“Writing Emmet’s Epitaph: Rebels Versus
Politicians in the Boston Globe’s
Representation of the Easter Rising”
James E. Jordan
Jordan
2
“I have but one request to ask at my departure from this world. It is
the charity of its silence. Let no man write my epitaph; for as no
man who knows my motives dare now vindicate them, let not
prejudice or ignorance asperse them. Let them rest in obscurity and
peace, my memory be left in oblivion and my tomb remain
uninscribed, until other times and other men can do justice to my
character. When my country takes her place among the nations of
the earth, then and not till then, let my epitaph be written.”
–Robert Emmet, 1803
On Easter Monday, April 24, 1916, a force of Irishmen under arms estimated
at between 1,000 and 1,500 men and women attempted to capture Dublin. Their
ultimate intention was to violently bring about “Home Rule” in Ireland by seizing the
opportunity presenting itself owing to Britain’s protracted involvement in the Great
War. The “rebels” took over key buildings, centered on the General Post Office in
O’Connell Street—the place where Padraig Pearse issued his proclamation on behalf
of the Irish Republic. The leaders of the rebellion, Pearse, James Connolly, and the
others, knew that their chances of success were so slight as to be almost non-existent;
yet, for almost a week, they fought and died, attempting to hold back the combined
might of the British and Irish forces sent against them. On the direct orders of the
cabinet in London, the punishment dealt to the rebels was swift, secret, and shocking:
the leaders were tried by a military court and executed. Only after death were their
sentences announced to the public. It was this callous response by the British that
served to create a sympathetic environment in which radical Irish Nationalists, such as
Michael Collins, would later prosecute a successful terrorist war and realize a(n)
(almost) free Ireland. Three thousand miles away in America, the British reaction
found the Boston Globe, historically a conservative, constitutionalist daily newspaper,
caught between the two seemingly opposed, yet inextricably intertwined, traditions of
Irishmen as rebels and as politicians. The Globe’s coverage essentially evolved
through three discernable stages. First, the newspaper expressed initial support for
Britain and Redmondite—constitutional—politics and thus denounced the rebels as
Jordan
3
traitors. Second, following the secret executions, the Globe started to withdraw from
its previous position; however, it did not openly support the revolutionaries either.
Finally, the Globe markedly changed the ways in which it described Pearse and co.,
but also in its treatment of Britain and her policies. Ultimately, it was these illconceived British policies that served to galvanize Boston public opinion in favor of
the men who had made the ultimate “blood sacrifice,” an opinion that had previously
been portrayed on the Globe’s pages as decidedly anti-rebel. It was the British
government’s cold-hearted suppression of the Rising, therefore, that brought to life
the “rebels” of popular imagination for the Boston-Irish, and in doing so paved the
way for the Boston Globe to write Emmet’s epitaph.1
The Globe’s first report of trouble in Ireland was on Wednesday 26th of April,
but it was downplayed, as per the British government’s official line, as a relatively
small and insignificant “German” affair. The language the Globe employed went
cheek-in-jowl with the British government’s position, referring to the affair as a
“revolt,” and the participants, “rioters,” “disturbers,” and as a “mob.”2 Notably, the
1
Robert Emmet, aided by Thomas Russell tried to reorganize the United Irish movement (the group
whose bloody rebellion had failed in 1798); however, their “efforts ended ignominiously.” Launching
a rebellion that lasted but a few hours on the night of July 23 rd, 1803, thirty people were killed,
including the chief justice of Ireland and his son-in-law “who were piked to death after their coach was
attacked.” Emmet was arrested on August 25th and was sentenced to death by hanging. Nevertheless, it
was his final words that, delivered extemporaneously after he learned his fate, outlived him and shaped
the legend his name was to become. These words are included in the opening quote of this essay. See
Golway, For the Cause of Liberty, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000), 92.
2
Boston Daily Globe, 26 April 1916 (1). Initially, and, in some quarters for much longer, Sinn Fein
was thought to be responsible for the rebellion. As Adelman notes, “Sinn Fein (‘Ourselves Alone’) had
been founded by Arthur Griffith in 1907 as a militant, but non-violent, Irish nationalist organization. It
had little influence before the war, and its anti-war stance in 1914 remained a minority view and was
more or less ignored by the authorities. What changed the situation was the Easter Rebellion of 1916.”
He further contends that “the rebellion was essentially a Sinn Fein uprising, [and] increased the
prestige and influence of Griffith’s organization at the expense of the Irish Parliamentary Party. Sinn
Fein’s popularity increased even more as a result of the policies pursued by the British government and
army after May 1916: the continuation of martial law and further imprisonments, including that of
Arthur Griffith himself; the creation of fresh martyrs owing to the deaths of a few prisoners on hunger
strike; the spread of revolutionary ideas among the Irishmen brought together in the prisons and
internment camps; and the apparent acceptance of the Unionist veto over immediate Home Rule by
Asquith and Lloyd George. By the end of 1916 Sinn Fein had in effect remodeled itself to conform
with its current image, and become a revolutionary party committed to the establishment of the Irish
Jordan
4
Globe identified the men actively opposing the riots as “loyalists” and “nationalists,”
terms clearly demonstrating the newspaper’s opening position on the “Easter
Rebellion.” The later edition has a more accurate report of the day’s occurrences in
Dublin, with two of the front-page headlines stating “Martial Law” and “11
Insurgents Killed.”3 In addition to referring to Sir Roger Casement as leader of the
“Separatist Faction,” the evening Globe voices the public’s condemnation, calling him
a “renegade” and a man whose actions have made him “intensely hated.”4 Overall,
the rebellion was still portrayed by the Globe as a relatively small affair, a view that
would change, however, by the following evening.
The next evening’s edition ran the headline, “ALL OF IRELAND IN
UPROAR,” a far cry from the previous day’s rendering of the rebellion. In response
to this escalation of events, the Globe quoted the two most important Irish politicians
(at the time), Sir Edward Carson and John Redmond, both of whom were avowed
parliamentary enemies, but both of whom expressed their “abhorrence of the uprising
and their desire to support the government” in the Commons.5
The newspaper
detailed the “official” British line in full, publishing Lord Lansdowne’s comments on
the rebellion, some of which included him stating that the “rebels made a half-hearted
attack on Dublin Castle” and that now the “situation was undoubtedly well in hand.” 6
Furthermore, the Globe continued to discredit Casement, running the headline,
“SUPPORT THEORY SIR ROGER CASEMENT IS INSANE”–the implications of
which are self-evident.7 The Globe followed up this derogatory headline by printing a
Republic whose birth had been announced in the Easter Proclamation.” In Paul Adelman, Great Britain
and the Irish Question: 1800-1922 (Trowbridge, Wiltshire: Redwood Books, 1996), 135.
3
Boston Evening Globe, 26 April 1916 (1).
4
Boston Evening Globe, 26 April 1916 (1).
5
Boston Evening Globe, 27 April 1916 (1).
6
Boston Evening Globe, 27 April 1916 (6).
7
Boston Evening Globe, 27 April 1916 (10).
Jordan
5
story that implied Sir Roger was acting according alone, unsupervised and out of
control.8
Amassing various points of view of the rebellion, the Globe found broad
support throughout the world for the denunciation of the rebels. There was even a
special dispatch from the Vatican illustrating the legitimacy of such denunciations in
which His Holiness the Pope was set to “discipline Irish clergy found to be rebels.”9
Again, the Globe reported that Redmond and Carson support the British in quashing
the rebellion, having “expressed their detestation of the rising.”10 In addition to
denunciation from within the United Kingdom and the highest office in the Roman
Catholic Church, the Globe also found disapproval of Pearse and co., from the farflung corners of the British Empire.
The newspaper printed that Redmond had
received a cablegram from, among others places, Adelaide, Australia “repudiating the
action of the rebellious elements in Dublin and expressing scorn at what they have
done ‘while brave Irish soldiers are dying at the front that their country might
prosper.’”11
Particularly unsympathetic to the rebels, Saturday morning’s Globe led with
the headline, “DUBLIN REBELS BEATEN WITH HEAVY LOSSES,” the report
direct from one of its own eye-witness correspondents.12 Continuing with anti-rebel
rhetoric, just a couple of inches down the headline reads, “TRAITORS TO IRELAND
REDMOND DECLARES.”13
Referring to the Home-Rule Bill that had been
temporarily postponed from being put into action owing to the outbreak of hostilities
on the Continent, Redmond begged the question, “Is there a sane man in Ireland who
8
Boston Evening Globe, 27 April 1916 (10).
Boston Evening Globe, 28 April 1916 (4).
10
Boston Evening Globe, 28 April 1916 (4).
11
Boston Daily Globe, 28 April 1916 (2).
12
Boston Daily Globe, 29 April 1916 (1).
13
Boston Daily Globe, 29 April 1916 (8).
9
Jordan
6
does not see this meant the drowning of Ireland’s newly-won liberties in Irish
blood?”14 Redmond further claimed the rebels’ view to be that of the minority,
consisting of traitors who had tried to make Ireland a cat’s paw of Germany.
Portraying the rebels as backstabbers, Redmond also referred to the revolt as an
“insane and unpatriotic movement” while criticizing the leaders for remaining “in the
safe remoteness of American cities.”15
This edition has a lot of “factual” and
eyewitness reports about the rising; for example, the Globe identified most of its
leaders (including Countess Markiewicz) and lamented the damage done to Dublin’s
infrastructure and business. The paper reported the rebels looting the hospital and
taking patients and hotel guests prisoner, as well as including an account of someone
who castigated the rebels for becoming very “indiscriminate” with their firing,
causing “many more civilians to be wounded.”16
The same correspondent who
reported that there was around 1500 rebels, confirmed that he had seen the “rebel
flag” and estimated the current number of casualties to be around 100.17 Furthering
the newspapers’ stance that the rebellion be condemned, the Globe informed its
readers the “rioters shot down women and children” in one or two instances, and that
the majority of the rebels were disaffected old men and impressionable youths.18
The next morning leading headline, “DUBLIN REBELLION IS NEAR
COLLAPSE,” gave Bostonians the impression that things would soon return to
normal, especially when it reported in the body text that the situation in the rest of
Ireland was “generally satisfactory.”19 Supplementing this sense of finality, Baron
Wimbourne, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, cleverly declared that the rebellion was
14
Boston Daily Globe, 29 April 1916 (1).
Boston Daily Globe, 29 April 1916 (8).
16
Boston Daily Globe, 29 April 1916 (8).
17
Boston Evening Globe, 29 April 1916 (1).
18
Boston Evening Globe, 29 April 1916 (1).
19
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (1).
15
Jordan
7
part of a German scheme designed to undermine the war effort. When coupled with
his “praise for the loyalty displayed by the great majority of the Irish people,” he
presented a persuasive argument that the British were quashing the rebellion on behalf
of the Irishmen overseas who were fighting the Germans.20 Although the Wimbourne
article primarily provides logistical information, it did include an account of the Sinn
Feiners shooting at the fire brigade– sentiments which would hardly endear the rebels
to a foreign audience.
Furthermore, another report implied that the civilian
population of Dublin was suffering most because the situation the rebels had created
kept them starving and unable to leave their homes. For those that did venture outside
of their houses for food or the like, the article entitled “Children Shot By Sinn
Feiners” articulated exactly what could happen to those who came within rebel sights,
an charge “fully justified” by the Associated Press correspondent who “saw the whole
thing that morning.”21
The newspaper reported that the “elements making for disorder” comprised of
no more than 3,000 of the population and that the rebel group consisted “almost
entirely of youthful enthusiasts, not even 100 men of mature years involved,” thereby
implying the rebellion was by no means representative of the general population of
Irishmen.22 In an effort to buttress this position, the Globe yet again ran a story in
which Redmond denounced the rebellion as anti-Irish.
In fact, this edition
demonstrates the considerable support the newspaper afforded John Redmond in the
pre-execution period of the Rebellion, stating that “as leader of the Irish Nationalists,
[he] has placed himself absolutely at the disposal of the authorities and is in constant
touch with them.”23
20
In addition to backing him themselves, the Globe printed
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (11).
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (11).
22
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (11).
23
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (11).
21
Jordan
8
evidence of other Redmondite support in America, one of the most significant being
when the “National Officials of United Irish League Declare[d] [Redmond] Voiced
Sentiments of Vast Majority of Irishmen” regarding the recent events in Ireland.24
Although Redmond’s support was portrayed as firm in the United States, according to
what the Globe published, it was stronger across the water in Ireland. The newspaper
continued, “in many places besides Dublin, the Nationalist voters already have on
their own initiative [as opposed to Redmond’s mere appeal for this] mobilized in
support of the troops.”25 The Globe, therefore, presented an image of Redmond and
the British government in which the former represented the Irish people while the
latter fought on behalf of their best interests. There was little or no dissension in
Ireland among the inhabitants vis-à-vis the British according to reports, with one
correspondent even stating, “on every hand one hears eager queries for news and
strong condemnation of the revolutionaries.”26 A word of warning is printed about
martyrdom along with an admonition that executing Sir Roger Casement would be
bad for the “Irish Cause” because his hanging “would confuse the minds of many
people who do not know the story of Irish politics and Home Rule.”27
Monday’s edition pronounced the end of the revolt, declaring that the “rebel
flag was up in flames” and that the “[British] soldiers [had] Stop[ped] Looting.”28
Details concerning the surrender were also printed, with the Globe estimating that
there were “about 450 of them” who had capitulated.29 The rebellion was over, and
so now the Globe attempted to assess the extent of the damage caused by the
belligerents. Therefore, one of its front-page headlines was “Redmond Reassures
24
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (11).
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (11).
26
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (11).
27
Boston Sunday Globe, 30 April 1916 (53).
28
Boston Daily Globe, 1 May 1916 (1); Boston Evening Globe, 1 May 1916 (2).
29
Boston Evening Globe, 1 May 1916 (1).
25
Jordan
9
America Uprising Has Not Harmed Home Rule Cause,” as if to try and calm
Bostonians down in their wrath against the rebels who might have undone many
generations’ constitutional work towards a free Ireland.30
German aid was again
cited as the impetus for the affair rather than any particular nationalistic volition on
the part of the Irish. Wimbourne was quoted as saying “that in fact their [Sinn Fein]
motto, ‘ourselves alone,’ accurately reflected their relations to the rest of their fellow
countrymen.”31 Compounding Wimbourne’s sentiments were the strong words of
John Redmond who, in a message written intended especially for American eyes,
claimed, “the whole disgraceful plot is viewed with execration by the Irish people”
and that “it was almost entirely a Dublin movement; partly the creation of the Sinn
Feiner cranks and German agents there….”32 Furthermore, he believed he had the
support of Irishmen all over the world. To demonstrate the rebellion’s fruitless
conclusion, the Globe printed Redmond as saying “I beg our people in America not to
be unduly disturbed by this futile and miserable attempt to destroy Ireland. It has
failed definitely, finally failed.”33 Perhaps because the situation had calmed down
significantly, the newspaper now printed a copy of the Proclamation of Independence
read out by Patrick Pearse on the steps of the GPO. In addition, the Globe also
published an (rare) article of its own, surmising on the rebellion that “the opinion
prevails on every hand that the attempt at the formation of a Republic has been
abortive. The rebels have been unable to show any success after their first surprise.”34
On Tuesday the 2nd of May, the Globe was still fully in support of John
Redmond and the conservative elements in Irish politics, reassuring its readers that
the situation in Ireland was returning to a state of normality. The front-page headline,
30
Boston Daily Globe, 1 May 1916 (1).
Boston Daily Globe, 1 May 1916 (2).
32
Boston Daily Globe, 1 May 1916 (3).
33
Boston Daily Globe, 1 May 1916 (3).
34
Boston Evening Globe, 1 May 1916 (2).
31
Jordan 10
“ENGLAND SHIPS DUBLIN REBELS: All in City Surrender and 489 Sent to
Britain,” presented Bostonians with the knowledge that the rebellion had definitely
ended.35 Brief biographies of some of the leaders and a fairly balanced day-by-day
account of the recent events in Ireland were also included. To demonstrate its attempt
at objectivity, the Globe incorporated a report stating that “most of the population,
expressed indignation at the outbreak, which they considered the work of fanatics, and
as never having had a permanent chance of success.”36
By arguing that the
inhabitants were the chief sufferers of the rebellion, the newspaper made a case in
which those same people could be mad at the rebels. These sentiments were realized
in a subsequent paragraph that read,
The Dublin soldiers and the Irish regiments, who bore the brunt of the first
day’s outbreak, expressed great indignation over the uprising. Some
expressed regret that the English regiments had been brought over to
suppress the disturbances, as they thought the English soldiers were inclined
to treat the rebels too leniently.37
Local support for John Redmond was also printed in an article describing the events at
a recent meeting of the Boston Central Branch of the U.I.L. which, after a two hour
deliberation, sent the following cablegram: “No doubting Irish sentiment in Boston.
Ardently supports you and the party.”38 With things returning to normal in Ireland
and no real change in opinion in Boston reported by the Globe, the rebellion looked
situated to be forgotten. Nevertheless, the winds of change were blowing and word of
the rebellion would not be long out of the news.
After a brief morning lull in the Globe’s interest in Dublin affairs, the evening
edition reported the first news of “FOUR IRISH REBELS SHOT” and
“SECRETARY BIRRELL RESIGNS,” thus breathing new life into this previously
35
Boston Daily Globe, 2 May 1916 (1).
Boston Daily Globe, 2 May 1916 (2).
37
Boston Daily Globe, 2 May 1916 (2). Owing perhaps to the explosive implications of this story it
was dropped for the evening edition.
38
Boston Daily Globe, 2 May 1916 (2).
36
Jordan 11
moribund subject.39
Now that the newspaper had been forced to make value
judgments as to the righteousness of these executions, it started to waver somewhat in
its anti-rebellion stance. A change of emphasis is belied in the morning edition’s
headline of “FOUR DUBLIN LEADERS SHOT.”40 Instead of being rebels, Pearse et
al. were now being considered leaders, implying that they were representative of a
people and not, of what noted historian R. F. Foster called, “a minority of a
minority.”41 Fairly sympathetic biographies are provided of Pearse, Connolly, Clarke,
and MacDonagh, while a report that the executions “created a profound feeling” in the
Commons when announced was also included.42
“EXECUTIONS DENOUNCED” led another article on the same day from
New York, in which Robert Ford decried the shooting of Pearse would “make the war
between England and Ireland more bitter.”43 He also lamented that Pearse should
have been treated as a prisoner of war: “To shoot him down was a piece of base
brutality and will no doubt cause reprisals by the people of Ireland.”44 Expanding
upon this theme, Jeremiah A. O’Leary, director of the United Irish Societies, defiantly
declared, “The world will remember Ireland because the blood of these men and the
sacrifices of their gallant associates will cry out.”45
Perhaps responding to the
changing (or hardening) attitudes, the Globe also reported how John F. Kelly,
chairman of the Massachusetts Committee, F.O.I.F., replied a resolute “no” to a letter
asking for funds for the relief of the Allies, adding his comments, “[of England] night
and day I pray for her downfall.”46
39
Boston Evening Globe, 3 May 1916 (1).
Boston Daily Globe, 4 May 1916 (1).
41
Foster, Modern Ireland, 477.
42
Boston Daily Globe, 4 May 1916 (6).
43
Boston Daily Globe, 4 May 1916 (6).
44
Boston Daily Globe, 4 May 1916 (6).
45
Boston Daily Globe, 4 May 1916 (6).
46
Boston Daily Globe, 4 May 1916 (6).
40
Nevertheless, by the evening edition, the
Jordan 12
newspaper continued in its transitional phase with appropriate ambiguity when it
appeared to have returned to its previous position regarding the Irish belligerents,
again referring to those who had been shot as rebels and stating that, “justice has been
swift in the case of the leaders of the Sinn Fein rebellion.”47 The Globe also corrected
itself from the morning edition when it had reported that Connolly had been shot – he
was still alive, in prison, wounded.48 Perhaps typical Globe reporting, one article
read,
The general public was not aware of the execution of the ringleaders until
late last evening, and it was not possible to observe the effect of their
punishment upon the citizens of Dublin, who, however, for the vastly
greater part were not in sympathy with the rebellion. 49
Openly advocating the British administration’s policies, the Globe once again
referred to the Irish belligerents, who were shot on Friday the 5th of May, as “rebels”
and quoted the Bishop of Dublin’s support for the Crown’s policies there. Shortly
after things had been reported to be calming down, Plunkett, Daly, O’Hanrahan, and
Willie Pearse were the “FOUR IRISH REBELS SHOT.”50 Furthermore, it became
known that Irish Secretary, Augustine Birrell resigned the previous day; the
combination of situations presented a somewhat archaic picture of events in Ireland,
and, in many ways, the confused position of the Globe. In an attempt to downplay the
latest executions, the Globe notified Bostonians that fifteen others were condemned to
death but later had their sentences commuted to 10 years penal servitude.
Additionally, however, the Bishop of Dublin, supporting the policy of executions,
announced,
Many armed rebels are still at large in Dublin, and the danger of another
uprising can only be averted by the strictest of measures. This is not the
time for amnesties or pardons. It is a time for swift, stern punishment. 51
47
Boston Evening Globe, 4 May 1916 (1).
Boston Evening Globe, 4 May 1916 (1).
49
Boston Evening Globe, 4 May 1916 (6).
50
Boston Daily Globe, 5 May 1916 (3).
51
Boston Daily Globe, 5 May 1916 (3).
48
Jordan 13
The apparent calming down of recent events in Ireland meant that the Globe’s
coverage on the 6th of May was limited to a short piece on the execution of Major
John McBride; what is noteworthy, however, is that from this date forward, the paper
is consistent when referring to the men and women it formerly castigated as “rebels.”
McBride’s execution was reported as his being the “EIGHTH SINN FEIN LEADER
SHOT.”52 The pendulum had swung, and the Irish belligerents were “leaders” once
more. After taking Sunday off Irish affairs, the Globe’s commentary reappeared on
Monday to return the Easter rebellion to its front pages making clear its paradigmatic
shift in perspective.
On Monday the 8th of May, Bostonians picked up their morning edition of the
Globe and were greeted with the very partisan front-page headline “PRAISE IRISH,
SCORE ENGLAND,” a banner exemplifying the paper’s recent change of heart
concerning the late unpleasantness in Ireland.53 Again, the Irish belligerents are
called “leaders” on the front page; the newspaper also recorded that the death
sentences of a number of the leaders had been commuted to jail terms.
John
Redmond’s name was reported “drowned out with hisses” at a local Roxbury meeting
of the F.O.I.F., an attitude that was becoming increasingly popular as a result of the
growing number of well-attended F.O.I.F. meetings held across the country.54
Quoting J. Rohan, the Globe reported from the meeting that “the resolutions style this
insurrection the greatest boon that could be achieved for the Irish race, and point to
the executions as deeds which the whole Irish race will resent for all time and for
which retribution must be exacted.”55 In addition, the Globe printed extensive details
52
Boston Daily Globe, 6 May 1916 (1).
Boston Daily Globe, 8 May 1916 (1).
54
Boston Daily Globe, 8 May 1916 (1).
55
Boston Daily Globe, 8 May 1916 (3)
53
Jordan 14
of a “Meeting of 4000 at Springfield: Auditorium Crowded at Mass Meeting to
Protest Against Executions of Leaders of Irish Uprising.”56
“FOUR MORE IRISH LEADERS SHOT” appeared on the front page of the
Tuesday morning Globe, accompanied by John Redmond’s request to the British
government that an end be put to the executions.57 Essentially, all that was new in
Tuesday’s editions was that James Mark Sullivan had been reportedly released and
John MacNeil, the “President of the Sinn Fein Volunteers,” had been arrested for his
involvement in the recent events in Ireland.58 In a very small piece on the front page
of Wednesday evening’s Globe also appeared a report that Baron Wimbourne, the
Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, had resigned, but little else on the latest occurrences of
interest in Dublin was mentioned.
When on the morning of Thursday the 11th of May the Boston Globe reported
the shooting of F. Sheehy Skeffington as a “blunder,” the paper continued its antiBritish pro-“rebel” commentary, even to the point of referring to two more men
executed as having been “slain.”59 The account of the three men being, in essence,
murdered, one of whom was a pacifist, and two of whom were journalists, added to
the increasing Bostonian sentiment that the British were acting capriciously in Ireland,
thereby contributing to the mounting feelings of sympathy for the rebels. Redmond’s
party recognized this sympathy and so issued statements, some of which the Globe
published, calling “for martial law to be revoked, otherwise the public would start to
turn against England and towards the rebels.”60 In Boston, it looked as though the
56
Boston Daily Globe, 8 May 1916 (3).
Boston Daily Globe, 9 May 1916 (1).
58
Boston Daily Globe, 9 May 1916 (1).
59
Boston Daily Globe, 11 May 1916 (1).
60
Boston Daily Globe, 11 May 1916 (3).
57
Jordan 15
public already had.61
The Globe also printed George Bernard Shaw’s defiant
comments that declared the executed men to be sacrificial victims who would take
“their places beside Emmet and the Manchester Martyrs in Ireland and beside the
heroes of Poland, Serbia, and Belgium in Europe” which “nothing in heaven and earth
[could] prevent.”
62
By continuing to report the Rising in such a way, the Globe
appeared to be proving true Shaw’s prophesy, and, in essence, writing Emmet’s
epitaph.
The evening edition related the urgency to which events in Ireland called for
by leading with the headline, “ASQUITH IS GOING TO DUBLIN,” and, notably, the
61
In Boston, the F.O.I.F. could count amongst its number the Devoy, Casement, Montgomery
(Roxbury), and County Plunkett (Roxbury) branches in addition to there also being branches in
Brokton, Brighton, Cambridge, and Lynn. The Ancient Order Of Hibernians (hereafter A.O.H.) was
the first strictly Irish organization to appear in America and was transplanted from Ireland in 1836. It
was basically a social and fraternal organization and spread very rapidly – by 1910, the national
assembly was 180,000, with numerous divisions in Boston. By its constitution the A.O.H. was
forbidden to involve itself in politics, but foreign affairs were exempted from the ban, which left the
Order free to work for the cause of Ireland. The nationalist organization endorsed the Irish
Parliamentary Party—the conservative Irish group whose object was Home Rule for Ireland within the
British Empire—but the membership generally favored complete independence. At the Massachusetts
State Convention of the Ancient Order of Hibernians in August, resolutions severely denouncing
England and demanding the recognition of Ireland as a republic were received with wild enthusiasm by
the thousand delegates. See Alden Jamison, Irish-Americans, the Irish question and American
diplomacy, 1895-1921 (Unpublished PhD dissertation, Harvard University, 1942), 525.
Theodore Hammet also noted “the historian of the A.O.H. claims that its members predominated (both
in numbers and in influence) in the F.O.I.F.,” thereby demonstrating a link between the two groups.
See Theodore Hammet, The Boston Irish During World War One: A Study in Idealism [Microform]
Boston: 1971., 69.
For a more detailed discussion of radical groups’ activity in Boston, see Hammet, 167.
62
Boston Daily Globe, 11 May 1916 (3).
The Manchester Martyrs: “On September 11, 1867, Colonel Kelly and a comrade were arrested in
Manchester England. As they were being transported under a light guard a week later, a party of thirty
Fenians ambushed the prison van and demanded that the police officers turn over their keys. The
policeman inside the van, a Sergeant Brett, refused to do so. One of the Fenians fired a shot, perhaps to
break the lock on the van door, perhaps to frighten Brett. Instead the bullet fatally wounded the
sergeant, and another prisoner inside the van took the key from the dying man and handed it to the
Fenians. Kelly was set free.
The officer’s murder, and the audacity of the ambush, shocked England. The police swept up dozens of
Irishmen living in Manchester. Eventually, five were put to trial for the crime. One was completely
innocent; the other four were part of the ambush but none had fired the fatal shot. Nevertheless, they
were convicted and sentenced to be hanged. Two of the suspects were naturalized American citizens,
and one of them, Edward Condon, gave the Manchester rescue words that would be added to Irish
nationalist lore. ‘I have nothing to regret, to retract or take back,’ he said in the dock. ‘I can only say:
God save Ireland!’ Three of his co-defendants, William Allen, Philip Larkin, and the other American
citizen, Michael O’Brien, took up the call: ‘God save Ireland!’ they shouted.
Allen, Larkin, and O’Brien were hanged in Manchester on November 24, 1867. They became known as
the ‘Manchester Martyrs,’ and the anniversary of their executions would be commemorated in Ireland
and in America for decades. Their courage inspired a ballad, entitled ‘God Save Ireland,’ that became
an anthem of nationality and defiance.” See Golway, For the Cause of Liberty, 147-148.
Jordan 16
article referred to those executed in the uprising as “persons.”63
“FOURTEEN
PERSONS EXECUTED IN IRELAND” appeared on the front page, a distinct
difference from the Globe’s pre-execution assignation of the belligerents purely as
“rebels.” Now, the newspaper was portraying these men as human and, by not
referring to them as rebels, again highlighting its own change in stance. This shift in
perspective by the Globe is also discernable by the language it used to describe the 73
“persons” who received sentences of penal servitude. Not only were the executed no
longer rebels, but also those who participated in the rebellion benefited from the
perspective change.
Another manifestation of the change in attitude was the
newspaper’s open advertisement of a F.O.I.F. meeting: “The provisional committee of
the F.O.I.F. of Massachusetts has called upon ‘the men and women of Irish blood and
all lovers of human liberty in Massachusetts’ to assemble in Tremont Temple Monday
at 8pm to protest against the recent execution of revolutionists in Ireland. There will
be speeches.”64
Following the executions of James Connolly and Sean McDermott, Saturday’s
Globe printed its belief that these “signers of [the] Proclamation” would be the “last to
suffer,” thus hinting that the bloody affair might finally be laid to rest.65 The term
“leader” was by this time the word consistently used by the newspaper to describe
those Irish belligerents who had been executed by the British Army.66
On Monday the 15th of May, the Boston Globe filled the second page of its
morning edition with a multitude of articles denouncing the British and the handling
of recent events in Ireland along with demands for a “FREE IRELAND.” 67 Now the
newspaper not only freely printed condemnations of the British but also started to
63
Boston Evening Globe, 11 May 1916 (1).
Boston Evening Globe, 11 May 1916 (1).
65
Boston Daily Globe, 13 May 1916 (1).
66
Boston Daily Globe, 13 May 1916 (1).
67
Boston Daily Globe, 15 May 1916 (2).
64
Jordan 17
publish “radical” groups’ rhetoric calling for an Ireland free from the yoke of Great
Britain. Even previously moderate—that is, constitutionalist—groups were reported
to be extremely anti-British. For example, the Globe printed that the
County Wexford Club adopted resolutions last evening denouncing the
conduct of the English government in their punishment of Irishmen who
took an active part in the recent Irish revolt in Dublin, at their meeting in
Hibernian Hall, Charlestown, following a stirring address by Dr. H. V.
McLaughlin of Brookline. 68
In addition, the President of the Central Branch of the United Irish League
“denounce[d] the conduct of the English government in their murdering of Irish
patriots” and castigated them for their “satanic brutality.”69 Someone else went so far
as to call for England’s ruin, declaring “no Irishman with red blood in his veins will
rest content until England has been destroyed.”70 Speaking of Easter 1916 in the
same vein as the American War of Independence in 1776, Matthew Cumming said
that he had “vengeance across his flag.”71
The 15th and 16th of May were days of high publishing activity for Boston’s
most popular newspaper, although the emphasis now shifted from events in Ireland to
the local reactions. The front page of the Globe’s morning edition on Tuesday the
16th of May was dedicated to the mass meeting held the previous night, during which
denunciations of the British had been commonplace. The meeting of over 9,000
people (which included a spillover meeting on the common at Parkman Bandstand)
was hailed by the Globe as “one of the biggest mass meetings Tremont Temple ever
saw” and featured speeches from the city’s leading men.72 The extremely radical
68
Boston Daily Globe, 15 May 1916 (1). Theodore M. Hammet contends that of particular interest in
Boston were the so-called Irish County Clubs, which were formed by immigrants and their descendants
from each county in Ireland and which held frequent socials, balls, and reunions. He also notes that
there was a city-wide Central Council of Irish County Clubs which was instrumental in calling the
attention of members to Irish and American causes. For a further discussion of these county clubs see
Hammet, The Boston Irish During World War One, 8.
69
Boston Daily Globe, 15 May 1916 (1).
70
Boston Daily Globe, 15 May 1916 (2).
71
Boston Daily Globe, 15 May 1916 (2).
72
Boston Daily Globe, 16 May 1916 (1). For example, Mayor Curley and Cardinal O’Connell.
Jordan 18
resolutions from the meeting that was held under the auspices of the F.O.I.F.
demanded “America Break With England,” and the Globe acquiesced, printing them
in full.73 The executions seemed to serve as the vehicle for increased radical Irish
Nationalism, an attitude manifested by one of the speakers, Joseph Smith of Lowell,
who “scored the English and Redmondite press” and declared, “We are here to honor
the memory of our martyred dead, not to mourn them.”74 Furthermore, the Globe
reported that when Smith asked the crowd if they endorsed the Tremont Resolutions,
the multitude “showed its emphatic approval of them with whoops which continued a
full minute.”75 In the midst of this sea of British denunciation, the Globe did publish
an account of the U.I.L.’s “SUPPORT FOR REDMOND,” an article that seemed to
swim against the current of popular Boston opinion.76 Included in the piece was a
statement maintaining “all the members expressed the fullest confidence in the
leadership of John E. Redmond and the members of the Nationalist party and they felt
that Irish representative will be able to handle the delicate situation in a way to win
the praise of Irishmen everywhere.”77
Much interest in Casement’s trial and
Asquith’s continued presence in Dublin was also expressed.
From the 17th to the 26th of May, the Globe primarily concerned itself with the
trial and character of Sir Roger Casement while also detailing the fate of Jeremiah C.
Lynch, an American citizen involved in the Rebellion.
Although Lynch had
originally been sentenced to death, his sentence was later commuted to 10 years in
prison in response to an outcry by the American press (and official diplomatic
73
Boston Daily Globe, 16 May 1916 (4).
Boston Daily Globe, 16 May 1916 (4).
75
Boston Daily Globe, 16 May 1916 (4).
76
Boston Daily Globe, 16 May 1916 (4).
77
Boston Daily Globe, 16 May 1916 (4). Contrary to what historian Michael J. Ryan has argued, the
President of the U.I.L. of America cabled him to the effect that the Irish executions after the Easter
Rebellion had “alienated every American friend and caused a resurgence of ancient enmities. Your lifework destroyed by English brutality.” See Charles Callan Tanshill, America and the Fight for Irish
Freedom, 1866-1922: An Old Story Based Upon New Data (New York: The Devin-Adair Co., 1957),
224-225.
74
Jordan 19
intervention by the Wilson administration). Another Globe article of note from this
period concerned an opinion on the state of affairs regarding the rebellion from
England. In a letter written from Dublin where he had been investigating conditions,
Henry W. Massingham, editor of The Nation, asserted, “the Sinn Fein Revolt finally
earned the sympathy of the Irish people, who in the hour of it start fiercely
condemned it, because of the executions and errors of the military administration.”78
The Globe appeared to be using Massingham’s analysis as its own, a style which had
come to characterize this newspapers’ approach to reporting Easter Rebellion news.
The front pages of the Boston Globe from August 2nd through 4th portrayed Sir
Roger Casement’s execution sympathetically, with the newspaper including a number
of partisan statements from people utterly opposed to such a “blunder.” The Globe
presented a variety of opinions on the subject, including sources from England and
U.S. Senators. On the 3rd of August, it printed a front-page statement by Lord Cecil
on the legality of the execution, although notably, in the later edition, there is an
article written by Michael Francis of Philadelphia who declared that statement a
fake.79 On the same day, an editorial from the Daily News (England) was published,
the author of which testified,
We cannot but reaffirm our conviction that resolving that the death penalty
must be exacted, the government has exhibited grave unwisdom. From a
commutation of Casement’s sentence no evil results could follow. To
pretend that further exaction is necessary as an example or warning is to
give the disaffected section in Ireland another martyr to embitter feeling
throughout the island, to alienate many persons, and to enable Germany to
play off the death of Casement—the parallel in reality is grotesque, but is
not near enough for her purpose against the death of Capt. Fryatt. 80
78
Boston Daily Globe, 20 May 1916 (3).
Boston Daily Globe, 3 August 1916 (1); Boston Evening Globe, 3 August 1916 (8).
80
Boston Daily Globe, 3 August 1916 (3).
Captain Fryatt: Captain Charles Fryatt of the Great Eastern Railway Steamer Brussels was a regular on
the Rotterdam/British East Coast route since the start of the war and this was the cause of much
annoyance to the Germans. In March 1915 they made two determined efforts to sink the Brussels. On
the 3rd March 1915 Capt. Fryatt successfully dodged an attack on his ship by a U-Boat and sailed
home to a hero’s reception and was presented with a gold watch by the ship's owners. On the 28th
March 1915 a further attempt was made to sink his ship by a U-Boat. Capt. Fryatt saw it surface and as
it was trying to line up a torpedo shot on the ship, he turned the helm over and bore down on the U79
Jordan 20
The editor continued, “No one can contend that the execution of Casement is
a crime; but that it is a lamentable blunder can hardly be contested.”81 With
such vehement denunciations of Casement’s plight, the change in the Globe’s
coverage from support of the politicians to rebels now seemed to be complete.
Striving to transcend the factionalized reactions concerning the Easter
Rebellion, the Boston Globe, perhaps unwittingly, placed itself above the two
seemingly opposed, yet inextricably intertwined, traditions of Irishmen as rebels and
as politicians. In an essay entitled, “The Political Irish: Politicians and Rebels,”
Thomas N. Brown contends that politicians and rebels “are in fact two political Irish
traditions that animate the contemporary American imagination.”82 He continues,
“the two images are at odds with one another,” stating that while the politician has
“the ability to accommodate differences, to find when in office suitable compromises
in moral and other dilemmas,” the rebel “is of a different order.”83 “The rebel,” in
Brown’s words,
Rejects compromise and pursues principles, even unto death. The moral
distance between the rebel and the politician is immense: The rebel seeks
justice, the politician is content with order. The rebel finds his place in the
streets and the hills, the politician in the ancient houses of power. The rebel
Boat which was forced to crash dive in order to avoid him. It appears that the U-Boat passed from
starboard to port under the ship as it surfaced close enough to the ship so that, as Capt. Fryatt reported
"you could have easily hung your hat on the periscope as she lay along side us". The U-Boat then
disappeared never to be seen again. Capt. Fryatt was awarded another gold watch, this time by the
Admiralty.
Captain Fryatt continued his voyages for another fifteen months until on the 23rd June, 1916, he was
trapped by a flotilla of German torpedo boats and taken to Zeebrugge. He was tried by a Court Martial
in Bruges on 27th July. By all accounts, he was convicted before the trial even took place. It
condemned Capt. Fryatt to death as a franc-tireur. The sentence being confirmed by the Kaiser. He was
executed that same evening. He was buried in a small cemetery just outside Bruges which the Germans
used to bury Belgian "traitors." This text was excerpted from
http://www.gwpda.org/naval/pers0003.htm. Online 11 Nov 2003.
81
Boston Daily Globe, 3 August 1916 (3).
82
Thomas N. Brown, “The Political Irish: Politicians and Rebels” in David Noel Doyle and Owen
Dudley Edwards, Editors, America and Ireland, 1776-1976: The American Identity and the Irish
Connection (Westport Connecticut, Greenwood Press, 1976), 134.
83
Thomas N. Brown, “The Political Irish: Politicians and Rebels” in Doyle and Edwards, America and
Ireland, 134.
Jordan 21
looks to the future; the politician sits complacently in the present…The
rebel resides in Ireland; the politician in America. 84
William V. Shannon further illustrated this concept when he posited that the Irish
immigrants to America brought with them an awareness of the uses of politics. Most
of them came from rural, western Ireland where local government was in the hands of
an Anglo-Irish landlord class backed by the British army and the police. The political
history of nineteenth century Ireland was essentially a struggle to break that
monopoly. During the long struggle, the ordinary Irish people had shown formidable
talents for political conspiracy and political agitation. Retaining the characteristics
that enabled them to extract concessions in Ireland, the Irish arrived in the United
States a community-oriented and politicized people. As a result, their political culture
put a high value on loyalty and on strong leadership.85 However, violence was
endemic in much of rural Ireland where tenant farmers and landless laborers struggled
to overthrow the landlord system, and nationalist groups like the Fenians conspired to
bring Ireland its freedom by the use of force. “Rebels” were, therefore, admired by
many and romanticized by a vast majority of Irish men and women. Shannon notes,
“the Irishman as rebel is a tradition counterposed to that of the Irishman as
politician.”86 Since the Irish so quickly found their way into political power in the
open American system, they had relatively little recourse on this side of the Atlantic
to violence or to the moral absolution of the rebel, but his romantic appeal lingered in
the popular imagination. Perhaps this contradictory respect and admiration for both
politicians and rebels was the reason for the Globe’s portrayal of a mixed reception to
the Easter Rebellion amongst Bostonians. As Brown proposes, however, throughout
84
Ibid., 134.
Information taken from William V. Shannon, “Boston’s Irish Mayors: An Ethnic Perspective” in
Burns and Formisano, Boston 1700-1980: The Evolution of Urban Politics (Westport, Connecticut:
Greenwood Press, 1984), 203.
86
Ibid., 203.
85
Jordan 22
history “Irish rebels are [seen as] heroes”; therefore, while the Globe’s receptiveness
to Boston’s Irish population and its eventual support for the Easter Rebels might not
necessarily be considered inevitable, it may be considered as somewhat
understandable. 87
Initially, the Globe may have appeared so vehemently anti-rebellion in the preexecution period because of the politics of its Irish Society editor, James T. Sullivan,
an active Redmondite. Sullivan dominated the John Redmond Branch of the U.I.L., a
branch that held its meetings at the Globe building, and a group to which he always
gave extensive coverage. Strengthening the case for a relative lack of Redmondite
activity even with a Redmondite in control, the Globe included few reports of
conservative gatherings in its coverage of Irish affairs.88 Considering that the first
mass meeting in protest to the executions was held at Hibernian Hall on May 7th under
the auspices of the Clan-na-Gael and was not accounted for by the city’s most popular
newspaper, a Redmondite agenda might have been thought to be behind this nonreport.89 John Devoy’s Gaelic American did print an account of the event, however,
reporting that “the hall was crowded to the utmost capacity, and a large number of
people were turned away” even going so far as to assert, “Boston never witnessed a
more enthusiastic or unanimous meeting.”90
Perhaps the Gaelic American
exaggerated, perhaps not. Either way, the Globe ignored a meeting whose crowd was
estimated at between 1500-2000 people; the reasons for its omission could be
assumed to be political. On May 16th, the day after the mass meeting held at Tremont
Temple, delegates representing 30 of the 32 Irish County Clubs passed a resolution
By the phrase “Boston’s Irish population” the Americans in Boston of Irish-descent are also intended
to be included.
88
Hammet, The Boston Irish During World War One, 166-167.
89
Ibid., 69-70. Granted, Redmond also denounced the executions, but this meeting held under the
auspices of the Clan-na-Gael resolved to support this latest independence movement.
90
Gaelic-American, May 13 1916.
87
Jordan 23
condemning the executions and calling on all “liberty-loving Americans” to join in
this sentiment against England’s “latest act of tyranny.”91
Two days later, one
thousand people attended the annual dance given by the Irish Volunteers to benefit
Irish freedom. The hall was decorated with a large “rebel flag” and a commemorative
tablet, draped in black, with the names of those executed and the motto “Sacred to the
Memory of Ireland’s Murdered Patriots. Never to be forgotten.”92 The Globe reported
none of it. Again, although it is possible that the newspaper was unaware of these
events, its ignorance is unlikely.
Although the Globe was not expressly affiliated with the Catholic Church, it is
impossible to divorce the latter’s influence from Boston culture and politics;
therefore, the newspaper, perceiving the Church’s official position as intrinsically
conservative and evenhanded, could have constructed its initial reactions anchored in
this Christian doctrine. Theodore Hammet sums up the Church’s official position on
the rebellion when he notes,
In a move which said a good deal about the Church, the Pope condemned
the rebellion and some two hundred priests signed a telegram to Redmond ‘
deploring the revolt…and expressing their loyalty to the King.’ 93
According to the teachings of the Church, a revolution must not be started unless it is
against a government that practices intolerable oppression. Moreover, all legitimate
means of redress should have been tried before any resort to violence.
The
revolutionary movement should also have widespread popular support and should
have a reasonable prospect of success. After applying these criteria to the Easter
Rebellion, historian John J. Horgan (writing many years after the Rebellion) was
sharply critical of the rising: “This small body of conspirators by putting nationalism
91
Boston Post, May 17 1916.
Boston Post, May 19, 1916.
93
Hammet, The Boston Irish During World War One, 67. Hammet quotes from the Boston Post, May
3, 1916.
92
Jordan 24
before religion…placed themselves outside the pale of the Church.”94 Theodore
Hammet offers a different interpretation, however, arguing that the Catholic Church
in Boston was far more favorable to the rebels than its counterpart in Ireland. He
notes, “Never in the vanguard of the militants, the Church, her priests in Boston, and
the diocesan organ nonetheless were deeply affected by the repression and the
executions.”95
The differences in opinion regarding the Rebellion that Hammet
asserts existed between the Catholic Church in Boston and Ireland might explain in
part the ease with which the Globe made the transition from being anti-rebellion to
pro-rebellion, especially because the Boston Pilot supported the rebels from the start.
Officially the Catholic organ for the archdiocese of Boston, the Pilot was
hostile to the British, while being openly in favor of the Easter rebels. The editor
manifested one such example of his enmity towards the Crown when, on the 5th of
August, he wrote “let us remember that the British Government will never yield to the
Irish claim for justice, because it is justice, unless a knife is at the nation’s throat or a
conquering enemy at its door.”96 As the authorized Catholic newspaper/letter for
Boston and its surrounding area, one would usually be surprised to find such an organ
advancing physical force tactics; perhaps the Pilot illustrated the general belief in
Irish-American (Catholic) circles that the British’s execution of the Irish “celebrities”
was both shocking and outrageous. Even a “modest opinion” on the Easter events in
the paper could yield sentiments stating,
we would say that every son, grandson, and great-grandson of an
Irishman…who took up arms for the Allies, had in his heart the stirring
hope that directly or indirectly he was doing something for Ireland, and
would be, in the last analysis, behind the rebels. 97
94
John J. Horgan, Parnell to Pearse: Some Recollections and Reflections (Dublin: Browne & Nolan
1948), 289. Quoted in Tanshill, America and the Fight for Irish Freedom, 201.
95
Hammet, The Boston Irish During World War One, 68.
96
Boston Pilot, 5 August 1916.
97
Ibid., 13 May 1916.
Jordan 25
In addition, Alden Jamison has noted the fact that once the rebellion had started, the
Pilot began almost immediately to “utilize the propagandistic Irish Press and News
Service, which it had previously spurned.”98 Despite the often highly biased views of
the Pilot’s writers and editors, it did raise awareness and perceptively surmise that the
“rebellion had already done much to unify Irishmen, wherever they might be, in their
determination that the Irish question had to be solved.”99
Thus, the Boston Globe’s representation of the Easter Rising of 1916, among
other things, has demonstrated that the newspaper was receptive enough to local
pressures to drastically change positions on the Irish belligerents and events. While
slightly more conservative—that is, pro-Redmond—than some elements of the
American press, it did allow itself to get swept along with the general tide of
discontent that crashed across the continent because of the British government’s
policy of mass internment and execution of rebels. One of the lessons of Easter Week
and the subsequent policies pursued in 1916 by the British are clearly evident:
Executions are not taken lightly, they serve to make martyrs of people and can lead to
emotions overtaking rationality, especially when those people perceive themselves to
be subjugated. General Maxwell, by putting Pearse et al. to death, brought to life the
“rebels” (as detailed by Brown) of popular imagination for the Boston-Irish, among
whom there was already considerable anti-English feeling. Another potential lesson
that might be taken from this study is that an ally (The Globe) turned against Great
Britain, granted, not to the extent some newspapers did, but significantly enough to
where it (perhaps unwittingly) became an important vehicle for Irish nationalism in
Boston. Both are lessons that would be well remembered by more powerful nations
against lesser ones when prisoners of war are taken.
98
99
Jamison, Irish-Americans, 494.
Ibid., 495.