Workers’ motivations for the general strike in Limerick, 1919.
Master’s Thesis (45 credits), Spring 2021 Author: Martha Dunster Supervisor: Theresa Johnsson Master’s Programme in Modern History Submission Date: 17 May 2021
HISTORISKA INSTITUTIONEN
Abstract
In April 1919, the Trades and Labour Council of Limerick County, Ireland, declared a general strike in response to the increasingly militarised policing of the region by the British authorities. A Strike Committee, consisting of local activists, assumed governance of Limerick for two weeks. While various attempts have been made to uncover this largely forgotten chapter of Irish history, the voices and perspectives of workers who initiated and sustained the general strike remain largely absent from the historical record. Therefore, this thesis utilises newspapers and documents produced by local activists in order to assess workers’ motivations for embracing direct action and participating in this radical act of protest. Firstly, I will discuss how the Irish Transport and General Workers’ Union (ITGWU) capitalised on the perceived shortcomings of craft unions and parliamentary strategies by offering a more self-sufficient model of labour activism. Additionally, I will challenge the notion that direct action in Limerick was a fundamentally ‘pragmatic’ endeavour by exploring various ideological currents which inspired workers to participate in the general strike. The Limerick Soviet was not only conceived as a response to specific grievances but was framed by some participants as an act of defiance against both capitalism and British colonialism. Consequently, this thesis will examine how global anti- colonialist and anti-capitalist ideologies and movements influenced the political climate of Limerick between 1916 and 1920. This thesis will also demonstrate the capacity of local activists to adapt and amend ideologies they encountered in order to suit the particularities of the local economic and political climate.
ii
Table of Contents
Abstract ...... ii Table of Contents ...... iii Abbreviations ...... iv Chapter 1 Introduction ...... 1 Historical Context ...... 2 Previous Research ...... 7 Theoretical Perspectives ...... 10 Sources and Method ...... 13 Structure ...... 17 Chapter 2 Disillusionment with Labour and Trade Unions ...... 20 Developments within Trade Unionism ...... 20 “Labour Must Wait” ...... 26 Chapter 3 Protests as a Cause of Radicalism ...... 31 The Death of Robert Byrne ...... 32 Previous and Ongoing Strikes ...... 34 Achievements of Collective Action ...... 37 Chapter 4 International Revolutionary Movements and Anti-Colonialism ...... 40 International Revolutionary Movements ...... 41 International Decolonisation Struggles ...... 46 Chapter 5 The Relationship between Leaders and the “Rank and File” ...... 52 “Larkinism” ...... 53 Connolly and “Socialist Republicanism” ...... 56 Local Agitators and Activists ...... 59 Adapting Ideologies: Women’s Revolutionary Role ...... 62 Chapter 6 Conclusion ...... 67 Appendix ...... 72 Timeline ...... 74 Sources and Literature ...... 75 Unpublished Sources ...... 75 Published Sources ...... 75 Literature ...... 78
iii Abbreviations
CGT Confédération Générale du Travail ILP Independent Labour Party IPP Irish Parliamentary Party IRA Irish Republican Army IRSP Irish Republican Socialist Party ITGWU Irish Transport and General Workers’ Union ITUC Irish Trade Union Congress IWW International Workers of the World LFTC Limerick Federated Trades Council LUTLC Limerick United Trades and Labour Council NUDL National Union of Dock Labourers NUR National Union of Railwaymen RIC Royal Irish Constabulary
iv Chapter 1 Introduction
The Limerick Soviet was established in April 1919 after workers in Limerick County, Ireland announced a county-wide general strike in protest against what they termed “British militarism”.1 The strike was initiated by representatives of Limerick’s trade unions, and a Strike Committee was established to oversee the operation of business and industry in the county for its duration. The Committee produced its own newspaper, the Workers’ Bulletin, and even issued its own currency.2 Prominent local activists hoped for support on a national scale, with some even expressing belief that the Limerick Soviet would act as a catalyst for a nationwide general strike.3 However, national labour bodies did not share such revolutionary hopes, and national strike action did not occur.4 Therefore, two weeks after the Soviet was declared, the general strike in Limerick was called to an end. While the strike itself didn’t achieve the most radical aims of some of its participants, it succeeded in undermining the increasingly militarised policing of the local community and inspired future “Soviets”, strikes and workplace occupations in Ireland.5 This thesis seeks to explore the role of both ideology and lived experience in motivating people in Limerick to participate in the general strike of 1919. In order to do so, I will analyse numerous newspapers produced by citizens of Limerick between the years of 1916 and 1920. These newspapers will be used to explore the material conditions in Limerick, workers’ lived experiences of conflict with employers and the state, and ideological currents which influenced the strategies they endorsed. Newspapers produced by local activists and informally distributed among workers suggest numerous reasons why people in Limerick became disillusioned with formal electoral politics and sought a more radical path to redress their grievances. They reveal how workers themselves could interpret and articulate their lived experiences, including experiences of poverty, poor working conditions and military suppression. Previous analyses of the Limerick Soviet suggest that workers in the county did not hold strong ideological convictions but ‘spontaneously’ employed syndicalist strategies to resolve specific grievances.6 In order to evaluate this perspective, this thesis will interrogate the relationship between lived experiences and ideological motivations, exploring various ways in which the syndicalist movement capitalised upon discontentment by offering revolutionary solutions to workers’ grievances. Additionally, I will draw connections between the events of Limerick and international movements, examining how Limerick’s labour movement gained impetus from anti- colonial and anti-capitalist political projects in other nations. Lastly, I will examine the relationship
1The phrase “Limerick Strike Against British Militarism” is printed on currency printed by the Strike Committee (See Figure 1 in Appendix). 2 Cahill 2019, pp. 21—22. 3 “Irish Strike Threats”, Daily Express 24 April 1919; Kostic 2005, p. 198. 4 Haugh 2019, p. 13. 5 O’Connor, 2000; D. Lee, 2003, pp. 295—300. 6 D. Lee 2003, p. 295; Queally 2010, p. 5; Cahill 2019, p. 275, 293.
1 between the “rank-and-file” and leaders of the labour movement, exploring the role workers played in adapting and disseminating radical ideas in the local community. In 1919, Ireland was in the midst of a national struggle for independence from the British Empire, commonly referred to as the Irish Revolution. Socialist and trade unionist figureheads featured among its leading revolutionaries, and one of the first and most influential republican paramilitary organisations of the Revolutionary era developed out of a labour dispute in Dublin.7 Despite this, historical accounts of the Revolution frequently marginalise the importance of socialist ideas and overlook the many labour disputes which occurred throughout the revolutionary period.8 While some historians have sought to remedy this, many fall short of drawing explicit connections between labour struggles in Ireland and international revolutionary movements. By focusing on the ideologies which gave impetus to the general strike of 1919, this thesis will demonstrate that workers in Limerick were heavily inspired by international currents of radical thought. The Limerick Soviet and subsequent worker militancy in the region continues to be an issue of great interest to trade unionists and socialists in Ireland. Dominic Haugh describes the Limerick Soviet as “one of the most momentous events in Irish labour history”, while D. R. O’Connor Lysaght has suggested it had the potential to provoke a nationwide socialist revolution.9 Despite such claims, the Soviet is extremely under-researched and there is very limited public awareness of its existence, even in Ireland. Commentators have referred to the events in Limerick as the “forgotten revolution”.10
Historical Context
The Limerick Soviet was created in the midst of the Irish War of Independence of 1919 to 1921, in which Irish republicans fought against British forces in pursuit of national independence. A major historical event which contributed to the rapid growth of militant republicanism in Ireland was the Easter Rising, a military insurrection against British rule in Ireland which occurred in April 1916. After the Rising, British authorities executed those regarded to be leaders of the insurrection, including some non-combatants.11 Their severe response generated widespread sympathy for the republican cause.12 The republican organisation Sinn Féin capitalised upon this newfound sympathy
7 The Irish Citizen Army (ICA) was formed by members of Dublin’s branch of the ITGWU in order to defend local trade unionists during a labour dispute known as the Dublin Lockout in 1913. The ICA collaborated with Republicans in militarily opposing British rule in Ireland (O’Connor 2002 pp. 22—23). 8 Ferriter 2015, p. 120. 9 O’Connor Lysaght 1979; Haugh 2006, p. 30. 10 Cahill 2019. 11 Murphy 2014, p. 57. 12 Laffan 1999, p. 156; Murphy 2014, p. 154.
2 and declared its ambition to create an Irish republican counter-state.13 Sinn Féin candidates then secured a landslide victory in the 1918 general election. Victorious Sinn Féin MPs abstained from the UK Parliament and instead convened as Dáil Éireann (the “Assembly of Ireland”) on 21 January 1919.14 This date is regarded by many historians to mark the beginning of the Irish War of Independence. In Limerick County, Sinn Féin rapidly grew in strength during this period. Between May and June of 1917, over 70 Sinn Féin clubs emerged in the region, and Limerick was home to two battalions of the IRA.15 Throughout the War of Independence, Limerick is regarded to have been one of the most prominent and radical sites of republican activity.16 The major events of the Revolutionary era and the general strike in Limerick are set out in a timeline on page 74 of this thesis. Another organisation that was highly influential in the political life of Limerick was the ITGWU. The ITGWU was founded by Jim Larkin in 1909.17 It was an industrial union that sought to organise employees of all rankings across industries.18 The most well-known dispute the organisation was part of was the Dublin Lockout of 1913, a major conflict between Dublin employers and ITGWU members.19 While this conflict helped to raise the profile of the union, ITGWU membership did not immediately improve. The organisation attempted to establish a branch in Limerick in July 1914, but “completely failed” to do so.20 However, the union’s fortunes changed after the First World War. The ITGWU experienced rapid growth from 1918 to 1919. By December 1919, the ITGWU had 429 branches registered at its head office, and the union reported a membership of 103,000 people across Ireland.21 Limerick is a city contained within County Limerick, which is located in the province of Munster in the Southwest of Ireland. According to census data from 1911, Limerick county had a population of 143,069 people.22 The population of Limerick city and county was overwhelmingly Catholic, with 101,502 citizens being recorded as Catholic in the same census.23 During the aftermath of the First World War, many Irish cities experienced substantial growth in major industries. However, Limerick’s economy benefited comparatively little. While the farming and manufacturing sectors experienced a degree of economic growth after the War, other major forms of employment such as the dockyards and the pork and bacon curing trades suffered greatly. 24
13 ‘The Manifesto of Sinn Féin as prepared for circulation for the General Election of December’, 1918. 14 Ferriter 2015, p. 185. 15 O’Callaghan 2010, p. 54. 16 Ibid., pp. 5—6. 17 Greaves 1982, pp. 26—27. 18 O’Connor 2011, p. 117. 19 Yeates 2001, pp. 31—36. 20 Fitzpatrick 1977, p. 241. 21 Ibid. p. 246. 22 Census data was not recorded during the War of Independence, and so the most recent data prior to the Limerick Soviet is from 1911. 23 O’Callaghan 2010, p. 10. 24 Haugh 2006, p. 27; O’Callaghan 2010, p. 10.
3 Furthermore, even in sectors that experienced some growth, the working-class population benefited little. Local workers experienced low wages, poor housing, and widespread illness.25 Among the largest employers in the region were four brothers named Cleeve who owned numerous creameries, factories and warehouses across Munster, including the Condensed Milk Company of Ireland.26 In total, the Cleeves Company directly employed around three thousand workers from Limerick city and county. In addition, their factories processed milk supplied by around five thousand farmers based in and around Limerick county. 27 Cleeves had a reputation for underpaying employees and for offering poor working conditions. They also refused the demands of trade unionists on numerous occasions.28 While the 1919 general strike occurred amid growing resentment against such inadequate living and working conditions, its existence can also be traced back to the death of a single Republican activist named Robert J. Byrne. Byrne was an active trade unionist and a member of the 2nd Battalion of the IRA in Limerick.29 In January 1919, Byrne was imprisoned on the charge of possession of a revolver. Like many republican prisoners, Byrne went on hunger strike during his prison sentence in order to advocate for his right to be recognised as a political prisoner. His demands were not met, and the authorities were forced to relocate Byrne to a hospital in March 1919.30 Following this relocation, fellow members of the Limerick IRA battalions formulated a plan to rescue Byrne from the hospital. However, the mission went awry, and, as a result, both a guarding policeman and Byrne himself were shot dead on 6 April 1919.31 Byrne’s death caused a mass outcry among the population of Limerick, many of whom were already angered by the plight of hunger-striking prisoners at the hands of prison guards and police.32 Officials feared that the funeral could spark unrest if large crowds attended. Therefore, on 9 April, the day before Byrne’s funeral, the British military utilised their unprecedented powers under the wartime Defence of the Realm Act to declare Limerick a military zone.33 Despite the severe scrutiny and repression this entailed, Byrne’s funeral was transformed into a mass event, attended by around 15,000 people.34 Tanks were stationed along the funeral procession and there was a heavy presence of soldiers. No disturbance occurred at the funeral, but the authorities decided to persevere with heavy military suppression of the county. Limerick was to become a Special Military Area, which meant that, as of 14 April, people travelling in or out of the boundaries of the military zone were required to possess a permit from the authorities and face military examination. However, many
25 O’Callaghan 2010, p. 10. 26 Haugh 2006, p. 27. 27 Cahill 2019, p. 282. 28 Ibid., p. 282. 29 Cahill 2019, p. 27; Haugh 2019, p. 106. 30 Cahill 2019, p. 40; Haugh 2019, p. 107. 31 Kemmy 1976, p. 46; Cahill 2019, p 22; Haugh 2019, p. 107. 32 Soldier Hunter Vol. 1, No. 1, 23 February 1918. 33 Kemmy 1976, p. 47; Cahill 2019 p. 21; Haugh 2019 p. 109. 34 Kemmy 1976, p. 47.
4 workers from Limerick worked outside of the boundaries of the military zone, so had to endure this process in order to simply go to work each day. 35 In response to this controversial act of suppression, the Trades and Labour Council – a local body consisting of representatives of all local trade unions – held an emergency meeting. At this meeting, it was agreed that a general strike would be called for the following day.36 The strike was declared on 13 April 1919, a mere week after Byrne’s death. A Strike Committee was formed by members of the Trades and Labour Council. John Cronin, a skilled carpenter and delegate of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters, was elected Chairman. James Casey, treasurer of the Trades and Labour Council, became the Committee treasurer. Another prominent Committee member was James Carr, an engineering worker.37 The Committee formed subcommittees responsible for propaganda, finance and food.38 Some “sympathetic” shopkeepers were granted permission to open their doors in return for currency issued by the Strike Committee. According to Jeremiah Cronin, a local IRA member, there was no single instance in which a local shopkeeper refused to accept the token currency.39 This new, worker-controlled operation of the county came to be known as the Limerick Soviet. The Strike Committee never formally titled the new, worker-controlled governance of Limerick a ‘Soviet’. However, the name was widely used in media coverage of the strike and was not met with opposition by local activists. Ruth Russell, a journalist for the Chicago Tribune, reported that John Cronin confirmed that the governance of the Committee constituted a Soviet in an interview conducted at the outset of the general strike.40 Historians have continued to use the title of the ‘Limerick Soviet’. According to Liam Cahill, the events of Limerick fulfilled many of the criteria to be regarded as a ‘Soviet’: the workers’ Committee “organised and managed political and civil society within most of Limerick city” and did not take over private property simply because “so long as shopkeepers were willing to act under the soviet’s dictates there was no practical reason to commandeer their premises”.41 Similar worker-initiated seizures of governmental offices and industries took place in other parts of Europe in 1919. In the years following the Russian Revolution of 1917, some of these socialist uprisings culminated in sustained worker-led re- organisation of cities, such as the Bavarian Socialist Republic and the Hungarian Soviet Republic.42 Consequently, the word ‘Soviet’ was widely understood to denote worker-led seizure of political power and operation of the economy and civil society within a city or locality. Demonstrating their
35 Cahill 2019, p. 21. 36 Ibid., p. 300. 37 Ibid., p. 77. 38 Ibid., p. 78. 39 Jeremiah Cronin Witness Statement (WS 1423), Bureau of Military History 40 Ruth Russell, “What’s the Matter with Ireland?” (1920), quoted in Cahill, 2016, p. 106. 41 Cahill 2019, pp. 273—274. 42 D. Lee 2003, pp. 288—290; Pelz 2016, pp. 120—124.
5 embrace of the phenomenon of small-scale Soviets, subsequent strikes and workplace occupations carried out in Limerick were explicitly titled ‘Soviets’ by the workers involved.43 The Limerick Soviet did not endure for long. On 25 April, workers who did not require a military permit to travel to their workplace were instructed to return to work, and a full resumption of work commenced on 28 April.44 The demise of the Limerick Soviet can, in part, be attributed to the lack of support from the national trade union movement. The ITUC declined to initiate a general strike in solidarity with Limerick. Instead, they created a scheme to evacuate the workers of Limerick from their county.45 This scheme was met with scepticism from Limerick residents. John M. MacCarthy, a member of the East Limerick Brigade during the strike, reported that this directive was the only occasion upon which he “wilfully disobeyed a military order.” In his view, the directive reflected “more than an undertone of hysteria” and would be viewed by the people of Limerick as “unrelated to the needs of the actual situation”.46 Therefore, the evacuation did not take place and the general strike ceased. While the Soviet did not endure, it succeeded as a protest against military suppression, as the military restrictions Limerick had been subjected to were officially ended on May 5, 1919.47 Furthermore, the Limerick Soviet inspired further strikes and occupations both in Limerick and elsewhere in Ireland. One notable subsequent Soviet was the ‘Knocklong Soviet’ of May 1919, established by the workers of Cleeves Creamery in Knocklong, a village in Limerick County. Much like the Limerick Soviet, the Knocklong Soviet was driven by prominent agitators of the local branch of the ITGWU.48 In protest at an unresolved wage dispute, workers seized control of thirteen creameries. They displayed a banner reading “Knocklong Soviet Creamery: We make butter not profits”, and a red flag was flown.49 Their protest was a success, as the Cleeves family was forced to concede to their employees’ wage demands. This success, in turn, inspired further strikes and occupations directed against the Cleeves company.50 David Lee suggests that prolonged occupations, in combination with the challenges of domestic political conflict, left Cleeves “economically battered and psychologically bruised” by the end of the Irish War of Independence.51
43 D. Lee 2003, p. 299. 44 Cahill 2019, p. 183. 45 John M. MacCarthy Witness Statement (WS 883), Bureau of Military History. 46 Ibid. 47 Cahill 2019, pp. 303—4. 48 Haugh 2016, p. 153. 49 Lee 2003, p. 295. 50 Ibid., p. 296 51 Ibid., p. 305.
6 Previous Research
The absence of public awareness and academic discussion of the Limerick Soviet are indicative of a broader pattern of labour and socialist movements being marginalised in popular histories and commemorations of the Irish Revolution. Following the partition of Ireland, the newly established Irish Free State sought to forge an independent identity, in part by furnishing a coherent national mythology distinct from those of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. As part of this myth-making process, the history of Ireland’s struggle for independence was interpreted in accordance with the self-image and political priorities of the Free State.52 As a result, hegemonic narratives of the Revolution are prone to adopting a “deterministic” vision of nationalism, focusing on strands of nationalist thought which came to dominate Ireland in the 1920s and 30s while marginalising competing ideologies.53 This marginalisation is reflected in commemorative traditions and popular culture. Diarmaid Ferriter suggests that socialist elements of Irish history have been deliberately excluded from popular and official narratives, with major commemorations demonstrating a “determined effort to side-line the labour movement in promoting the nationalist narrative”.54 Historical analysis of the events of the Limerick Soviet is scarce, but a few authors have published accounts of the events of the general strike. One of the most comprehensive publications on the subject is Liam Cahill’s book The Forgotten Revolution, first published in 2016. Cahill, a former official of the Federated Workers’ Union of Ireland, provides an extremely detailed account of the events preceding the strike and how the strike itself unfolded.55 His interpretation of the strike particularly emphasises the importance of the ITGWU. More recently, a book commemorating the centenary of the Limerick Soviet was published in 1919 by Dominic Haugh. Haugh’s account of the strike seeks to emphasise the important contributions of local activists in its initiation, particularly of Sean Dowling, a socialist who has been described as the “philosophical begetter” of the Limerick Soviet.56. Aside from this emphasis, Haugh’s analysis differs from Cahill’s in its detailed account of labour disputes and trade union activism in Limerick throughout the nineteenth century and leading up to the Revolutionary period. By outlining many decades of developments in local trade unionism, Haugh’s book re-contextualises the events of the Soviet, presenting the general strike as the climax in a long history of local strikes and agitation. While these recent books are among the first publications to provide comprehensive accounts of the history of the Limerick Soviet, both Cahill and Haugh are indebted to the research of Jim Kemmy, a socialist activist and former mayor of Limerick who published numerous articles
52 The process of national-myth making as part of state-formation processes, particularly in relation to the enshrinement Catholic moral teaching in governance, is discussed in Michael G. Cronin, ‘Impure thoughts’, 2012, pp. 52—55. 53 Foster 2014, p. 18. 54 Ferriter 2015, p. 120. 55 Queally 2010, p. 2. 56 Haugh 2019, p. 25.
7 on the Soviet in a local socialist newspaper, the Limerick Socialist, during 1972 and 1973. Kemmy sought to assess radical ideas which inspired the strike, and his Limerick Socialist articles frequently use interviews with strike participants printed in “official” newspapers such as the Limerick Leader.57 Kemmy’s detailed and thorough research provided the groundwork for historians seeking to study the general strike in subsequent decades.58 In addition to publishing numerous articles of his own, Kemmy also curated an archive of documents connected to the Limerick Soviet and trade unionism in Limerick, which has been used extensively in the development of this thesis. Consequently, while Kemmy was not a professional historian himself, his dedicated research into the Limerick Soviet has played a crucial role in preserving and popularising this chapter of Irish labour history. The Limerick Soviet has been a subject of interest among trade unionists and socialists in Ireland for many decades, and this is reflected in the historiography of the Soviet, much of which is produced by people who are involved in political activism. Another of the earliest publications dedicated to discussing the general strike is a publication by the self-described Trotskyist historian D. R. O’Connor Lysagt.59 O’Connor Lysagt’s article ‘The Story of Limerick’ reflects his political outlook, as he depicts the Soviet as an example of an alternative, more promising path Ireland could have taken and laments the demise of the Soviet as it was “betrayed” by the wider labour movement.60 Consequently, O’Connor Lysagt appears to measure the Soviet against his own ideological objectives rather than emphasising the objectives and outlooks of historical actors.61 A similar tendency is apparent in Haugh’s 2019 work, in which he asserts that “The Soviet holds important lessons for the workers movement and for left activists”. Haugh then reflects upon the radical potential of the Soviet and the reasons for its “failure”.62 While these researchers have each produced extremely valuable work by documenting in detail the events of the strike, this thesis will deviate from their analytical approaches by bypassing assessments of the ‘successes’ or ‘failures’ of the Soviet and the ‘lessons’ it offers activists today. Conversely, my thesis is concerned with uncovering a plurality of aims and ambitions which motivated workers to embrace direct action. Therefore, this thesis primarily uses these accounts to establish the events of the strike, which have been corroborated across various studies. In addition to the few publications which focus on the Soviet in particular, this thesis also builds upon the broader historiography of labour disputes, trade unionism and socialism in Ireland as a whole. A prominent historian who has focused upon the more ‘radical’ leftist figureheads of the Revolution is Emmet O’Connor. O’Connor has produced numerous works focusing on the
57 Jim Kemmy, The Limerick Socialist Vol. 1 No. 4 April 1972—Vol. 7 No. 2 February 1973. 58 Cahill states Kemmy was a ‘lone pioneer’ and ‘build a solid foundation on which this book [The Forgotten Revolution] rests.’ (Cahill 2019, p. 13). 59 In a letter to the journal Revolutionary History, O’Connor Lysagt describes himself as “the only independently-published Trotskyist historian in Ireland” (O’Connor Lysagt 1996). 60 O’Connor Lysagt 1979. 61 Ibid. 62 Haugh 2019, p. 21.
8 history of labour disputes and trade unionism in Ireland in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These include a biography of ITGWU founder Jim Larkin, and the first book ever published specifically on the subject of syndicalism in Ireland.63 O’Connor examines the distinctive qualities of the ITGWU’s approach to trade unionism, discussing how and why it advocated syndicalist strategies such as sympathetic striking and labour militancy. His research promotes recognition of the strength of the ITGWU at the outset of the War of Independence, presenting it as an influential organisation that succeeded in harnessing the power of previously unaffiliated ‘unskilled’ workers.64 While the ITGWU did not explicitly define itself as a syndicalist union, historians regard the union to have been heavily inspired by the principles of syndicalism. As O’Connor argues, syndicalism was never a cohesive, coherent philosophy.65 Rather, it can be considered a “philosophy of action”, more concerned with endorsing worker-initiated direct action than with developing a unifying doctrine.66 Therefore, it is argued that strategies such as sympathetic striking and workplace occupations which characterised the activities of the ITGWU reveal its “syndicalist character”.67 Accordingly, its activities have been compared and contrasted with contemporaneous syndicalist organisations in other countries, including Spain, Italy and France. Ralph Darlington’s comparative approach to analysing the growth of syndicalism after the First World War contextualises labour unrest in Ireland by presenting it as one portion of a transnational revolutionary movement. His analysis demonstrates that labour leaders in Ireland endorsed strategies inspired by events they had witnessed in other nations and conceptualised revolution in accordance with ideological frameworks popularised abroad.68 Darlington’s comparative studies have been crucial in my efforts to identify how Limerick’s labour movement was influenced by international political currents and what aspects of local activism deviated from the norms of the global syndicalist movement. Lastly, the events of Limerick can be connected to global anti-colonial activism which occurred in the years following the First World War. The Irish War of Independence is one facet of an international “Crisis of Empire” which occurred from 1919 to 1922. During these years, the British Empire faced an onslaught of challenges, with attacks on imperial authority occurring in Africa, India, and Ireland.69 This international upheaval strongly influenced the political landscape of Ireland, inspiring anti-colonialist thought and demands for political recognition for Ireland’s right to self-determination. The influence of such currents of thought can be seen in the events of the general strike in Limerick and appeals to the principle of self-determination permeate the
63 O’Connor 1988, p. xi. 64 Ibid., pp. 193—222; O’Connor 2011, pp. 75—88. 65 O’Connor 1988, p. xvii. 66 Darlington 2013, p. 19. 67 O’Connor 1988, xvii. 68 Darlington 2008. 69 Gallagher 1981, p. 355.
9 contents of workers’ newspapers. Consequently, existing scholarship discussing decolonisation and the concept of self-determination will provide an additional backdrop to my analysis of popular ideology in Limerick.
Theoretical Perspectives
Existing historiography of the Revolutionary period displays a tendency to view ideologies as uniform and coherent entities. In many instances, diversities within ideologies are obscured and broad ideological frameworks are reduced to a few generalised characteristics. However, some historians have identified and criticised this tendency. In the case of Irish nationalism, Katy Hayward endorses the concept of “multiple nationalisms”, arguing that the Irish Revolution was characterised by a range of nationalisms competing for space and influence.70 Hayward identifies three broad categories of Irish nationalism – unionist, constitutional and republican – but emphasises that there is great diversity even within these core groups, with differentiation visible in nationalists’ formulations of national identity, territory and state.71 The Limerick Soviet can be regarded as evidence of the diversity of perspectives among Irish republicans. Within Limerick, there were 4,600 Sinn Féin members by the end of 1917, and 2,600 people were part of the republican paramilitary the Irish Volunteers.72 Members of republican paramilitaries were actively involved in the operation of the Soviet.73 Therefore, while a large sector of the population aligned themselves with the republican cause, their political outlook differed greatly from the conservative Catholicism commonly associated with Irish republicanism. My analysis will be predicated upon the idea that ideologies encompass a range of concepts, and that there is variation and contestation within any given ideology. Michael Freeden states that ideologies are “complex combinations and clusters of political concepts in sustainable patterns.”74 In this thesis, I will attempt to identify patterns of ideas and opinions and highlight variation and contestation between and within ideologies. The working classes of Limerick were not a homogenous group, and the ideas they endorsed were diverse and, at times, contradictory. Rather than seeking to identify a ‘dominant’ mode of political thought or draw generalisations, I will instead explore reasons why such diverse ideological tendencies nonetheless provoked many workers to collaborate against a common injustice. Another common shortcoming of analyses of popular ideology in Revolutionary Ireland is the tendency to dichotomise ideological traditions. This tendency is particularly pronounced in
70 Hayward 2009, p. 64. 71 Ibid., pp. 64—7. 72 Cahill 2019, p. 222; Haugh 2019, p. 101. 73 John M. MacCarthy witness statement (WS 883), Bureau of Military History; Jeremiah Cronin witness statement (WS 1423), Bureau of Military History. 74 Freeden 2003, p. 51.
10 analyses of the more ‘radical’ trends of political thought. For example, the dichotomisation of syndicalism and nationalism is apparent in Emmet O’Connor’s earlier publications, including his book Syndicalism in Ireland (1988). In this book, O’Connor claims nationalism had minimal impact on the labour movement, arguing “people join trade unions to improve their wages and conditions, not to express a national identity”.75 However, in accordance with Freeden’s definition of ideologies as “clusters of political concepts”, this thesis seeks to highlight instances of the interlinkage of nationalist and syndicalist concepts.76 The rhetoric of workers in Limerick displays a fusion of syndicalist and nationalist principles, demonstrating that these ideologies could be mutually supportive rather than mutually excluding. As previously discussed, existing accounts of the Limerick Soviet are also prone to judging the “successes” and “failures” of the Soviet. While not explicitly stated, these judgements appear to be a measure of the degree to which the workers challenged the architecture of capitalism in Ireland and enacted change associated with socialism. For example, D. R. O’Connor Lysagt states that Limerick “does not need to apologise for its Soviet … for two short weeks, the city had shown Ireland the vision of the Workers’ Republic”.77 Additionally, O’Connor Lysagt suggests that the aftermath of the strike does not support the notion “that the national question got in the way of the social question”, thereby implying nationalism could be detrimental to the types of social change his analysis endorses.78 The inclination to judge or favour certain ideological traditions is not limited to commentaries of the Limerick Soviet, however. Among commentators of many disciplines, nationalism is commonly assumed to be a “primitive” ideology and is perceived to hold less intellectual weight than other ideologies.79 However, in order to study ideology, the researcher must first understand the assumptions contained within an ideology and put themselves “in the shoes of the ideological promoter”. 80 This takes precedence over arriving at personal judgements about the value of a given ideology.81 Therefore, my analysis of workers’ newspapers will not attempt to evaluate the positions advocated by workers according to their merits. Instead, it will attempt to consider what different ideologies offered to those who propagated them. This is an approach that embraces and emphasises the subjectivities of ideological promoters. In his book Silencing the Past, Michel-Rolph Trouillot asserts the importance of incorporating the voices and subjectivities of historical actors into accounts of the past. He suggests that there is no way of describing a strike without making
75 O’Connor 1988, p. xvii 76 Freeden 2003, p. 51. 77 O’Connor Lysagt, 1979. 78 Ibid. This implication corresponds with a broader narrative of the Revolutionary period which claims the interests of labour were subordinated to nationalist objectives, as will be discussed on page 26. 79 Freeden 2003, p. 71. 80 Ibid. 81 Ibid.
11 “the subjective capacities of the workers a central part of a description”.82 Trouillot argues that narratives of a strike need to incorporate workers’ voices “in the first person”, as this alone enables the historian to understand why workers decide not to work and the objective they are attempting to pursue.83 A related theoretical debate surrounds the question of how ideologies are created and transmitted. According to Marx and Engels, ideologies constitute illusions that are propagated by rulers in order to control and dominate the proletariat.84 While this model of ideology has been revised and contested over the decades, its core assumptions still underpin certain narratives surrounding popular ideology. One manifestation of this continuity is “agitator theory”, which proposes that worker militancy and popular protest are the outcomes of workers being either inspired, or, in less sympathetic narratives, duped, by ideologues and agitators.85 This narrative is evident in contemporaries’ accounts of the Limerick Soviet and some recent analyses. Conversely, Emmet O’Connor portrays the militancy of the syndicalist movement as emanating almost entirely from the “rank-and-file” of labour organisations, with leaders tending more towards conservatism.86 However, both explanations for the growth of worker-led agitation typically neglect to systematically analyse the ideas expressed by the workers themselves. While the ideas and writings of intellectuals are assessed, only the activities of workers are considered, not their own rhetoric, publications and testimony. As a result, historians fail to account for how working-class people could interpret and reformulate the ideas transmitted to them by leaders, intellectuals and agitators. Ideology is assumed to be either foisted upon workers or of marginal relevance to their actions, as the ability of workers to criticise, amend or rework ideologies they encounter is entirely overlooked. Therefore, my thesis will be centred on the perspectives of workers themselves, as opposed to leaders and intellectuals. Analysis of this type is consistent with the historical tradition of ‘history from below’. ‘History from below’ was initially embraced by British Marxist historians and came to represent a ‘theoretical tradition’ based on the proposition that class struggle is central to the historical process.87 Since the 1960s, ‘history from below’ has been influenced by a desire to recover the voices of those who are marginalised due to their class, ethnicity or gender.88 In line with such aims, this thesis will focus on the ideas of those whose voices are commonly absent from the historical narrative. It will not only re-centre the ideas of working-class people, but it will seek recognition for the contributions of sectors of the working classes whose views and actions are especially marginalised, namely working-class women.
82 Trouillot 2015, p. 23. 83 Ibid., p. 24. 84 Freeden 2003, p. 6. 85 Darlington 2008, p. 84. 86 O’Connor 1988, p. xix. 87 Green & Troup 2016, p. 70. 88 Ibid., page 453.
12 Sources and Method
In order to uncover the perspectives of workers, this thesis will extensively analyse newspapers produced by citizens of Limerick city and county between the years of 1916 and 1920. The Easter Rising is commonly regarded to be a pivotal moment in Irish history which provoked a rapid escalation of republicanism. As previously discussed, during the four years that followed, both the ITGWU and Sinn Féin first experienced rapid growth in the local population. Consequently, this four-year period represented a transformative period in the history of Limerick, in which syndicalism and republicanism emerged as powerful popular movements. Issues of various newspapers produced within Limerick are preserved in archives curated by Jim Kemmy at both the University of Limerick and the Limerick City and County Museum. For the purposes of this thesis, I will primarily analyse issues of three different newspapers. These are the Factionist, the Bottom Dog, and the Workers’ Bulletin. These newspapers have different political alignments and agendas and offer varying perspectives on the circumstances in Limerick and the ideologies which circulated in the county prior to the general strike. My source base has been limited to issues of these newspapers which are accessible on digital archives. This encompasses 33 copies of the Factionist published between 17 May 1916 and 20 September 1917, nine issues of the Bottom Dog published between 7 November 1917 and 1 June 1918, and five issues of the Workers’ Bulletin published during March and April of 1919. In addition, a few issues of other newspapers which are included in the Jim Kemmy archives have been assessed, including issues of the Irish Republic and the Soldier Hunter. Three issues of the Irish Republic are accessible, each published between 7 July 1917 and 16 February 1918. Additionally, one issue from the Soldier Hunter is digitally accessible, which was published in February 1918. These newspapers use nationalistic imagery, but since I could not access a greater number of issues, I have not been able to substantially explore their particular agendas and political positions. Consequently, these newspapers are primarily used to corroborate perspectives that are offered in more widely available newspapers. Lastly, I have analysed one issue of the Red Flag, a newspaper produced by law clerks affiliated with the ITGWU who engaged in strike action shortly after the demise of the Limerick Soviet.89 In total, fifty-two issues of ‘unofficial’ newspapers circulated in Limerick have been analysed in the development of this thesis. Both the Bottom Dog and the Factionist were published anonymously, but editors of each newspaper have now been identified by historians. In spite of the newspaper’s own claims to the contrary, the publication of the Factionist is attributed to Michael Gleeson. 90 Gleeson owned a
89 Cahill 2016, p. 277 90 O’Callaghan 2011, p. 185.
13 printing works on Cornmarket Row which was repeatedly raided by the authorities in an attempt to suppress publication.91 The newspaper openly supports the local branch of Sinn Féin, and largely discusses Ireland’s struggle for independence. However, it also provides some commentary on labour disputes and remarks on the local living and working conditions, thereby providing an insight into how republican and labour concerns could intersect. Conversely, the Bottom Dog is an openly socialist newspaper that secondarily endorses nationalistic objectives. The newspaper was established and edited by Ben Dineen, an active member of the Limerick Bakers’ Union. 92 Cahill reports that the newspaper was written and circulated by prominent members of the Limerick United Trades and Labour Council until it ceased publication shortly after Dineen’s death in 1918.93 Due to Dineen’s background as a baker and the content of the newspaper, which discusses living and working conditions of the local working-class community, the Bottom Dog has been described as “Limerick’s first working-class newspaper”. 94 Both the Factionist and the Bottom Dog likely had a range of contributors, and the exact socioeconomic background of authors is not known. Nonetheless, both newspapers exhibit extensive and intimate knowledge of the experiences of working-class people in Limerick. Local employees and employers are referred to by name, and the wages and working hours of various local people are specified.95 Therefore, while it cannot be irrefutably demonstrated that all contributors to this paper were themselves local workers, it is apparent that authors of both newspapers were very well acquainted with the plight of employees of Limerick’s factories, shops, bakeries and other workplaces. One difficulty associated with the analysis of informally distributed newspapers is the absence of verifiable information about the scope of their audiences. There is no recorded data to indicate how widely the newspapers were distributed since they were not sold through official press channels. Official newspapers of the time reported that the Factionist had a ‘fairly large circulation’, and Cahill asserts that the Bottom Dog had a broad readership.96 In one issue of the Bottom Dog, the newspaper proclaims that it sold 8,335 copies in the previous week, although this may be an exaggeration.97 However, as previously explained, my thesis will not attempt to identify a dominant mode of political thought or to draw generalisations about the beliefs of the
91 “Police Seize the Second Irish Paper”, New York Times, 20 July 1919. 92 Haugh 2019, p. 82. 93 Cahill 2019, p. 216. 94 Kemmy 1976, p. 45. 95 Examples of references to local wages, employers and employees are included in Bottom Dog, No. 2, 7 November 1917; No. 25, 6 April 1918; No. 24, 30 March 1918, and the Factionist Vol 1., No. 23, 5 July 1917, Vol. 2, No. 9, 13 September 1917. 96 Cahill 2019, p. 216. 97 Bottom Dog No. 2, 7 November 1917.
14 population of Limerick. While precise readership figures are unknown, the newspapers still provide a crucial insight into the political climate of the county. The arguments publishers make will not be assumed to be representative of the views of the entire population of Limerick, but rather, indicative of forms of rhetoric that circulated in the county before and during the general strike. The informal method of distribution also means it is difficult to ascertain who made up the audiences of these newspapers. However, the content of newspapers and their stated aims provide some indication of who their intended audiences were. The Bottom Dog professes to speak on behalf of all “Bottom Dogs”, meaning all people who are oppressed on the basis of “class, nation or sex”.98 However, it primarily writes on behalf of the local labour force, reporting specifically on employment conditions of low-ranking employees in stores, factories, bakeries and creameries. Meanwhile, the Factionist appears to cater towards those with separatist nationalist views. The newspaper was printed in defiance of the state’s efforts to suppress its publication and appears to delight in the police’s failed attempts at censorship, defying “imitation detectives and fat-headed peelers of Limerick to locate us”.99 Such taunting reveals publishers were confident in their ability to post whatever they chose without consequence, and the newspaper repeatedly endorsed unlawful and militant forms of Republican activism.100 Therefore, the intended audience of the Factionist was likely Sinn Féin supporters, members of the Irish Volunteers and their allies. The newspaper displays no attempt to accommodate alternative views on the “National Question”, openly mocking the more moderate Irish Parliamentary Party for its willingness to negotiate with the British government.101 The Workers’ Bulletin is referred to in existing literature discussing the Limerick Soviet as the newsletter produced by the Soviet’s propaganda sub-committee.102 However, contained within the University of Limerick archives are editions of a newspaper with the same title which predate the initiation of the general strike, with the earliest issue dating back to 27 March 1919. One explanation is that two different Limerick newsletters shared the same title in the spring of 1919. However, issues of the Worker’s Bulletin printed in March and April of 1919 use the same fonts and formatting styles.103 Furthermore, all issues of the Bulletin published prior to the Strike are
98 This quote is the slogan of the Bottom Dog which appears at the header of every issue assessed in this thesis. 99 The Factionist, Vol, 2, No. 4, 9 August 1917. 100 For example, the Factionist, No. 2, Vol. 1, 20 September 1917; No. 9, Vol. 1, 29 March 1917; No. 16, Vol. 1, 17 May 1916. 101 The Factionist, No.1, Vol. 1, 27 January 1917; No. 21, Vol. 1, 21 June 1917; No. 16, Vol. 1, 17 May 1916. 102 Cahill 2019, 308; Haugh 2019, 134. 103 While there is variation in appearance and formatting between issues (including the placement of the apostrophe in ‘Workers’/Worker’s), The Worker’s Bulletin No. 7, 27 March 1919 and Vol. 1, No. 3, 18 April 1919 have identical headers and distinctive use of borders. The latter exclusively discusses the Soviet and activities of the Soviet Strike Committee.
15 nonetheless signed “Published by the Strike Committee at their Offices, National Monument, Limerick”. These issues reflect on growing radical sentiments in Limerick and provide accounts of specific labour disputes ongoing in the county. Similarly, for the duration of the Soviet, the Workers’ Bulletin updated the population about the events of the strike through an explicitly anti- capitalist lens.104 Consequently, it appears that March editions of the Workers’ Bulletin were a precursor to the newspaper printed by the Strike Committee during the Soviet and were also produced by members of the Trades and Labour Council. This view is supported by the numbering of issues, as editions of the Bulletin published during the general strike are labelled ‘New Series’ and renumbered from Vol. 1, No. 1. Therefore, it appears that a body of workers labelled themselves ‘the Strike Committee’, had assumed offices in central Limerick, and took responsibility for alerting the population to local labour disputes shortly before the initiation of Limerick’s general strike. However, the exact authorship of all issues of the Bulletin cannot be verified. Therefore, much like the other newspapers, the Workers’ Bulletin will be used to indicate what ideas were circulating in Limerick County before and during the strike. The newsletter provides detailed insights into strikes predating the Soviet, and issues published during the general strike itself display how the events of the strike could be framed by local workers. Consequently, in spite of its ambiguous authorship, the newspaper is a valuable resource in uncovering the lived experiences and perspectives of workers in Limerick. One limitation of each of these newspapers is that they appear to primarily address the experiences and concerns of people working in Limerick city, and do not extensively account for the particular experiences of agricultural workers living in the rural areas of Limerick county. The general strike encompassed both the city and county of Limerick, and much of the county was not urbanised to the same extent as Limerick city, with many inhabitants living in towns with less than 500 residents.105 While many of the ideas and issues discussed in newspapers examined in this thesis do not outright exclude agricultural labourers, they display a more intimate knowledge of the experiences and demands of the residents of Limerick city. Consequently, while the particular experiences and motivations that led agricultural labourers and inhabitants of rural areas to participate in the general strike is a subject well worthy of its own study, access to their distinct perspectives would demand a different methodology to the one employed in this thesis. This thesis will also utilise ‘witness statements’ which have been compiled by the Bureau of Military History (BMH). The BMH was established in 1947 and aims to assemble material to
104 Worker’s Bulletin Vol. 1, No. 3, 18 April 1919; O’Callaghan 2010, p. 121; Cahill 2019, p. 15. 105 O’Callaghan 2010, p. 10.
16 assist historians studying the Irish Revolution. Its archives include 1700 witness statements from a “widely representative” selection of participants in the movement for independence.106 Included in this selection are a number of citizens of Limerick who were involved in the events leading up to and during the general strike, including Barry Stack, John McCarthy, and Michael Brennan. Additionally, the Strike Committee’s treasurer, James Casey, produced his own account of the Soviet in 1948.107 Sources of this type can be challenging due to the subjectivity of the accounts provided, particularly since the BMH’s stated aim of assisting the construction of a national history inevitably encourages self-aggrandizing narratives.108 However, when examining ideas and beliefs, such subjectivity can be seen as one of the most valuable assets of these sources.109 They offer an insight into how the participants themselves viewed the events in Limerick and how they frame their own motivations. While the writings and testimony of workers will form the basis of my arguments, analysis of these sources will be supplemented by discussions of articles, propaganda and speeches of influential leaders, intellectuals and agitators. The newspapers incorporate various references to figureheads of socialism and republicanism on a national scale, and sometimes include passages of leaders’ speeches and writings. In order to effectively assess how workers’ perspectives were shaped by the ideas and actions of leaders such as Jim Larkin and James Connolly, I will draw connections between the rhetoric of these leaders and that of workers’ newspapers.110 The principles of Larkin and Connolly had a pervasive impact on Irish labour and republicanism and were foundational to the ITGWU, so an understanding of the perspectives of both leaders is crucial to interpreting the aims and methods of this organisation.
Structure
The empirical analysis of this thesis has been divided into four sections. Chapters two and three will consider how workers’ lived experiences inspired them to reject ‘conventional’ forms of advocacy and embrace syndicalist strategies. In chapter two, I will discuss how, in the face of transformations in the industrial and political life of Ireland, conventional trade unions and parliamentary strategies failed to adequately address some workers’ grievances and concerns. In particular, I will discuss specific shortcomings of ‘craft’ unions in the face of new socio-economic
106 Fitzsimons 2014, p. 45. 107 Casey 2009. 108 Torstendahl 2003, p. 306. 109 McGarry 2011, p. 28. 110 James “Jim” Larkin (1874-1947) founded various labour organisations including the Irish Citizen Army and the ITGWU (O’Connor 2002 pp. 22—23, 46). James Connolly (1868-1916) was a socialist who was prominent in various revolutionary organisations including the ITGWU. He was executed for his participation in the Easter Rising (Lynch 2015, p. xiv).
17 circumstances, such as their dependency upon British trade union organisations, their use of conciliatory strategies, and their unwillingness to accommodate ‘unskilled’ workers. Additionally, I will consider workers’ perspectives of parliamentary politics, discussing how and why workers felt they were being neglected by both labour and republican politicians, and how the ITGWU capitalised upon such feelings of neglect. Chapter three will examine how experiences of industrial conflict served to alienate workers from the state and police, thereby provoking them to consider less conciliatory strategies. Ralph Darlington’s research emphasises that strikes can be both an outcome and a cause of worker radicalisation.111 In order to uncover this radicalising impact, this chapter will discuss numerous articles in workers’ newspapers which address strikes and other labour disputes, exploring how these disputes fostered antagonism between workers and the authorities. Secondly, I will discuss how the successes of major strikes and protests in the years preceding the Limerick Soviet encouraged workers to recognise the advantages direct action could hold over more conciliatory strategies. While syndicalism was, in part, favoured because it was perceived to be a viable strategy that could be used to settle grievances, the Limerick Soviet was also motivated by radical, political objectives. The Soviet was characterised by its progenitors as a protest against British military tyranny and some trade union activists argued direct action could undermine the structures of capitalism.112 Anti-colonial and socialist currents of labour activism in Limerick can be connected to international socio-economic upheaval. The aftermath of the First World War was perceived by many worldwide as an opportunity to restructure society along more egalitarian lines, resulting in a wave of post-war unrest and upheaval.113 Therefore, chapter four will examine how Limerick’s labour movement responded to both anti-colonial and anti-capitalist movements in other nations. It will firstly discuss revolutions and Soviets which were initiated in other nations between 1917 and 1919, exploring how international labour radicalism invited the belief that the demise of capitalism was imminent. Secondly, I will discuss how the Irish republican movement forged connections with international anti-imperialist projects, and how this post-war “Crisis of Empire” influenced rhetoric and strategies used in Limerick. Lastly, chapter five will consider how radical ideologies were disseminated within the Limerick labour movement. While problematising the notion that radicalism originates with leaders and is foisted upon working-class people, I will discuss how workers in Limerick drew inspiration from the ideas popularised by Jim Larkin and James Connolly, discussing the influence of “Larkinism” and “socialist republicanism” upon the writings and actions of the local community.
111 Darlington 2013, p. 37. 112 Workers’ Bulletin No. 7, 27 March 1919; Workers’ Bulletin No. 17, 8 April 1919; Proclamation of End of Strike (see Figure 2 in Appendix). 113 Darlington 2013, p. 47; Aan de Wiel 2020, pp. 198—9.
18 However, I will also demonstrate that local actors could themselves act as ideological promoters, encouraging other workers to interpret their material conditions according to a radical ideological framework. In order to achieve this goal, local activists adapted radical ideologies, emphasising aspects that were most relevant to the grievances and interests of the local community. As a result of such adaptations, the local trade union movement developed an unusually egalitarian vision of labour activism, centring women’s grievances and contributions to radical change. Therefore, this chapter will consider how women’s position in Limerick’s activism differed from conventions within the national labour and republican movements, highlighting ways in which Limerick uplifted and emphasised women’s contributions to local activism. Finally, chapter six concludes the thesis by drawing together the major findings of the previous empirical chapters. Through each of these chapters, this thesis will seek to establish how a combination of lived experiences and ideological outlooks inspired workers in Limerick to initiate and sustain a general strike. My analysis will draw connections between the rhetoric of national leaders, international movements and the ideas espoused by workers. In doing so, this thesis will uncover how grievances among the working classes of Limerick were reframed according to radical frameworks between the years of 1916 and 1920, culminating in direct action enacted by masses of workers.
19 Chapter 2 Disillusionment with Labour and Trade Unions
During the early twentieth century, syndicalism rapidly rose in influence around the world. Among the largest syndicalist organisations were the Confédération Générale du Travail in France, the Conféderación Nacional de Trabajo (CNT) in Spain, and the Unione Sindicale Italiana (USI) in Italy. In Britain, the Industrial Syndicalist Education League (ISEL) was prominent in Labour unrest from 1910 to 1914.114 Additionally, the Chicago-based Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) and the ITGWU can be regarded as heavily syndicalist-inspired organisations.115 Both contemporary observers and historians have sought to develop explanations for the growth of syndicalist strategies internationally. One narrative perpetuated at the time, which is upheld in some contemporary analyses, is that syndicalist strategies were the inevitable outcome of the failure of more conciliatory methods to achieve the immediate goals of trade unions.116 In this chapter, I will examine how the shortcomings of established forms of trade unionism and parliamentary strategies created the conditions for the growth of syndicalist-inspired industrial unionism. I will firstly discuss the aims and methods of long-established Irish trade unions and the ITUC, considering how the strategies advocated by these bodies appeared increasingly inadequate in the face of both economic and political transformations in Ireland. Workers’ newspapers also provide an insight into rising dissatisfaction with the Irish Labour Party and display scepticism of politicians of all parties who claimed to act on behalf of the worker. I will examine the basis of these criticisms, reflecting upon the extent to which the political landscape of the early twentieth century side-lined the interests of labour whilst pursuing national independence. Additionally, I will discuss how the ITGWU capitalised upon discontent with existing trade unions and parliamentary politics by providing an alternative vision for change that positioned the workers themselves as the architects of a new social order.
Developments within Trade Unionism
Changes in industry
The ITGWU formed part of a transnational shift in the norms of trade unionism. ‘Craft unions’, consisting of ‘skilled’ workers employed within certain trades, dominated trade unionism in the second half of the nineteenth century. These unions primarily relied upon contracts with employers
114 Darlington 2013, p. 42 115 O’Connor 1988 p. 76; Darlington 2013, p. 37. 116 Darlington discusses how the failure of other unions to meet the demands of their members was regarded as an explanation for the growth of the syndicalism in the early twentieth century (Darlington 2013, pp. 41—3). Additionally, O’Connor states that syndicalism rose in the post-war period as old strategies were ‘discredited’ (O’Connor 2011, p. 103).
20 and did not offer representation to ‘unskilled’ workers.117 The first major challenge to this model of trade unionism in the United Kingdom came in the form of ‘New Unionism’, a movement that became highly influential in Britain during the 1890s. This movement was associated with the unionisation of ‘unskilled’ labourers and the extensive use of “aggressive strike tactics.”118 These methods were employed by major trade unions with British and Irish branches, including the National Union of Dock Labourers (NUDL), making the Irish docks a site of frequent labour unrest during the 1890s.119 However, Ireland’s experiment with New Unionism was more short- lived than that of Britain, and by the end of the 19th century, Irish branches of these organisations appeared to be largely defunct. In the next few years, the number of strikes taking place in Ireland diminished dramatically.120 However, this brief spell of radical, socialist-inspired trade unionism left its mark. As Desmond Greaves argues, “the working class as a whole absorbed the experience and added new weapons to its defences”.121 Consequently, the methods and principles of New Unionism endured longer than the organisations which dominated the movement in Ireland. A new effort to harness the power of masses of ‘unskilled’ and ‘semi-skilled’ workers took place during the early twentieth century in the form of industrial unionism. Industrial unions encompassed workers of all skill levels within a specific industry or multiple industries. In his study of the emergence of this phenomenon, Larry Peterson attributes the growth of industrial unionism to rapid industrial transformations, namely the concentration of economic power among large corporations. As industry became more centralised, employers became more powerful and presided over growing numbers of workers. Industries and factories, particularly within construction, increasingly relied upon ‘unskilled’ and ‘semi-skilled’ labour due to new forms of technology.122 This broad pattern of industrial change is apparent in aspects of Limerick’s economy. As mentioned before, one of the largest employers in the region was the Cleeves Company, which owned around one hundred creameries, factories and mills in Limerick, Tipperary and Cork. The Cleeve family also owned the company J. P. Evans & Co., an agricultural machinery supplier which owned many warehouses in Limerick as well as a pharmacy.123 Consequently, the influence of the four Cleeve brothers upon economic life across Munster was vast. As employers gained power and workforces changed, traditional craft unions which defended only small groups of ‘skilled’ workers appeared increasingly inadequate and unrepresentative of the majority of workers.124 Conversely, emergent industrial unions offered representation to previously unaffiliated ‘unskilled’ and ‘semi-
117 Greaves 1982, p. 2; Peterson 1983, p. 51. 118 Boyle 1988, p. 107. 119 Ibid., p. 108. 120 Greaves 1982, p.8. 121 Ibid., p. 1. 122 Peterson 1982, pp. 43—44. 123 D. Lee 2003, p. 296. 124 Peterson 1983, p. 52.
21 skilled’ workers and attempted to create cross-industry alliances to empower workers against large, powerful employers. The rate of industrial growth is regarded to have been much slower in Ireland than in other countries with prominent syndicalist movements.125 However, workers’ newspapers illustrate that new technologies and other transformations in local industries were a pressing concern among the working classes of Limerick city and county. Indeed, the subject of mechanisation and new technology is one of the most comprehensively and passionately discussed subjects in the Workers’ Bulletin. In an article titled ‘The New Era’, published on April 8th, 1919, the authors argue that all transformations to industry must serve the interests of the workers rather than the interests of capital.126 While they support the use of labour-saving technology, they argue that “the advantages that science and human ingenuity places at the disposal of industry should be utilised in the interests of the community – that is, in the interest of the operatives, and not as a get-rich quick devise [sic] for the privileged few”. The authors also connect the misuse of new technologies to the growth of monopolized industry, claiming that the issue of technology serving capital instead of workers can be addressed by replacing the “present system of monopoly” with “a system of national ownership and democratic control”.127 Therefore, while Ireland did not experience the same rate and scale of industrial transformation as other countries, it is apparent that the monopolization of industry and the growth of new technologies were contentious issues among workers in Limerick. Industrial developments not only gave impetus to the unionization of previously unaffiliated “unskilled” and “semi-skilled” workers but also provoked these groups to examine the relationship between profit, technology and their own rights as workers. The Workers’ Bulletin draws explicit connections between new technology and unemployment, claiming new appliances used to discharge coal from coal boats led to quay-workers losing their jobs. In light of such developments, craft unions were not only unrepresentative of the contemporary workforce, but their traditional approach of compromising with employers appeared insufficient to ensure the interests of capital did not take precedence over the interest of workers. As the Bulletin concludes, “if the workers are to benefit by these innovations – and there will be many of them – they must change not only the method of production, but the system that controls it”.128 Such sentiments were crucial to the rapid growth of the ITGWU, a new type of union which not only accepted all workers but provided a vision for a new economic order in which the rights of workers took precedence over capital. As previously discussed, syndicalist-inspired organisations
125 Joel Mokyr discusses the view that Ireland was regarded to be underdeveloped in contrast to much of Europe and examines explanations for the nation’s rate of economic growth throughout the nineteenth century (Mokyr 1980, pp. 429—458). 126 Workers’ Bulletin, No. 17, 8 April 1919. 127 Ibid. 128 Ibid.
22 did not seek to advocate any singular, cohesive doctrine.129 However, certain common features of syndicalist movements have been identified by historians. One such feature is the common belief that society consists of two groups, the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, whose interests are diametrically opposed.130 Therefore, syndicalist unions devised methods according to the principle that the proletariat must be self-sufficient in its activism and must not depend upon the sympathy of employers. The influence of this Marxist-inspired framework is evident in much of the rhetoric of the workers’ newspapers in Limerick. One local newspaper, the Bottom Dog, presents its own variation of this model, replacing the concept of the ‘Proletariat’ with that of the “Bottom Dogs”, a group consisting of all peoples oppressed on the basis of “nation, class, or sex”.131 Meanwhile, ‘Top Dogs’ are defined as “capitalists”, and are said to be more concerned with looking after their machinery than their employees.132 However, in slight deviation with the model of the broader syndicalist movement, the Bottom Dog includes a third socio-economic grouping, the “Middle Class Dog”, who is more “respectable” and economically secure than the Bottom Dog. The authors write, “this respectable collie dog (well represented on Municipal and Labour bodies) would never condescend to visit White Wine Lane and mix with common low down Irish terriers. No, he would rather be ‘conciliating’ the Top Dog, but there’s no fear he would bite him”.133 This description of the ‘Middle Dog’ exemplifies workers’ dissatisfaction with conciliatory, reformist trade unionism. Rather than depending upon self-serving and complacent ‘middle’ and ‘top’ dogs, the authors of the Bottom Dog advocate for an alternative, self-sufficient form of activism. The newspaper claims that it is only the ‘Bottom Dog’ who “knows where the shoe pinches and is the only man who can settle it. His wages, thanks to the I.T.G.W.U. (not the Top or Middle dogs) [have] increased because he has to organise.”134 Thus, the ITGWU’s emphasis on worker-initiated and self-sufficient activism enabled the organisation to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the conciliatory and exclusionary tendencies of more established trade unions. Amid growing concerns about industrial transformations which appeared to threaten the rights and job security of masses of workers, the ITGWU offered a new vision for Irish industry which prioritised workers’ autonomy instead of leaving them vulnerable to the interests of capital. Notions of class struggle and workers’ control of the means of production were particularly irreconcilable with the trade union bodies which were established in Limerick city and county. Historians describe these organisations as highly ‘conservative’ in comparison to the ITGWU. This conservatism is, in part, attributed to the unusually close ties between trade union bodies and the
129 Darlington 2008, p 19. 130 Ibid., p. 21. 131 Printed at the top of every Bottom Dog issue is the slogan “We must look at life in all its aspects from the point of view of the ‘Bottom Dog’ – the oppressed – be it nation, class, or sex”. 132 Bottom Dog No. 33, 1 June 1918. 133 Ibid. 134 Ibid.
23 Catholic church in Limerick city and county. According to Dominic Haugh, members of the local clergy were allowed to intervene extensively in union affairs of the major local trade union councils, the Limerick United Trades and Labour Council (LUTLC) and the Limerick Federated Labour Council (LFLC).135 Numerous members of the clergy of Limerick displayed animosity towards radical ideologies and movements, resulting in the suppression of these tendencies in local organisations.136 For example, in July 1919, prominent trade union activist Sean Dowling proposed that the Trades Council should endorse an upcoming meeting named ‘Hands off Russia’, which was to be held in solidarity with the Bolshevik revolutionaries. In response, local Reverend Devane denounced socialism and radical sentiments, arguing that the programme of the Labour movement should be based upon “sane Catholic social principles” and not the “irreligious Social Democrats of the continent”.137 Religious intervention in the affairs of the local trade union councils, therefore, primarily served to suppress radical ideologies and strategies, thereby positioning member unions as placated ‘middle dogs’ in the eyes of discontented workers.
Changes in the political landscape
Trade unionism also underwent transformations due to developments in Irish republicanism in the early twentieth century. The first trade unions were established in Ireland in the 1850s, at which time British-based unions established branches in major Irish cities including Dublin, Belfast, Cork, Derry and Newry. As these unions were merely Irish branches of British organisations, their aims and methods were consistent with those of Britain.138 Indeed, the national federation of trade unions, the Irish Trade Union Congress (ITUC), explicitly modelled itself upon the British Trade Union Congress (TUC). In an address to the ITUC in 1900, President G. Leahy stated, “We are not ashamed to admit that we took as our model the procedure and methods which resulted in bringing about material benefits for the workers of England during the past quarter of a century”.139 Even the more radical ‘New Unions’ of the 1890s were Irish branches of British organisations, rather than wholly “Irish” unions.140 The indebtedness of Irish trade unions to British organisations was, unsurprisingly, alienating to Irish people who fought for the political autonomy of their nation. While Irish nationalism had long contained anti-English currents, such as the Irish Ireland movement of the late nineteenth century, these currents became increasingly militant and pervasive in the years following the Easter
135 Haugh 2016, p. 31 136 Haugh 2019, p. 86. 137 Ibid., p. 103. 138 Boyle 1988, p. 151. 139 Ibid. 140 Greaves 1982, p. 25.
24 Rising.141 The Manifesto of Sinn Féin in 1918 is characterised by strong opposition to England, with the party pledging to use “any and every means available” to make England impotent.142 This trend is described by the Factionist in an article published on 13 April 1917, which claims “twelve months is a short time, but it has been enough to re-kindle the national spirit in the people, so that 90 per cent of the Irish race are now determined never again to bow their heads under the English yoke”.143 In Limerick, Irish republicanism was widespread, and many workers were supporters or members of both trade union organisations and republican organisations in the years preceding the Limerick Soviet.144 As a result, scepticism about the relationship between British and Irish trade union structures is evident in the political commentary of workers’ papers. The Factionist expresses resentment against prominent trade unionists, arguing that the “Trade and Labour Bodies should surely be able to find something more beneficial to do for themselves than shaking hands, making speeches, and patting eachothers back [sic], because one of their number has been ‘honoured’ with a [payment] by the British Government”.145 This attitude indicates that a nationalistic rejection of British influence in Irish affairs could tarnish workers’ perceptions of trade unionists. Similar condemnation was also voiced by prominent nationalist figureheads, including Arthur Griffith, whose newspaper titled Sinn Féin denounced the “evil” influence of “English” trade unionism upon the workers of Ireland.146 As the Revolution progressed, pressure increased for the Irish trade union movement to “decolonise” and detach itself from its British counterparts.147 This desire to oust British influence is apparent in the rules and terms of the ITGWU. In its first published rule book, the organisations’ founding members wrote, “are we going to continue the policy of grafting ourselves on the English Trade Union movement, losing our identity in the great world of organised labour? We say emphatically, No. Ireland has politically reached her manhood”.148 Unlike many other unions, therefore, the ITGWU presented the autonomy of workers and the Irish nation as interconnected, arguing that the Irish working class must be autonomous from both their capitalist oppressors and from imperial authority. Consequently, while established models of trade unionism were, to some extent, irreconcilable with the principles of advanced nationalism, the ITGWU propagated a new model which united the two causes under one banner. Consequently, in regions such as Limerick
141 For examples of ‘anti-English’ tendencies within Irish nationalism pre-dating the Easter Rising, see D. P. Moran’s essay ‘The Philosophy of Irish Ireland’ (1905) and Douglas Hyde’s lecture ‘The Necessity of De- Anglicising Ireland’ (1892). 142 ‘The Manifesto of Sinn Féin as prepared for circulation for the General Election of December 1918’, CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts. 143 The Factionist Vol. 1, No. 13, 13 April 1917. 144 O’Callaghan 210, p. 70, p. 121. 145 The Factionist Vol. 1, No. 8, 22 March 1917. 146 Greaves 1982, p. 8. 147 O’Connor 2011, p. 76. 148 O’Connor 1988, p. 74.
25 where many had “double loyalties” to both labour and nationalist causes, the ITGWU positioned itself as an authentically Irish movement, compatible with anti-English and broadly anti-imperialist sentiments.149
“Labour Must Wait”
In the recent growth of scholarship addressing the history of labour during the Irish Revolution, it is commonly asserted that the cause of liberating workers was subordinated to the national cause during this period. A phrase which is commonly evoked to evidence this subordination is ‘Labour must wait’, often wrongly attributed to Sinn Féin figurehead Éamon de Valera.150 According to such narratives, Connolly’s execution by the British government was a pivotal historical moment, after which time the socialist, egalitarian principles expressed in the Proclamation were replaced with a type of Catholic-inspired social conservatism.151 Emphasis is placed on the “lost opportunities” of the Revolution for achieving real structural change in the interests of workers. According to former IRA activist George Gilmore, “Labour waited, and that was the great failure of our generation”.152 Such narratives of “lost opportunities” contain the assumption that the republican movement prioritised nationalism over the interests of the working classes. The majority of Sinn Féin members were men of educated backgrounds who could be described as middle- class.153 Additionally, in some instances during the aftermath of the Revolution, Sinn Féin politicians disavowed radical ideologies and emphasised their own conservatism. A claim famously made by Kevin O’Higgins, Vice-President of the First Dáil’s Executive Council 1922 - 1927, was that “we [the Dáil] are the most conservative-minded revolutionaries that ever put through a successful revolution”.154 The Irish Labour party originated as a political branch of the ITUC and was titled the Irish Labour Party and Trade Union Congress (ILPTUC).155 However, it came to be known simply as ‘Labour’ or the ‘Labour party’ and will be hereafter referred to as the ‘Labour Party’. James Connolly brought forward the proposal of a Labour Party at the Irish Trade Union Congress of
149 Aan de Wiel 2020, p. 196. 150 O’Connor 2011, p 110. Éamon de Valera was a leading republican throughout the Irish War of Independence. He was the president of the First Dáil (see below: footnote 154) and later became the first President of the Irish Republic. 151 The Easter Proclamation was produced by participants of the Easter Rising and read by Pádraic Pearse during the Rising. It includes the guarantee of “equal rights and equal opportunities to all citizens” (1916). See Kieran Allen, ‘James Connolly’s vision never realised’, Irish Times, 9 March 2016 for an example of how Connolly’s death is deemed to have been crucial to the trajectory of republicanism and growth of conservatism. 152 Ferriter 2015, p. 120 153 Ibid., p 127. R 154 J. Lee, 1989, p. 105. The First Dáil was the first form of Dáil Éireann (the “Assembly of Ireland”) convened by Sinn Féin which existed from 1919 until 1921. The Dáil declared itself the government of the independent nation of Ireland in 1919. It was not recognised as a legal parliament by the British Government (Ferriter 2015, p. 185). 155 O’Connor 2011, pp. 89—90.
26 1912. Connolly argued its creation was necessary in order to allow workers to directly advocate for their rights, suggesting that it was inadequate for the labouring classes to continue to “tack themselves on to some political party of their masters in order that they might swell the fortunes and help the ambitions of their employers”.156 While some attendants objected to the introduction of socialist principles to trade union activities, the resolution was passed.157 The Party was subsequently founded by Jim Larkin, James Connolly and William O’Brien in 1914.158 Following Connolly’s execution by the British authorities in 1916, Thomas Johnson assumed leadership of the Labour Party until 1927.159 It is, therefore, apparent that the Labour Party was originally invested with the same radical objectives and self-sufficient ethos as the ITGWU. However, in practice, the Labour Party did not succeed in substantially enacting the radical principles set out in its original constitution between 1914 and 1919. Some argue that the failure to enact structural socio-economic change was a product of the weak and impotent national leadership of the Party. According to the labour historian Arthur Mitchell, “opportunities for fostering social and economic revolution were ever present” during the Revolution, but “moderate” labour leaders failed to capitalise upon this potential.160 In particular, the events of the 1918 election are regarded by many as evidence of the weakness of the Labour Party. During these elections, the Labour Party agreed to abstain from entering candidates into municipal elections in order to ensure Sinn Féin could win as many seats as possible and form an independent Irish parliament.161 At a meeting in Mansion House in November 1918, Labour leaders William O’Brien and Thomas Johnson recommended the withdrawal of all Labour candidates “in the hope that the democratic demand for self- determination […] would therefore obtain the freest chance of expression at the polls”.162 This agreement is regarded as emblematic of the subordination of labour to nationalist interests. However, Emmet O’Connor argues that the Irish Revolution “was not without its radical dimension”.163 While Labour was asked to abstain from elections, O’Connor argues that the First Dáil undertook efforts to “offset” Labour’s lack of parliamentary representation. An example of this is the Democratic Programme announced in January 1919, a declaration of aims and principles which were adopted by the First Dáil. The Programme was created in collaboration with the Labour Party and included many socialist-inspired objectives, including a new system of collective autonomy over industry and land.164 Some of the activities of the Dáil indicate an effort to uphold
156 ‘Report of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Meeting held at Whitworth Hall, Drogheda, 1919’, p. 13. 157 Ibid., p. 17. 158 F.S.L. Lyons 1973, p. 281. 159 Mitchell 1969, p. 396. 160 Ferriter 2015, p. 122. 161 Laffan 1999, p. 159. 162 Keohane 2014. 163 O’Connor 1988, p. 115. 164 ‘Democratic Programme’ (1919), National Library of Ireland.
27 these principles, such as the creation of arbitration courts to resolve land disputes.165 Nonetheless, many of the objectives of the Democratic Programme did not come to fruition. Many historians, including Dominic Haugh, argue that its adoption was mainly symbolic and did not reflect a sincere commitment to the principles the Programme stated.166 While there is debate surrounding the extent to which formal politics actually neglected the interests of workers, newspapers circulated in Limerick indicate that some workers felt a broad distrust of politicians and scepticism towards parliamentary politics. One target of this distrust is local politicians of Limerick city and county. Articles published in the years preceding the Soviet indicate that some workers felt their needs were being overlooked by local leaders. For example, an article published in the Factionist in March 1917 condemns the Mayor of Limerick after he failed to attend a meeting about the issue of food shortages in Limerick, stating “He gave absolute proof of the deep interest he takes in the City’s welfare, by remaining away from the Meeting, thereby insulting the men he called together”.167 Consequently, it is apparent that there was some degree of resentment against local politicians for neglecting to protect poorer members of the local community. Commentary on poor living conditions in Limerick is also included in various articles, especially those of the Bottom Dog. The newspaper describes in detail the struggles of the local community, including poor housing, poverty, disease, and inadequate wages. In an issue published in November 1917, the Bottom Dog claims that the city sits on the verge of “chronic poverty” and that there is widespread homelessness.168 This account is accompanied by an assertion that the community is being wilfully and systematically neglected. The authors state that “it is this system of ignoring Limerick tradesmen that has reduced the city to its present poverty-stricken condition”. They assert that they are “fed up with lip sympathy” and demand that their struggles are heard and addressed.169 Liam Cahill suggests that the Bottom Dog’s extensive reporting on the poor living conditions in Limerick “must have heightened some kind of radical consciousness within the city”, highlighting that such narratives of neglect at the hands of the political establishment inspired workers to endorse more radical solutions.170 In addition, some articles express particular outrage at the neglect of politicians who proclaim themselves to be Irish nationalists. One issue of the Bottom Dog attacks an Earl from Limerick, stating that while he proclaimed to the press “I have ever loved my country … and country-men”, he meanwhile “shows his love of his fellow-countrymen by paying his workmen a magnificent wage of 22/6 for a week of 60 hours! And this only because he is compelled to do so by law”.171
165 O’Connor 2011, p. 116. 166 Haugh 2019, p. 101. 167 The Factionist Vol 1, No. 9, 29 March 1917. 168 Bottom Dog, No. 2, 7 Nov 1917. 169 Ibid. 170 Cahill 2019, p. 218. 171 Bottom Dog, No. 33, 1 June 1918.
28 This renouncement indicates a belief that some republicans did not consider how the Irish Revolution could serve the rights and interests of the masses of working Irish women and men. Condemnation of self-proclaimed Irish nationalists is most frequent in articles published prior to the rise of Sinn Féin in 1917 and 1918. Before then, the prominent nationalist organisation was the Irish Parliamentary Party (IPP), a party that sought devolved government for Ireland within the United Kingdom instead of complete separation. Reflecting its alignment with Sinn Féin, the Factionist displays significant animosity towards the IPP, referring to its members as “local party hacks” and refers to the organisation itself as the “so-called Irish Party”.172 Therefore, while many prominent trade unionists were members and supporters of Sinn Féin by 1919, a recent history of perceived neglect at the hands of politicians fuelled a desire for autonomy and activism outside of the realm of formal politics. Partly as a consequence of this desire, the ITGWU witnessed rapid growth in Limerick between 1917 and 1918. While the organisation had limited influence before the First World War, between 1917 and 1919 it expanded rapidly.173 The region’s County Inspector recorded a membership of 7,487 people across 44 different branches in Limerick by the end of 1919, amounting to roughly five percent of the population of the entire county.174 Therefore, by the time of the ascension of Sinn Féin, sentiments of self-sufficiency and direct action had already taken hold of many working-class people in the county. The pervasiveness of these principles is commented on by the Bottom Dog, which stated in December 1917 that workers “are beginning to realise … that to be effective they must run their organisations themselves altogether free from the destructive influence of the politician who is ‘a friend of the worker’ when it suits him to use the worker as a stepping-stone to his power and position”.175 Politicians are presented in this newspaper as opportunists, lacking authentic understanding and commitment to the interests of workers. Instead of depending upon such people, the Bottom Dog invites workers to be self-sufficient and organise outside of the realms of formal politics. As previously discussed, syndicalism promoted the notion that workers must be autonomous and self-sufficient. In the broader syndicalist movement, this concept of worker autonomy often extended to rejection of formal political procedures, with syndicalists instead advocating worker- initiated direct action as the primary means of achieving structural change. In the words of Father Thomas Hagerty, a leading figure in the early years of the IWW, “The ballot box is simply a capitalist concession. Dropping pieces of paper into a hole in a box never did achieve emancipation for the working class, and to my thinking it will never achieve it”.176 Alienation from politicians
172 The Factionist, No.1, Vol. 1, 27 January 1917; No. 21, Vol. 1, 21 June 1917; No. 16, Vol. 1, 17 May 1916. 173 Fitzpatrick 1977, p. 241. 174 O’Callaghan 2010, p. 123. Police estimates from December of 1918 are more conservative, estimating the local ITGWU membership to be 3,433. 175 Bottom Dog No. 10, 22 December 1917. 176 Darlington 2008, p. 23.
29 displayed in workers’ papers fuelled a broader disavowal of formal electoral procedures. Workers in Limerick instead embraced the syndicalist notion that the proletariat must “create its own conditions of struggle, its own means of resistance and aggression”.177 As it is framed by the Bottom Dog, “With the forward march of Labour we must see that time servers and opportunists are all brushed aside and, that Labour controls its own movement in a self-reliant, self-respecting way”.178 Ultimately, the fate of the Limerick Soviet demonstrated the gulf between the objectives of local trade unionists and the national labour movement. The ITUC and Labour party had the opportunity to advocate nationwide sympathetic strike action but were unwilling to endorse the radicalism displayed in Limerick.179 Instead, the leadership of the national movement took care to ensure subsequent disputes did not escalate so much that they posed a challenge to the authority of the Dáil.180 Consequently, the Limerick Soviet remained one of the most significant instances of direct action to occur during the Revolutionary period. Between 1917 and 1919, the local population expressed both a nationalistic distrust of British models of trade unionism and dissatisfaction with parliamentary strategies. The ITGWU, through its advocacy of national autonomy and self-sufficient activism, was able to capitalise on both grievances. As it is summarised by the 1918 annual report by the ITGWU, “the economic conditions created by the War combined with the growth of a more self-reliant spirit in the country to stimulate a general zeal for Trade Unionism, of which the Irish Transport and General Workers’ Union got full advantage”.181 This extensive growth of the ITGWU facilitated population-wide, worker-initiated direct action, which finally came to fruition in the form of the Limerick Soviet. Therefore, this chapter has demonstrated that the growth of syndicalist strategies in Limerick can be partially attributed to workers’ lived experiences of perceived neglect at the hands of politicians and craft unions. Some workers did not believe their concerns and grievances to be adequately addressed by alternative forms of trade unionism or parliamentary strategies. Consequently, the syndicalist model of labour agitation flourished in Limerick, in part, because the ITGWU’s approach better resonated with many workers’ republican principles and disinclination to leave their fate in the hands of politicians and ‘Middle Dogs’.
177 Émile Pouget, quoted in Darlington 2008, p 33. 178 Bottom Dog No. 10, 22 December 1917. 179 Cahill 2019, p. 160. 180 Powell 2017, p. 54. 181 ‘Irish Transport and General Workers' Union Annual Report for 1918, Issued by the authority of the Executive Committee’, National Library of Ireland.
30 Chapter 3 Protests as a Cause of Radicalism
Amid challenges to reformist trade unionism and the perceived failure of parliamentary parties to advocate for the rights of workers, many workers sought alternative methods of improving their working conditions. Historians and contemporaries of the post-war period have debated why syndicalism, in particular, flourished as an alternative to reformist trade unionism. Some argue the growth of syndicalist unions in the early twentieth century was simply due to the comparative efficacy of their methods. In the words of one contemporary commenting on the growth of the Industrial Syndicalist Education League (ISEL), “the masses of workers in Great Britain are not socialists nor are they syndicalists. But they are being converted to the methods of socialism and syndicalism by the proof that following those methods they are able to win great concessions.”182 According to such interpretations, the embrace of more militant strategies was not ideologically driven, but a simple matter of workers embracing whatever strategies were most effective in obtaining immediate objectives such as wage increases or shorter working hours. This view is upheld in existing literature concerning the Limerick Soviet, which characterises the Soviet as a “pragmatic” response to the oppressive circumstances faced by the local population.183 Related to this interpretation is the idea that the unsympathetic responses of employers and law enforcement towards more conciliatory methods compelled workers to resort to more radical strategies. In the words of a contemporary commentator, Louis Levine, the growth of the IWW was primarily due to members’ “experiences of bloody industrial warfare – often associated with the interventions of government, police, and troops on behalf of the employers – that politically radicalized them and encouraged their belief in solidarity, industrial unionism and syndicalism”.184 Syndicalism is often cast as workers’ pragmatic and spontaneous response to the repressive actions of their employers. Therefore, ongoing and historic labour disputes and strikes can themselves be viewed as a source of worker radicalisation, because it was at these moments of conflict that the repressive tendencies of employers and law enforcement were most blatantly exposed.185 In order to examine this interpretation of the growth of syndicalism, this chapter will focus upon the history of strikes and labour disputes in Limerick. I will first consider the acts of repression immediately preceding the Limerick Soviet which drove workers to initiate a general strike. Secondly, I will examine numerous instances in which workers’ newspapers report upon previous labour disputes, strikes and protests, and the heavy-handed responses of the state, employers and police. The prevalence of reports on previous disputes illustrates that past
182 Darlington 2013, p. 38 183 For example, Cahill 2019, p. 275, 293; D. Lee 2003, p. 295; Queally 2010, p. 5. 184 Darlington 2013, p. 38. 185 Ibid., p. 45.
31 experience of conflict with state and police had a radicalising impact, reinforcing existing distrust of the authorities and compelling workers to advocate for themselves in an increasingly direct and uncompromising manner.
The Death of Robert Byrne
The events immediately preceding the Limerick Soviet reveal the radicalising and polarising potential of acts of protest. In the year 1919, Limerick underwent a cycle of increasingly uncompromising popular protest and state suppression, culminating in the initiation of a general strike. The first act of protest which initiated this cycle was the hunger strike carried out by Robert Byrne, as described in the introduction chapter. Hunger striking was a prevalent strategy used by republicans seeking to obtain the status of ‘political prisoners’, and responses to their protests were often severe.186 For example, prison guards sometimes attempted to forcibly feed prisoners. Prior to Byrne’s imprisonment, the population of Limerick had already demonstrated a sympathy with the plight of hunger-striking republican prisoners. In February 1919, news spread that this practice was taking place in Limerick prisons, and some residents expressed outrage at the brutality of British authorities. Included in an issue of the Soldier Hunter is a pamphlet alerting the population to the practice, announcing that “the horrible and revolting system of Forcible Feeding is at present BEING CARRIED OUT on some of your fellow-countrymen imprisoned in the County jail, and that there are Two Limerick Doctors doing their DIRTY WORK! And acting as the paid tools of the British Government … It is up to you to make your power felt – to end for ever this latest form of British Torture for Irishmen”.187 Consequently, Robert Byrne’s death in a military hospital in 1919 occurred amid existing outrage at the British authorities’ mistreatment of protesting republicans. The event of Byrne’s death only served to heighten existing anti-police sentiment and inspire the local population to take action and ‘make [their] power felt’. While the exact circumstances of Byrne’s death were unknown, it was believed by many people in Limerick that it was a member of the Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) who had fired the fatal shot at the hospitalised prisoner.188 Consequently, the mass funeral held in commemoration of Byrne can reasonably be interpreted as a form of protest against the brutal excesses of the police on behalf of victimised republicans. The funeral procession was attended by hundreds of Irish Volunteers, members of the women’s republican organisation Cumann na mBan, and the republican youth organisation Fianna Éireann.189
186 Murphy 2014, p. 80. 187 Soldier Hunter No. 1, Vol. 1, 23 February 1918. 188 The Limerick United Trades and Labour Council passed a vote of condolence and termed Byre’s death a ‘murder’ (Cahill 2019, p. 300). 189 Cahill 2019, p. 25.
32 In turn, the extensive military presence at Byrne’s funeral was perceived by many as emblematic of the repressive nature of the state, and further evidence of the necessity of the local community asserting its own rights and autonomy. The subsequent imposition of a military zone directly infringed upon the rights of many members of the local community, preventing them from being able to travel freely to and from their place of work.190 Even the local clergy publicly condemned the government’s responses to protest in Limerick, describing the military arrangements of Byrne’s funeral as “unnecessarily aggressive and provocative” and “calculated to fill every right-minded person with feelings of disgust and abhorrence”.191 They also stated that the authorities showed “a lamentable want of consideration for the citizens at large, and especially of the working classes” when creating the military zone.192 Consequently, the decision to carry out a general strike can be seen as a pragmatic attempt to overturn the new military restrictions, enacted by a population alienated by the authorities’ increasingly militarist responses to recent acts of protest. The events leading up to the strike exposed the hostility of the state and police to workers in Limerick, both through their mistreatment of prisoners and their suppression of the local community. In light of this suppression, the community employed a more drastic strategy to re- assert their rights and revoke the military restrictions they were being made to endure. Indeed, the testimony of some local individuals who helped execute the general strike represents the initiation of the Soviet as a pragmatic solution to newly imposed forms of suppression. According to Michael J. Stack, member of the Second Battalion of the Limerick Branch of the Irish Volunteers, the strike was organised amongst citizens of Limerick “with the object of upsetting them entering and leaving the city in the execution of their work”.193 Stack states that while the Strike was short-lived, “it served its purpose as the proclamation was withdrawn as a result”.194 According to Stack’s account, therefore, the general strike was simply a strategy to resolve a specific grievance, not necessarily indicative of any broader revolutionary objectives. IRA Lieutenant Michael Brennan provides a similarly straightforward account of the strike, stating that “martial law was now proclaimed in Limerick and the local labour organisations decided to fight it with a General Strike”.195 However, syndicalist methods and principles were growing in influence in Limerick for several years before the death of Robert Byrne. For this reason, Limerick’s response to the death of Byrne and imposition of military restrictions can be interpreted as the culmination of many years of growing labour militancy in the region. As previously mentioned, the ITGWU experienced rapid expansion in Limerick between the years 1917 and 1919. Therefore, in order to understand why
190 Cahill 2019, p. 21. 191 Ibid., p. 140. 192 Ibid. 193 Michael J. Stack, Witness Statement (WS 525), Bureau of Military History. 194 Ibid. 195 Michael Brennan, Witness Statement (WS 1068), Bureau of Military History.
33 workers embraced the ‘radical’ methods of the ITGWU, it is necessary to consider a longer history of labour disputes in Ireland. The imposition of the military zone was far from the first act of severe suppression of workers in Limerick. Rather, a pattern of increasingly severe, and at times, violent, suppression of attempts to organise within the local community encouraged workers to embrace more radical strategies.
Previous and Ongoing Strikes
In addition to endorsing their own political perspectives and agendas, newspapers produced by workers in Limerick included reports upon strikes and disputes which were taking place in the county at the time of publication. The Bottom Dog, in particular, provided substantial commentary on ongoing labour disputes. In March of 1918 alone, the newspaper provided information and updates about four separate strikes carried out by Limerick-based workers, encompassing plumbers, cabinetmakers, and employees at creameries.196 Local newspapers’ accounts of strikes consistently display sympathy for the plight of striking workers and animosity towards repressive police and employers. By reporting upon such hostile responses, these newspapers also encouraged their readers to feel alienation and animosity towards employers and local authorities. Therefore, accounts of past strikes in workers’ newspapers assisted in undermining support for conciliatory and conventional strategies of labour agitation. One of many articles which presents employers as unsympathetic to the plight of protesting employees is ‘The Right to Live’, published in the Factionist in May 1917. This article reports upon the events of a wage strike carried out by agricultural labourers on the estate of local landowner Lord Emly. According to the Factionist, Emly settled the strike “by increasing [workers’] wages to 12/- a week - and people wonder why men are leaving this country - but when they came back to work he sacked one of the men to make up for it, however.”197 The duplicity of Emly’s response to striking workers is represented as further reprehensible due to the employer’s political affiliations. The author writes, “Is not he a supporter of the Party; a member of the County Council; and of the County Technical Committee, etc.? God help us!”198 Such rhetoric indicates that Emly was assumed to be a kind of ally to his employees due to his participation in local government and committees. Accordingly, Emly’s treatment of workers is represented as a twofold betrayal. His harsh treatment of employees is represented as evidence that even those employers who might claim to defend the interests of the community cannot truly be trusted. Further illustrating workers’ alienation from employers, the Red Flag reports extensively upon a strike among law clerks which occurred in Limerick a few months after the Soviet. The newspaper
196 Bottom Dog No. 21, 9 March 1919; Bottom Dog No. 24, 30 March 1918. 197 The Factionist Vol. 1, No. 18, 31 May 1917. 198 Ibid.
34 condemns solicitors’ mistreatment of striking employees, describing them as “slave-drivers” who resist any forms of mediation, instead opting to “[starve] their employees into submission”.199 The Red Flag argues that “if there was any decent minded Solicitor in Limerick he would long since have broken away and done the right thing. As none has done so we must reluctantly conclude that they are all tarred with the same brush”.200 This conclusion exemplifies the polarising and alienating potential outcomes of lengthy strike action. Strikes encouraged workers to view themselves as a united force and to view their employers as a similarly united entity, all equally condemnable in their failure to break from the repressive norm. Additionally, newspapers display outrage at the violent strategies of the local police in suppressing republicans and trade unions in Limerick. Specific instances in which local republicans are wrongfully arrested are repeatedly described in issues of the Factionist. This newspaper displays belief that repressive police actions against republicans are becoming the norm, stating that “past experience has taught us that the police in this country instead of being guardians of the peace are bitter enemies … consequently we do not feel much surprise when we see and read of brutal baton charges, upon the slightest provocation”.201 While these reports concern the military suppression of republican activists in particular, they indicate heightened conflict and animosity between the authorities and the predominantly republican population of Limerick. In a community where many were affiliated with both trade union and nationalist groups, many workers were predisposed to distrust law enforcement, who were notoriously violent towards republican activists.202 Consequently, suppression of strikes only served to compound the existing distrust of a police force broadly understood to be enemies of Irish republicans and a tool of British imperialism. The Factionist represents these acts of suppression as invitations for the local population to engage in militant counter-violence. Rather than simply allowing the contents of their reports to fuel animosity towards the police, the newspaper repeatedly explicitly advocates workers taking up arms and confronting the authorities.203 In one issue, the Factionist states that police “severely batoned several people” at a rally in Limerick. Reflecting upon this incident, the author argues “We have very little sympathy with glass breaking and affairs of that description, but we do think the police could be well taught a lesson … we suggest that in future any crowd of young men feel incline to demonstrate they ought to be prepared to meet the peelers at their own game”.204 Consequently, the newspaper displays such a level of distrust for the local police that it compels local republicans to enter into conflict with the local forces.
199 Red Flag Vol. 1, No. 3, 27 November 1919. 200 Ibid. 201 The Factionist Vol. 2, No. 1, 19 July 1917. 202 Ann Dolan discusses the violent approach to policing of Ireland during the War of Independence. Dolan argues that militant activism was perceived merely as civil disobedience to be suppressed (Dolan 2012, p. 4). 203 For example, the Factionist Vol. 1, No. 2, 8 February 1917. 204 The Factionist Vol. 1, No 16, 17 May 1917.
35 The Factionist’s reports on ongoing disputes between local activists and the police conform to the interpretation of worker militancy and syndicalism as a pragmatic response to exceptionally harsh suppression. The newspaper prefaces each call to action with claims that it ordinarily disavows militant strategies. In the above example, a call to militant action is prefaced with a disclaimer that the publishers usually have “very little sympathy with glass breaking and affairs of that description”. A conditional and pragmatic embrace of radical strategies is even more apparent in the newspaper’s report on a strike among Limerick dockworkers. Reflecting upon the plight of the striking workers faced with uncompromising employees, the newspaper concludes “we do not like to advocate syndicalism but we do think Jim Larkin is needed in Limerick!”205 The newspaper’s endorsement of syndicalism, therefore, reflects the perceived exceptionalism of the repression faced by the local community rather than a sincere alignment with Larkin’s ideals. However, it is important to consider the motivations and interests which lie behind the accounts provided by newspapers. While the Factionist proclaims scepticism towards militancy and radicalism, other newspapers were produced by committed and active local socialists and trade unionists. While workers’ newspapers reflect the perspectives of their publishers, they also act as persuasive pieces, encouraging their readers to align themselves with the authors’ perspectives. Therefore, extensive reporting on ongoing strikes is, in some cases, indicative of the authors’ own recognition of the radicalising potential of ongoing strikes. Narratives of labourers being ruthlessly and violently repressed serve as propaganda for the more radical strategies favoured by certain publishers. Workers’ awareness of the power of these narratives is demonstrated by an article in the Workers’ Bulletin published shortly before the general strike. Issues of the Bulletin include extensive commentary on an ongoing labour dispute against a powerful local employer, John McBirney. The Bulletin states that while “unrest amongst the masses is neither a new nor an unexpected phenomenon”, “the dispute is of such magnitude and hate which the wrong inflicted by McBirney & Co. upon their workers has called forth is so intense that Limerick is surely and rapidly becoming a vast reservoir of resentment, embitterment, but above all – and thank God for it – of class consciousness!”206 This article demonstrates complete recognition that labour disputes had the power to embolden and radicalise workers by producing “embitterment” against unsympathetic employers, and the newspaper is transparent about its desire to capitalise upon the wealth of discontentment. Readers are instructed to choose their affiliation, “McBirneyism or Co- Operation”, a choice that enshrines an entirely polarised view of the local community.207 Consequently, some workers who came to perceive the authorities as an enemy of the people then
205 The Factionist, Vol. 1, No. 17, 26 May 1917. 206 Workers’ Bulletin No. 9, 29 March 1919. 207 Ibid.
36 imposed this model of society upon the rest of their community, forcing others to declare “whose side” they supported.
Achievements of Collective Action
While strikes and protests fuelled animosity towards authorities and employers, they also served to demonstrate the potential of collective action among workers. The growth of the ITGWU in Limerick can be partially attributed to the organisation’s successful interventions in local labour disputes. On many occasions, the ITGWU assisted local unions in their strike action, providing practical forms of support to help them attain their immediate goals. These unions then often opted to affiliate with the ITGWU, as the union had proved its weight in action.208 Therefore, syndicalism gained precedence in Limerick in part because it offered bolder and more effective methods of confronting powerful employers and militant authorities. An example of such practical assistance occurred on the Limerick docks in 1917. On 28 December 1917, a strike was organised by the Dock Labourers Society. The ITGWU actively supported the striking workers, helping them to win a wage increase. Therefore, the dockworkers chose to affiliate with the ITGWU. Haugh argues they subsequently became the “backbone” of the Limerick labour movement, frequently supporting other striking workers.209 Additionally, workers in Limerick were exposed to the power of collective action through mass protests outside of the regular activities of the ITGWU. The most impactful and wide-scale protests which occurred in Limerick before 1919 were protests against the proposal to introduce conscription to Ireland. This was a proposal that caused nationwide outrage and demonstrations, leading members of various republican groups to forge a strong alliance in opposition to conscription. Representatives of disparate groups including Sinn Féin, the Irish Parliamentary Party, the Catholic Church and the Labour Party united to sign a pledge against conscription titled ‘Ireland’s Solemn League and Covenant’ in 1918.210 This pledge stated that any conscription bill created by the UK parliament would be regarded as a declaration of war on the nation of Ireland and that signatories would use any “effective means” to oppose any attempt to enforce conscription.211 In addition to action on a national scale, large protests against conscription were carried out in Limerick City and County. In the weeks before these protests, the Factionist and the Bottom Dog each published condemnations of conscription and endorsements of protests against its
208 Haugh 2019, p 89. 209 Ibid. 210 ‘Ireland’s Solemn League and Covenant: a national pledge’, Mansion House Conference 1918, National Library of Ireland. 211 Ibid.
37 imposition.212 The Bottom Dog denounced the injustice of the measure and asserted the strength of the local community to fight it, stating “As men we defy any Nation or any-body of men to make us hand over to them, the conscience given us by God, and become part of a brainless, blundering, soul-less military machine … We can if we will, by united action defeat this measure”. The article concludes, “The choice is on us now, the crisis has arrived, let each man only to himself be true”.213 Consequently, the conscription crisis prompted many members of the local community to unite behind a common cause and engage in large scale protests in opposition to the state. Therefore, in April 1918, mass protests were held in Limerick in protest against the proposed conscription of Irish men. At these protests, a large banner bearing the image of James Connolly was flown alongside the motto “Death before Conscription”.214 Much as smaller labour disputes provoked bodies of workers to conceptualise themselves as a united force opposing a common enemy – the employer – the mass protests against conscription positioned the population of Limerick as a single unit fighting against the British government. Reporting upon mass meetings held in protest against conscription, the Bottom Dog stated, “Sunday’s big meeting under the auspices of the Trades Council and the overflow meeting outside the Town Hall on Monday night, showed clearly that Limerick workers will not have conscription. Let the people who made the war fight it and pay for it … the present crisis has shown us who our enemies are. Don’t be illogical … Don’t send Irish food to feed the enemy”.215 Consequently, the conscription crisis helped to entrench a view of the government as an “enemy” of the people. According to the account of one County Inspector, “the whole city and county are seething with hatred against the government” for attempting to impose conscription upon Ireland.216 Anti-conscription protests revealed the potential of mass protest and concerted action overwhelming the will of the authorities. The galvanising impact of successful collective action for the working classes of Ireland was apparent even to the Irish Times, who reported that the day of mass protest against conscription on April 23rd “will be chiefly remembered as the day on which Irish Labour realised its strength”.217 Emmet O’Connor re-iterates this view, stating that the conscription crisis had an “ice-breaking effect” on the Irish labour movement, inspiring further worker-initiated action.218 Furthermore, Limerick’s anti-conscription movement may have also inspired the precise strategies which were employed during the Limerick Soviet. Dominic Haugh argues that the systems which were put in place by the Strike Committee during the General Strike 1919 were originally devised to be part of the anti-conscription protests of the previous year. Local socialist
212 Bottom Dog No. 32, 25 May 1918; No. 27, 20 April 1918; The Factionist Vol. 1, No. 23, 5 July 1917. 213 Bottom Dog, No. 27, 20 April 1918. 214 Haugh 2019, p. 93. 215 Bottom Dog No. 27, 20 April 1918. 216 O’Callaghan 2011, pp. 187—188. 217 Kostic 2005, p. 194. 218 O’Connor 2011, p. 110.
38 and trade unionist Sean Dowling, along with other industrial organisers of the ITGWU, sought to continue the momentum of the April 1918 conscription protests. To do so, they devised a plan for a series of local strikes and occupations which would take place across Limerick city and county. According to Haugh, this plan did not come to immediate fruition but ended up being used as the blueprint for the operation of the Limerick Soviet.219 Therefore, anti-conscription protests not only fuelled anti-government sentiment and belief in collective action, but also motivated local activists to devise new strategies of protest which directly inspired the actions of the Trade and Labour Council in 1919. In summary, workers’ lived experiences of industrial conflict exposed the shortcomings of conciliatory strategies but demonstrated the potential of direct action. The Limerick Soviet was established by a population who were alienated by the unsympathetic and repressive responses of employers and the state to both republican and labour activism. As a result, workers’ newspapers portray a polarised view of society, presenting employers, police and the British government as enemies of the local community and encouraging workers to take action to assert their rights and overcome “tyranny”. Both the activities of the ITGWU in assisting strike action and successful anti-conscription protests demonstrated that concerted community-directed action could effectively achieve the will of its participants. Consequently, when confronted with new and highly suppressive military restrictions, it was direct action which the community chose to employ in order to regain their autonomy. Therefore, this chapter has demonstrated that worker’s lived experiences of protest and conflict with employers with the state contributed to the growth of syndicalism in Limerick during 1916-1920. Accounts and outcomes of previous disputes suggest that workers were, to some extent, motivated to use direct action in 1919 because previous and more moderate attempts at self-advocacy had been met with hostility, repression and violence.
219 Haugh 2019, p. 25.
39 Chapter 4 International Revolutionary Movements and Anti- Colonialism
The previous two chapters of this thesis demonstrate that there was certainly a ‘pragmatic’ aspect to the embrace of syndicalist strategies in Limerick between 1916 and 1920. Alternative models of unionism did not offer representation to the majority of the workforce, nor adequately address workers’ concerns regarding industrial transformations. By contrast, direct action had proven itself to be an effective method that bypassed some of these issues through its self-sufficient ethos. Consequently, syndicalism seemed an effective tool that the working classes could utilise to better their material conditions. However, the language used in the workers’ papers is not strictly ‘unideological’. Craft unions are condemned for their collaboration with “evil” British unions; anti-conscription activism is characterised as a campaign against “enslavement” by a foreign enemy.220 Additionally, as discussed in chapter one, the ITGWU was able to capitalise on discontentment with other movements by propagating an explicitly Marxist vision of society. As Robert Magraw observed of the contemporaneous French syndicalist movement, “a reductionism which explains all workers’ protest as a pragmatic response to work experience and technological change is unconvincing … politics and ideology also play a role”.221 While the lived experiences of workers influenced their preferred forms of activism, the language they employ illustrates that workers viewed these experiences through the lens of various influential ideologies. The Limerick Soviet was established during a time of international revolutionary spirit and political upheaval. This upheaval occurred on multiple fronts, with challenges emanating from anti- colonial movements, syndicalist and socialist organisations. Workers in Limerick were cognisant of political movements in other nations and drew inspiration from international affairs. This chapter will consider how workers in Limerick responded to political upheaval abroad. Firstly, I will discuss how Limerick’s labour movement responded to revolutionary movements elsewhere in the world, namely in Russia. Workers’ newspapers indicate that workers in Limerick conceived their actions to be part of an international revolutionary movement that would be decisive in the subversion of the capitalist global order. Secondly, I will discuss how workers responded to an emergent discourse of self-determination, championed by President Woodrow Wilson in the aftermath of the First World War. I will explore how Irish republicans connected Ireland’s struggle for autonomy to the struggles of other British colonies, exposing the contradictions within Britain’s self-proclaimed commitment to the rights of “small nations”.
220 Irish Republic Vol. 1 No. 32, 16 February 1918; Greaves 1982, p. 8. 221 Darlington 2013, p. 40.
40 International Revolutionary Movements
In 1917, Bolshevik Revolutionaries led by Vladimir Lenin overthrew the Provisional Government which had held power in Russia since the abdication of Tsar Nicholas II.222 This overturning of governance during 1917 came to be known as the Russian Revolution and had extensive international repercussions. The Revolution was regarded by socialist revolutionaries in other nations as the first step towards a new socio-economic era.223 Consequently, the Limerick Soviet can be regarded as one of many political endeavours directly inspired by the Russian Revolution. Limerick’s connection to the 1917 Revolution has been emphasised by various historians, including Dominic Haugh, who argues that the general strike “definitely had political undertones and was inspired by the event in Bolshevik Russia”.224 British and Irish media coverage of the events in Limerick also condemned the Soviet as a feeble emulation of the Bolshevik Revolution. The Daily Star reported that radicals in Ireland decided to follow the example of Lenin by establishing “a government of soviets, with Limerick […] as the first of the illustrious series”, while the Irish Times ridiculed Limerick’s attempt to introduce ‘Bolshevism’ in Ireland, claiming the movement “never will make any real headway in this country”.225 A similar view is evident in official monitoring of the events of the Soviet. In a report to the United States Secretary of State, an Irish official stated that the Soviet was “not a trade dispute, not a strike against the military, but purely a labour demonstration of bolshevism served out with a flavour of Sinn Féin”.226 The Russian Revolution received significant support from within the Irish republican movement on a national scale. In February 1918, a mass meeting was held in Mansion House, Dublin, in celebration of the events in Russia. Ten thousand people attended, and various prominent Irish republican activists spoke at the event, including Maud Gonne and Constance Markiewicz.227 The Irish Times subsequently reported that Ireland had been infected by “the anarchy of Bolshevism”.228 Even the more ‘conservative’ elements of the national labour movement displayed sympathy for the Bolshevik Revolutionaries. The ITUC contained a variety of trade unions with varying objectives and affiliations, including many craft unions that rejected militant and revolutionary strategies. Despite this, at a meeting held by the ITUC in 1918, 240 delegates unanimously passed a motion of support for the Bolshevik revolutionaries.229
222 ‘Timeline of the Russian Revolution’, British Library. 223 Aan de Weil 2020, pp. 199—204. 224 Haugh 2019, p. 456 225 “By the Way”, Daily Star, 28 April 1919; Irish Times quoted in Kemmy 1976, p. 5. 226 Haugh 2019, p. 343. 227 Maud Gonne (1866-1953) was a prominent republican activist and founder of the republican women’s organisation Inghinidhe na hÉireann (Connell 2011). Constance Markiewicz (1868-1927) was a revolutionary republican who participated in the Easter Rising and founding member of the women’s republican organisation Cumann na mBan. She was the first women ever elected to Westminster Parliament and was Minister for Labour at the First Dáil. (Lynch 2015, p. xiv). 228 Bryce 2017, p. 42. 229 O’Connor 2011, p. 215.
41 Furthermore, the years following the Russian Revolution witnessed an increase in events asserting the strength and solidarity of the Irish working classes, including May Day Parades. May Day was established as an international workers’ day in the late nineteenth century and was used to assert the strength and solidarity of the workers of the world.230 Many regions of Ireland did not partake in such events until 1918, at which time large May Day parades were held across the country, mostly organised by local branches of the ITGWU. The largest of these events took place in Belfast in 1919 where over a hundred thousand workers marched and red flags were flown.231 In Limerick, the county’s very first May Day celebration was held in 1918. The event was reportedly attended by around ten to fifteen thousand people, and the organisers explicitly stated that the gathering was held in solidarity with the Bolshevik revolutionaries.232 At the parade, a speaker offered greetings to “workers of all countries, paying particular tribute to our Russian comrades who have waged such a magnificent struggle for their social and political emancipation”.233 However, while the Bolshevik Revolution had a profound impact on global politics, revolutionary ideologies did not emanate solely from Russia and spread to other nations. The First World War had a transformative effect on global politics, leading to numerous challenges being posed to the norms and institutions which were in place before the war. The Bolshevik Revolution, therefore, can be viewed as the most wide-scale singular example of a range of international challenges to pre-war institutions and norms. In the eyes of many international actors, the post- war period presented an opportunity to restructure the socio-economic system in the interest of the masses.234 Reflecting upon this challenge to the status quo, Lloyd George observed, “There is a deep sense not only of disappointment but of anger and revolt amongst the workers against pre- war conditions. The whole existing order in its political, social and economic aspects is questioned by the masses of the population from one end of Europe to another”. 235 The Bolshevik Revolution, therefore, constituted one element of an international challenge to the assumptions which underpinned the pre-war global order. Therefore, the Limerick Soviet was one of many examples of ‘Soviets’ which were established across Europe in the months and years following the Bolshevik Revolution. In the same year, revolutionary leftist movements transformed the governance of various cities. In particular, on 8 April 1919, a Bavarian Soviet Republic was proclaimed in Munich.236 The Republic was declared by Kurt Eisner, head of the Munich Independent Socialists, and consisted of a workers’ council
230 Chase 1993. 231 Kostic 2015, p. 22. 232 Kemmy 1976, p. 46; Haugh 2006, p. 30. 233 Kemmy 1976, p. 46. 234 Darlington 2013, p. 46. 235 Ibid. 236 D. Lee 2003, pp. 289—90.
42 which survived for almost a month.237 Additionally, in March 1919 a Soviet republic was proclaimed in Hungary, after the communist activist Béla Kun led a seizure of power from the Hungarian government.238 International movements were looked upon with great interest by the workers’ movement in Ireland, particularly among the ranks of the ITGWU. The ITGWU’s own official newspaper, The Voice of Labour, stated that “To-day the Soviet idea is sweeping westward over Europe … the Soviet has shown itself to be the only instrument of liberation in Europe … Ireland’s best and most effective answer is the immediate establishment of Soviets, the instruments which will bring about the dictatorship of the Irish proletariat”.239 In light of such international currents and national debates, the Limerick Soviet was interpreted by many to be just such an effort to seize power for the proletariat. Many of the actions undertaken by the Strike Committee were interpreted by the media and outside observers as evidence of socialist ideals and objectives. In particular, contemporaries invested much symbolic importance in the Strike Committee’s decision to print its own currency. This decision was ridiculed in the Manchester Guardian, which described the Committee’s currency as a “curious document” that reflected the growing “assumptions and pretensions” of the Strike Committee and a deepening “theatricality” in the conduct of the strike.240 Conversely, Britain’s Independent Labour Party (ILP) praised the Committee’s decision to print its own currency. In a meeting discussing the Soviet, the ILP was reported to have congratulated the Limerick Soviet “on its issue of a paper currency as the first outward and visible sign of the proletariat in these islands making a determined effort to emancipate itself from capitalist domination”.241 Thus, to both supporters and opponents of the Strike Committee, their currency was understood to be indicative of revolutionary objectives and of an effort to legitimise the autonomy of the proletariat over Limerick city and county. Socialist-inspired newspapers printed in Limerick also convey an internationalist vision of radical upheaval of the capitalist order. The Workers’ Bulletin, Bottom Dog and Red Flag are each explicitly revolutionary in their political outlook, and their rhetoric represents the workers of Limerick as part of a global proletariat engaged in a common struggle. This internationalist vision is conveyed partly through the use of internationally recognised symbols of communism and socialism. During this period, the image of a red flag was popular among labour movements worldwide, and a popular labour song of this era was entitled ‘The Red Flag’. The lyrics to this song were printed in both the Worker’s Bulletin and the Red Flag in 1919, and both newspapers emphasise that the song originated in Ireland. The Red Flag prefaces the lyrics by stating, “This song was written by an Irishman and is now the rallying song of labour all over the world”, while
237 Rosenfeld 1997, p. 226. 238 Pelz 2016, p. 124. 239 Darlington 2013, p. 186. 240 “All-Night Vigil at Limerick”, Manchester Guardian, 22 April 1919. 241 “Law in Disrepute”, Manchester Guardian, 23 April 1919.
43 the Worker’s Bulletin titles the song “The Dublinman’s song that all the world is singing”.242 The lyrics of the first few verses of this song are printed in the Worker’s Bulletin as follows:
I
The People's Flag is the deepest red
It shrouded oft our martyred dead.
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold
Their hearts' blood dyed its every fold.
Chorus
'Then raise the Scarlet Standard high
Beneath its shade we'll live and die.
Let cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We'll keep the Red Flag flying here.
II
Look round! the Frenchman loves its blaze,
The sturdy German chants its praise
In Moscow's vaults its hymns are sung;
Chicago swells the surging throng.
While the lyrics to this song were written in 1889, its use in 1919 continued to evoke notions of international labour solidarity, particularly because the locations cited in the third verse were still centres of radical labour activism in the early twentieth century.243 Germany was home to both the Bavarian Socialist Republic and significant labour unrest during the post-war period, while the French trade union movement was driven by the syndicalist principles of the CGT. The CGT experienced a massive resurgence in the post-war period, increasing from 600,000 members after the First World War to 1.2 million members in 1919.244 Additionally, while the reference to ‘Chicago’ was originally written as an allusion to the Chicago Martyrs of 1887, Chicago gained a new significance to twentieth-century syndicalists as the birthplace of the Industrial Workers of the
242 Workers’ Bulletin No. 7, 27 March 1919; Red Flag No. 1, Vol 3, 27 November 1919. 243 Boyd 2001. 244 Darlington 2013, p. 41.
44 World, a preeminent syndicalist-inspired organisation founded in 1905.245 Thus, the decision to fly a red flag at subsequent strikes and operations in Limerick, including the ‘Knocklong Soviet’, was invested with an internationalist, radical meaning. O’Connor asserts that the red flag had become “synonymous with direct action and workers’ control”.246 However, while Limerick’s newspapers evoke symbols of international labour solidarity, they do not demonstrate that there were strong, practical connections forged between the labour movement in Ireland and movements elsewhere in Europe. Specific organisations in other nations are not named, nor are specific strikes and other protests which took place in other nations discussed. However, while workers in Limerick may not have been well-acquainted with the details of international leftist endeavours, the rhetoric used in the Bottom Dog and Workers’ Bulletin exhibits a perception that capitalism was undergoing a concerted, international challenge. Therefore, the rhetoric used by their authors reflects a conviction that capitalism was soon to reach its demise. Newspapers adopt a celebratory tone in their use of socialist poems, songs and slogans, optimistically asserting that the workers of the world “have nothing to lose but their chains, and they have the world to gain”.247 The importance of this mindset is emphasised in the reflections of Donal Nevin, a well- known Irish trade unionist who was politically active during the Irish Revolution. Nevin argued that it is difficult for observers in subsequent decades to comprehend the “messianic fervour” that motivated socialists of this era “as they assumed the imminent collapse of bourgeois capitalism and its replacement by a co-operative organisation of industry”.248 Such “messianic fervour” is visible among the ranks of trade unionist activists in Limerick. The Workers’ Bulletin asserted in April 1919 that “a new era” is imminent, in which “the old order – the order of repression, starvation and force – is on the brink of the precipice, and no power on earth can prevent it toppling over”.249 The Bottom Dog displays a similar degree of optimism, claiming “we must only scan the horizon for the sign of better times, when the world will have regained its sanity … and when too, the workers will have a just share of the wealth they produce. They can hasten that happy time by their own united strength and solidarity”.250 At least among some local activists, therefore, labour agitation in Limerick, including the 1919 general strike, constituted an effort to finally secure the emancipation of the working classes from capitalism. Far from describing syndicalist agitation as a pragmatic local measure, the Workers’ Bulletin invests great transformative potential in the direct action carried out in Limerick in 1919.251
245 Boyd 2001; ‘The 1905 Proceedings of the Founding Convention of the Industrial Workers of the World’, Marxists Internet Archive. 246 O’Connor 2000. 247 Workers’ Bulletin, No. 7, 29 March 1919. 248 Ferriter 2015, pp. 79—80. 249 Workers’ Bulletin No. 17, 8 April 1919. 250 Bottom Dog No. 10, 22 December 1917. 251 Workers’ Bulletin No. 7, 27 March 1919.
45 The newspaper claimed in March 1919 that local strikes were gaining widespread attention and asserted that “it is inconceivable that all these men and women can be left to wander and roam the streets indefinitely without producing a resentment and a reaction that will overwhelm the very basis of the social order”.252 Belief in the transformative potential of direct is also indicated by participants’ conviction that the national labour movement would act in solidarity with the Limerick Soviet. In an interview with the Daily Express, delegate of the ITUC Thomas Johnson asserted that “you may rest assured that the whole of the organised labour in Ireland is with us and ready to back us with men and resources.”253 Similarly, in an interview with an American Journalist, John Cronin reportedly claimed “the national executive council of the ILPTUC will change its headquarters from Dublin to Limerick. Then if military rule isn’t abrogated, a general strike of the entire country will be called”.254 The rhetoric of the Strike Committee and working-class newspapers in Ireland does not display a deep engagement with theoretical questions, nor debate the intricacies of how society ought to be restructured. Workers’ newspapers also lack evidence of detailed knowledge of international forms of agitation. It is perhaps for reasons such as these that Cahill asserts that the Bottom Dog displayed an “extraordinarily hazy concept of socialism”.255 However, Limerick derived momentum from the conviction that capitalism was facing concerted, international opposition, and that local activism constituted one part of a global labour movement. Events in Russia and elsewhere were significant to Limerick not because of the specificities of their methods and ideologies, but because these movements represented a unified challenge enacted by the global proletariat in opposition to capitalism. Belief in the fragility of the capitalist system led workers to invest great faith in direct action, and the Strike Committee displayed conviction that radical methods had the power to provoke major structural upheaval. The Limerick Soviet, therefore, was conceived by some of its participants to be part of a radical, concerted challenge to capitalist oppression, rather than an isolated act of protest.
International Decolonisation Struggles
John Gallagher, an influential historian of colonialism, argued that the Irish War of Independence constituted one part of an international “Crisis of Empire” which occurred between 1919 and 1922. The spring of 1919 was particularly turbulent for the British empire, with uprisings successively occurring in Egypt, India and Afghanistan. In light of the internationalism of anti-imperial activism, Gallagher advocated a transnational approach to the study of this crisis. As he stated in an essay
252 Ibid. 253 “Irish Strike Threats”, Daily Express 24 April 1919. 254 Kostic 2005, p. 198. 255 Cahill 2019, p. 207.
46 written in 1981, “the historian who studies any of these crises in isolation does so at his peril, for their consequences tended to interlock.”256 His research also emphasises that British colonial authorities viewed these uprisings as a concerted, almost conspiratorial effort, and feared the empire was on the brink of collapse.257 This fear is apparent in the diaries of British war cabinet member Sir Henry Wilson, who wrote, “If England goes on like this she will lose the empire. There is absolutely no grip anywhere … We are certain to have serious trouble in Ireland, Egypt and India, possibly even with the Bolsheviks”.258 Therefore, both colonisers and colonised societies understood anti-colonial unrest to be an international phenomenon and recognised the fragility of the imperial global order during 1919. Subsequent scholarship of colonialism has used transnational approaches to examine the causes for this international challenge to colonial authority. One explanation for the “Crisis of Empire” offered by Erez Manela is that this period of anti-colonial unrest was provoked by the failure of the Paris Peace Conference to adequately address the concerns of colonised societies.259 In January 1918, US President Woodrow Wilson advocated for the principle of self-determination for all nations. His ‘Fourteen Points’, presented before Congress as a premise for a re-ordering of geopolitics which would preserve peace, included the proposition of the “impartial adjustment of all colonial claims”. Wilson championed the creation of a “general association of nations” which would afford “mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike”.260 Manela argues that colonised societies were inspired by this proposition, but the Treaty of Versailles failed to deliver on Wilson’s promise. This “failure of Wilsonialism” fuelled unrest in colonies around the world during the “Crisis of Empire”.261 Irish separatists displayed enthusiasm for Wilson’s ideas in the months preceding the Paris Peace Conference and fully embraced the principle of self-determination. After the war, the Irish republican movement undertook efforts to pressure the Paris Peace Conference to address the question of Irish independence.262 In pursuit of this aim, De Valera wrote a document addressed to Wilson entitled ‘Message to the free nations of the world’. In this letter, he stated, “Ireland to- day reasserts her historic manhood the more confidently before the new world emerging from the War, because she believes in freedom and justice as the fundamental principles of international law”. The letter concludes with the assertion that Ireland is “resolutely and irrevocably determined at the dawn of the promised era of self-determination and liberty that she will suffer foreign dominion no longer”.263 De Valera’s language reflects an embrace of Wilson’s vision and
256 Gallagher 1981, p. 355. 257 Ibid., p. 367. 258 Kostic 2005, p. 188. 259 Gerwath and Kitchen 2015, p. 177. 260 Woodrow Wilson, ‘The Fourteen Points’, The National WWI Museum and Memorial. 261 Gerwath and Kitchen 2015, p. 177. 262 Aan de Wiel 2020, p. 195. 263 De Valera, ‘Message to the Free Nations of the World’, 1919, Documents on Irish Foreign Policy.
