18 July 1875.
57 Newfoundlander, 16 July 1875.
58 Evening Telegram, 12 and 13 April 1886.
59 Patriot, 4 October and 7 November 1873.
60 Colonist, 3 May \m.
bx Colonist, 10 May 1886.
62 Colonist, 15 May 1886. This is the grandson of the GH. Emerson
who had served in various capacities in the 1840s-50s.
63 Slattery Papers, Letter #100, 24 May 1886 (St. John's: Fleming
to Holland).
M Colonist, 17 May 1886.
65 Slattery Papers, Letter #100, 24 May 1886 (St. John's: Fleming
to Holland).
66 Slattery Papers, Letter #100, 24 May 1886 (St. John's: Fleming
to Holland); Colonist, 17 May 1886.
61 Colonist, 17 May 1886.
68 Evening Telegram, 14 May 1886.
69 Slattery Papers, Letter #100, 24 May 1886 (St. John's: Fleming
to Holland); Evening Telegram, 28 August 1886.
10 Colonist, 15 May 1886.
71 Evening Telegram, 17 May 1886.
72 This was time of political change with party alignments in flux.
The old Catholic Liberal Party was finished and its members had
become aligned with the Protestant Conservatives. By the end of
the 1880s the Tories had become what would have previously been
called Liberal. O'Flaherty, Lost Country, 160-1.
1?> Colonist, 20 May 1886.
74 Evening Telegram, 14, 18 and 21 May 1886.
75 O'Flaherty, Lost Country, 147-51, 155-6,160.
76 Evening Telegram, 28 August 1886.
77 There were several letters to the editor that express a desire for
a public meeting on the issue to circumvent the Liberal leaders.
Evening Telegram, 18 and 21 May 1886.
78 BIS Minutes, 18 February 1859.
CJIS/RCEI 34:2 55
This content downloaded from 185.44.78.76 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 19:11:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions