Defending Ireland from the Irish: the Irish Executive’S Reaction to Transatlantic Fenianism 1864-68
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Defending Ireland from the Irish: The Irish Executive’s reaction to Transatlantic Fenianism 1864-68 A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2017 Jerome Devitt Trinity College Dublin Declaration I declare that this thesis has not been submitted as an exercise for a degree at this or any other university and it is entirely my own work. I agree to deposit this thesis in the University’s open access institutional repository or allow the library to do so on my behalf, subject to Irish Copyright Legislation and Trinity College Library conditions of use and acknowledgement. Signed: ________________________________________ Jerome Devitt July 2018 ii Summary This thesis examines the Irish Executive’s reaction to the threat posed by transatlantic Fenianism from the closing phase of the US Civil War to the end of Fenian activity in the year following the Fenian Rising of February and March 1867. It argues that the Fenian conspiracy was the catalyst for a substantial development in the Executive’s ability to assert its control throughout the country in the name of maintaining state security. Its central argument is that the government’s adoption of a policy of deterrence, combined with the systematic reform of the composition and distribution of military and constabulary forces on the island, at first delayed and later helped to suppress the abortive rising that eventually emerged. Although the periodization is narrow, the four years in question set in motion a security policy that would influence the governance of Ireland throughout the remainder of the century. The Executive’s response, however, was influenced not only by the suppression of the Young Ireland rising in 1848, but was also guided by a wide range of transnational influences. Central among these was the need to balance the needs of ‘Home’ and ‘Imperial’ Defence. What emerged was a practice that this thesis calls ‘counterinsurgency off the shelf’, where previous Irish plans and similar actions from the empire were adapted to the immediate circumstances. The thesis draws on a broad range of primary sources, such as the archives of the Lord Lieutenant John Wodehouse and his successor Lord Abercorn. The Chief Secretary’s Office Registered Papers at the National Archives of Ireland are supplemented by using the Mayo, Larcom and Kilmainham Papers in the National Library of Ireland. The extensive correspondence of the Commanding Generals in Ireland, Sir George Brown and Sir Hugh Rose, are augmented by consulting the papers of the Army’s Commander-in-Chief, the Duke of Cambridge. Particular attention is paid to papers in The National Archives, Kew, including Home Office, War Office, Colonial Office, and Admiralty Papers. Extensive use is also made of online and hardcopy newspaper archives in the United State, Canada, the UK, and Ireland to assess the public reception of the steps taken by the Irish Executive. The transnational perspectives are bolstered by incorporating an analysis of reports iii from US Consuls in Ireland, as well as British Consuls in the United States and contemporary Canadian officials. Methodologically, the thesis examines these actions in the light of recent developments in counterinsurgency theory and practice, and by using Michael Mann’s theory of the “Infrastructural Power of the State” as a tool to facilitate this analysis. Where possible, the thesis views these elements in a transnational context, particularly by considering the wide range of imperial experiences of senior administrators and military commanders and assessing how those experiences influenced Irish affairs. This framework adds to current knowledge by demonstrating the capacities and limitations of the mid-Victorian governance of Ireland. It does this by contrasting the stated policy goals of the Executive and assessing them against the actual actions on the ground. The thesis is structured into three broad thematic sections. The first, the ‘Civil Sphere’ examines the use of coercive legislation and policing as tools of counterinsurgency. Chapter One focuses primarily on how the suspension of Habeas Corpus was used to influence the potential insurgents and imprison those who threatened state security. Chapter Two considers how the Irish Constabulary shifted from its usual civil duties to embrace more militarized functions at a time of crisis. Chapters Three and Four in the second section, the ‘Military Sphere’, examine the British Army and Irish Militia. The reform and redeployment of the army for political ends and the formation of Flying Columns at the outbreak of the rising are contrasted with the implications of the suspension of the Militia’s annual training. The three chapters of the final section, the frequently overlooked ‘Naval Sphere’, examine the role of the Royal Navy, Royal Marines, and the Irish Coastguard and assess their contribution to counterinsurgency activities. While each chapter deals with a specific institution, the coordinating role of the Irish Executive is never far from the surface. The thesis concludes that without vigorous Executives, led by lords Wodehouse and Naas respectively, to coordinate the disparate branches of state power, the suppression of Fenianism would have been significantly more problematic. iv Acknowledgements It’s only at the end of a PhD, with some small amount of time to reflect on a daunting and draining process, that one begins to understand the enormity of the debt that every doctoral candidate accumulates. If an army marches on its stomach, then truly the PhD student marches sustained by the encouragement of their friends, colleagues, and family. I consider myself incalculably lucky to have found two incredible supervisors in David Dickson and Ciarán O’Neill. As I have described them often, they’re the old sage on the brink of retirement, who has seen and done it all, and the rising star at the start of his career. Their enthusiasm, generosity of time, and startling scholarship have stood as a beacon to their bungling, but well-intentioned student. Their patience in the face of my never-ending stream of crises was astonishing, while the insights they offered on my work were always constructive, thoughtful, and useful. My time as a PhD student was unconventional, with periods of full-time and part-time study, as well as a year off books – they stuck by me through it all. Thank you. Equally, my examiners, Professor Eunan O’Halpin and Dr. Niall Whelehan, made the viva process a genuine pleasure. It was eminently clear that they engaged with my work in a constructive and professional manner, offering useful suggestions for the post-viva world. For this I am most grateful. Throughout the five years of study I was lucky enough to strike upon a good vein of funding, without which the undertaking would have been impossible. I am indebted to the Irish Research Council’s ‘Government of Ireland’ Postgraduate Scholarship (2013-15), the Irish-Canadian University Foundation’s ‘Dobbin Scholarship’ at the University of Toronto in the summer of 2013, and for smaller grants and prizes from the Irish Legal History Society, the Alan Villiers Postgraduate Essay Prize in Naval History, the Society for Army Historical Research, the Society for the Study of Nineteenth Century Ireland, and the Society for Military History’s ‘Russell Weighley’ Postgraduate Award. At my home institution I was awarded Trinity Trust and Leland Lyons travelling scholarships v that facilitated travel to archives and conferences, and was awarded the Thesis-in- Three prize in 2014. I have been welcomed with inestimable good cheer wherever I’ve travelled to archives by friends who never (visibly) tired of my ramblings. In London, my brother-in-law Stephen Banville and brother-in-arms Kevin Murphy made my long stints in the British Library and Kew more like holidays than work. In Edinburgh, Sophie Cooper and Joe Curran provided entertainment and useful advice. In Washington, Vanessa and Simon Carswell opened their doors to an old friend. In Kansas City, Will O’Brien and Tod Rathbone flew the Norwich University flag proudly beside me. In Oxford, Blake Ewing ensured my extended trips to the Bodleian involved the High Table experience at Oriel and provided sound advice, a comfortable bed, and perceptive comments throughout. To these, and the other unnamed, but equally helpful hosts, I am eternally grateful. For the push in the right direction that was needed at the conclusion of my Masters, I am most grateful to Dr John Broom, of Norwich University, Vermont, USA. Elsewhere, Dr Richard Dunley in Kew, Commander BJ Armstrong at the US Naval Academy and staff and students in the University of Portsmouth helped me navigate the tricky waters of naval history, and showed great humanity to a struggling postgrad. Professor Andrew Lambert was generous with his time in the early stages of this process, and saved me countless weeks of archival dithering. Professor Padraic Kennedy was kind enough to share some of his insights into the Irish Constabulary, saving me equally long archival stints. In Canada, David Wilson, Peter Vronsky, and Brian Jenkins shared their time and insight over numerous pleasant meetings. Dr William Butler’s insights into the Irish Militia helped to consolidate my understanding of that idiosyncratic organization. I also extend my thanks to the many unnamed, and often unseen, archivists and librarians I depended upon along the way. I am very grateful to the management of The King’s Hospital, Palmerstown, for granting me a two-year career break during which the lion’s share of my work was completed. All of the staff (except two) have been encouraging and supportive. vi Andrew Deacon, Niall Mahon, and John Huggard stand out as three exceptional colleagues, to whose level of professionalism I can only aspire. My fellow travellers on the PhD trail in Trinity have been one of the biggest surprises of a journey that I thought I would be travelling alone.