47 demonstrates how Ireland used the emergent discourses of self-determination and anti-colonialism to frame its own struggle against British rule. Limerick’s Sinn Féin supporters also displayed optimism for “Wilsonialism” and held a local meeting to propose a resolution demanding representation at the Peace Conference.264 In the years during and after the First World War, newspapers published in Limerick also emphasised the principle of self-determination and endorsed a new, post-colonial global order. Authors highlighted the uncompromising imperialism of Britain’s foreign policy, and ridiculed the suggestion that Britain joined the First World War to defend the rights of “small nationalities”.265 Britain’s approach to the ‘Irish Question’ was characterised as evidence of the nation’s unabated imperialism. This condemnation of British imperialism is visible in the Factionist’s account of the Irish Convention of 1917. The Irish Convention was established by British Prime Minister David Lloyd George as an attempt to settle the ‘Irish Question’ by creating a forum for negotiation between nationalists and unionists.266 One of the initial terms of this Convention was that Ireland must remain “within the Empire”, which provoked Sinn Féin to boycott the Convention.267 In Limerick, the Factionist denounced the Convention as self-serving, arguing that Lloyd George only called this Convention because Britain “cannot face the world with the hypocritical cant of ‘Small Nationalities’ and ‘Government according to the will of the people’ on her lips, while she keeps our countrymen locked up in her gaols”.268 Shortly after the Convention, the British government decided to simultaneously introduce the policies of Home Rule and conscription in Ireland.269 This outcome only vindicated the Factionist’s suggestion that Britain was unwilling to concede any colonial authority and was hypocritical to feign support for the rights of “small nationalities” during and after the First World War. While it is apparent that Irish republicans connected their struggles to those of other decolonising nations, it is important to note that republicans also differentiated themselves from other colonised peoples when it appeared advantageous to do so. Maurice Walsh notes that British officials connected nationalist revolts in Ireland to those of Egypt and India, and Irish revolutionaries took an active effort to forge connections with global anti-colonial movements.270 Nonetheless, Walsh argues, Irish revolutionaries “were increasingly aware that proclaiming their whiteness was a clever card to play”. For example, in an interview with an American Journalist, Seán T O’Kelly defended Ireland’s right to representation at the Paris Peace Conference by arguing,
264 The Facionist, Vol. 1, No. 5, 1 March 1917. 265 The Worker’s Bulletin sarcastically describes conscripts as ‘men who enlisted “to fight for Small Nationalities”’ (Vol. 1, No. 3, 18th April 1919). 266 Ferriter 2015, p. 170. 267 Connell 2017, p. 70. 268 The Factionist No. 18, Vol. 1, 31 May 1917. 269 Geiser 1918, p. 296. ‘Home Rule’ entails Ireland being granted devolved parliament within the United Kingdom. 270 Walsh 2021.
48 “It seems that the blacks and yellows, all colours and races, may be heard before the conference except the Irish”.271 A similar argument is made in the Workers’ Bulletin to denounce Britain’s neglect of Irish workers. The newspaper claims that while all foreign workers were paid exploitative wages at British ports, “this admittedly sweated wage paid by the shipowners to Chinamen and coloured sailors was actually 50 per cent higher than the present wages paid […] in the Christian City of Limerick to white men and white women of whom the Christian Law demands Christian Lives!”.272 In the assessment of the Bulletin, it is deplorable that Irish workers are suffering at the hands of an oppressive colonial authority, but especially deplorable that such treatment is afforded to white, Christian workers. Therefore, while the newspaper recognised the plight faced by workers of other ethnicities, it also utilised ‘whiteness’ to lay claim to better rights for Irish workers. This reflects a broader rhetorical device used by separatists which leveraged concepts of racial difference in order to elevate Ireland’s claim to autonomy above those of other ethnicities of people. Despite all of Ireland’s efforts, both Britain and the other Great Powers declined to address the ‘Irish Question’ at the Paris Peace Conference. As Jérôme Aan de Weil argues, it soon became apparent to the people of Ireland that “self-determination applied to the nationalities of the vanquished powers only”.273 However, while Wilson’s idealist project did not succeed in substantially dismantling imperialism and granting Ireland self-government, the notion of self- determination had a substantial and enduring influence on the political mobilisation of colonised societies. During and immediately after the Paris Peace Conference, anti-colonial nationalisms flourished globally and emphasised their claim to self-determination. According to Robert Gerwath and James E. Kitchen, nationalisms in Canada and South Africa took on a new character which was “republican, self-sufficient, and grounded in a sense of cultural difference from the British”, while Australia and New Zealand emphasised national maturity.274 Workers’ newspapers in Limerick also displayed endorsement of the principles of self-determination and were assertive in their rejection of imperialism. The Factionist emphasises Ireland’s right to political autonomy by asserting that Irishmen are “FREE men, and, as such, as well entitled to govern our own country as any Englishman is to govern his”.275 Additionally, the newspaper the Irish Republic condemns the “despotism” of British colonialism which “enslaved us physically”, while the Red Flag refers to the rulers of Britain as the “parliament of our oppressors”.276 This upsurge in anti-colonialist rhetoric and mobilisation was also apparent in media debates surrounding the Limerick Soviet. In one report by the Manchester Guardian, the Soviet is described
271 Ibid. 272 Worker’s Bulletin No. 15, 5 April 1919. 273 Aan de Weil 2020, p. 195. 274 Gerwath and Kitchen 2015, p. 180. 275 The Factionist Vol. 1, No. 23, 5 July 1917. 276 Irish Republic Vol. 1 No. 32, 16 February 1918; Red Flag Vol. 1, No. 3, 27 November 1919.
49 as ‘Limerick’s reply to President Wilson’s question: “‘Shall the military of any nation or group of nations be suffered to determine the fortunes of people over whom they have no right except the right of force?’”.277 In addition, the ‘Correspondence’ section of the same newspaper included a letter by Sinn Féin activist Daniel Figgis, which was written as a response to the Guardian’s less charitable representations of the Limerick Soviet. Figgis frames the general strike as an anti-colonial struggle and condemns the Guardian’s characterisation of the Strike Committee as a “rebel junta”. He states that there are two “authorities” ruling in Limerick, describing them as follows:
1. A special Strike Committee, formed of elected persons possessing the confidence of the overwhelming majority of citizens, and representative of them in fact as in name. They are ruling in order, I take it, to show that government of the people, by the people, and for the people cannot, in spite of appearances, perish from the earth
2. A foreign dictator with the rank of a brigadier general, supported by armed soldiers, all of them foreign, machine-guns, armoured cars, armoured airplanes, and all the pomp and paraphernalia of militarism up to date, including for all I know gas implements and flame throwers.
Figgis emphatically concludes, “Which of these is the ‘rebel junta’? And what is a junta? And what is a rebel?”.278 His interpretation of the Soviet exemplifies the republican movement’s re- framing of Britain as a foreign, colonialist oppressor who rules Ireland against the will of its people. The Strike Committee, by contrast, is cast as a legitimate, anti-colonial and democratic form of governance. Consequently, in light of a global challenge to imperialism, the establishment of a Soviet was interpreted by some observers as far more than an industrial dispute. Instead, sympathetic observers perceived the general strike as an effort to reclaim autonomy over occupied territory. To some, the Strike Committee not only represented the will of the working classes in opposition to employers, but the will of Ireland in opposition to British colonial rule. Similar rhetoric of anti-colonial activism is also visible in some accounts produced by people who themselves participated in the general strike. James Casey, Treasurer of the Soviet and IRA combatant, produced one of the earliest accounts of the general strike in a chapter entitled ‘A Limerick Challenge to British Tyranny’, first published in 1948. Casey describes the military restrictions imposed on Limerick using the language of anti-colonialism, stating that “parties going to and from their daily occupation had to face the bayonets of foreign soldiery … in face of this gross act of tyranny, the United Trades and Labour Council of Limerick replied with a general strike which led to one of the most momentous struggles found against foreign domination in this country”.279 Such narratives are also visible in documents produced by the Strike Committee during the general strike. For example, the Proclamation issued by the Committee to declare an end to the
277 ‘New Irish Threat’, Manchester Guardian, 20 April 1919. 278 ‘Correspondence: “Law in Disrepute”’, Manchester Guardian, 29 April 1919. 279 Casey, ‘A Limerick Challenge to British Military Tyranny’, 2009.
50 general strike states, “We further call upon those workers whose daily occupation requires them to procure a Military Permit to continue in their refusal to accept this sign of subjugation and slavery … We also call upon our fellow-countrymen, and lovers of Freedom all over the World to provide the necessary funds to enable us to continue this struggle against Military Tyranny”.280 This document displays not only an anti-colonialist framing of direct action in Limerick, but an appeal to a sympathetic international audience to assist in their struggle for freedom from foreign domination. Similarly, a memo issued by the Strike Committee stated that Limerick’s workers “should be left alone to exercise the right of free men in our own countries” and asserts that “in this glorious cause we shall have millions of supporters from all over the world”.281 Consequently, participants represented the general strike not just as a pragmatic response to militarised policing of the local community, but also as a protest against the imperial order from which the local authorities derived their power. As explained by the Workers’ Bulletin, the British soldier “is not our real enemy”, since he is “merely the tool of his Imperialistic, Capitalistic Government”.282 The imposition of a military zone and permit system were not just viewed as an inconvenience by workers, but also as a symbol of their “enslavement”.283 Therefore, the Soviet took on its own symbolic importance. To both participants and outside observers, the general strike represented an assertion of Irish peoples’ right to autonomy within their own territory. It occurred amid a significant, global challenge to the imperial global order, and the language adopted by people in Limerick reflected contemporary discourses of self-determination. While members of the Irish republican movement utilised the concept of ‘whiteness’ to assert Ireland’s right to autonomy above those of other colonised peoples, the movement nonetheless sought to connect Ireland’s plight for independence to other anti-colonial nationalisms. This internationalist outlook is apparent in the writings of workers in Limerick. Workers were motivated by contemporary anti- colonial discourses and the perceived fragility of imperialism and were, therefore, much more readily mobilised to defend their autonomy against the will of British authorities. Therefore, this chapter demonstrates that workers in Limerick were aware of international movements which were both anti-colonialist and anti-capitalist in nature, and thus perceived the global architecture of capitalism and imperialism to be under imminent threat. This belief provided a radical motivation behind direct action, as a singular act of protest such as a general strike was conceived by some to be a contribution towards a concerted, international attack upon the foundations of both imperialism and capitalism. Therefore, at least some participants in the strike were driven by revolutionary objectives inspired by international political upheaval.
280 Quote from the Strike Committee’s Proclamation which called an end to the strike. See Figure 2 in Appendix. 281 Kemmy 1972. 282 Workers’ Bulletin, quoted in O’Callaghan 2010, p. 121. 283 Quote from Strike Committee Proclamation: See Figure 2 in Appendix.
51 Chapter 5 The Relationship between Leaders and the “Rank and File”
As established in the previous chapter, accounts of syndicalism which presuppose that workers are motivated by pragmatic concerns tend to overlook broader political currents which influenced their interpretations of local socioeconomic conditions. In addition to this, accounts that regard syndicalist strategies to be a pragmatic response to the material needs of workers tend to assume that it is lived experience, rather than ideology, which provokes radicalisation. This interpretation invites the notion that it is the “rank-and-file” of labour movements who propel militancy, since it is their own lived experiences of poor working conditions and oppression which inspire radical ideas. Interpretations such as these conform to a broader trend within labour history which Jonathan Zeitlin describes as “rank-and-filism”. Zeitlin suggests that this explanation of conflict within industrialism was commonplace among British labour historians of the 1980s. “Rank and filist” interpretations of industrial conflict propose that trade unions are defined by a structural “tension between discipline and militancy”.284 Workers’ experience of “exploitation at the point of production” causes them to rebel and embrace militancy, whereas leaders have managerial obligations and tend to moderate the demands of their members.285 In summary, militancy is regarded to emanate from the rank-and-file of organisations, often in opposition to the will of leaders. In agreement with such a model, Emmet O’Connor’s study of the phenomenon of syndicalism in Ireland asserts that “the mainspring of militancy in the movement can be located in the trade union membership rather than officialdom. The radical character of industrial conflict was due to rank-and-file control over forms of protest rather than leadership audacity”.286 With regards to the establishment of Soviets in particular, O’Connor argues that their emphasis on local activity “stood in marked contrast to Labour propaganda extolling the power of the united, centralized movement co-ordinated by general staff”.287 The fate of the Limerick Soviet, undermined by the lack of national solidarity action and forced to surrender authority, indicates that the Strike Committee did not act according to the desires of the contemporary leaders of national labour and trade union bodies. Nonetheless, the radical ideas espoused by workers were not the product of lived experiences alone. Workers were also influenced by the ideas promoted by important figures within the Irish labour movement. The beliefs and principles of former ITGWU leaders Jim Larkin and James Connolly were enshrined in the operation of the local branch of the ITGWU, and the activities of workers during the general strike closely reflect ideologies popularised by these iconic labour leaders. The ideas of these leaders
284 Richard Price, quoted in Zeitlin 1989, p. 91. 285 Ibid., p. 90. 286 O’Connor 1988, p. xix. 287 Ibid., p. 128.
52 also impacted the ways in which local workers interpreted their material conditions. Prominent local activists propagated and adapted the ideas of leading figures, emphasising aspects of these leaders’ ideologies that best resonated with local circumstances. In particular, local activists centred the experiences and role of women in industrial struggle in their re-configuration of syndicalist and socialist concepts.
“Larkinism”
In contrast with some other leftist movements, syndicalism is often regarded to be defined by its scepticism towards ‘outside experts’ and intellectuals. Darlington argues that the movement emphasised that the revolution must be directed by and for the proletariat, with minimal interference from “outsiders.”288 Nonetheless, prominent syndicalist agitators were often well acquainted with radical leftist theory and can be perceived as fulfilling the role of ‘worker intellectuals’.289 These ‘worker intellectuals’, Darlington argues, played an important role in facilitating radicalism by encouraging their fellow workers to view their lived experiences in accordance with a radical ideological framework. Local actors agitated around the specific grievances of workers and invited them to redress these through direct action.290 Therefore, workers were ‘converted’ to syndicalism due to both their lived experiences and their encounter with revolutionary theories which reframed these experiences in terms of class conflict. One figurehead who could be regarded as a kind of “worker intellectual” is ITGWU founder Jim Larkin. Historical accounts of the development of syndicalism in Ireland emphasise the importance of Larkin in popularising syndicalist ideas. Indeed, employers of the early twentieth century used “Larkinism” as a derogatory term to describe the syndicalist methods he championed, such as militancy, sympathetic striking and ‘cult of the agitator’.291 Diarmaid Ferriter suggests that Larkin courted his own ‘cult of the agitator’ within the Irish labour movement, taking efforts to centre his own leadership and importance.292 The appearance of “Larkinism” began with the revival of ‘new unionism’ in 1907, and one of the most prominent organisations which displayed ‘new unionist’ tendencies was the Irish branch of the National Union of Dock Labourers (NUDL).293 This newfound radicalism in the NUDL can be largely attributed to the influence of Larkin, as his first task upon arrival in Ireland as an industrial organiser in 1907 was to reinvigorate this union.294 Two years later, Larkin established the ITGWU, and his ideas were at the forefront of the new union’s operation.
288 Darlington 2008, p. 19. 289 Ibid. 290 Darlington 2013, p. 50. 291 O’Connor 2011, p. 194. 292 Ferriter 2015, p. 80. 293 O’Connor 1988, p. 107. 294 O’Connor 2002, p. 17.
53 From its outset, the ITGWU was characterised by a commitment to fundamental, structural change in the interest of the working classes. This commitment is visible in the first manifesto of the ITGWU, produced in 1909. The manifesto states that the ITGWU’s role is to assist workers in their efforts to secure better wages, working hours and working conditions, through negotiation, arbitration, and, where necessary, “withholding our labour until amelioration is granted”.295 However, the manifesto also displays a desire to enact more transformative, all-encompassing changes. Its programme includes an eight-hour working day, adult suffrage, nationalisation of all means of transport, pensions and unemployment provisions. The manifesto concludes,
‘By the advocacy of such principles and the carrying out of such a policy, we believe we shall be ultimately enabled to obliterate poverty, and to realise the glorious time spoken of and sung by the Thinkers, Prophets, and the Poets, when all the children, all women, and all men shall have their full share of the essentials in life; when men shall work and rejoice in the deeds of their hand, and thereby become entitled to the fullness of the earth and the abundance thereof’.296
Therefore, while the ITGWU concerned itself with minor wage disputes and other such conflicts, the union had a revolutionary vision for society. Specific grievances were interpreted as symptomatic and symbolic of the unjust system of capitalism, and direct action was deemed to be one method that could facilitate the breakdown of this system. Industrial action enacted by the ITGWU reflected these broad, revolutionary objectives. One of the most significant events in Irish labour history was the Dublin Lockout of 1913. This conflict occurred after William Murphy, a Dublin businessman and IPP politician, led employers in Dublin to take a stand against Larkin and the ITGWU. Murphy and over 400 local employers attempted to eradicate syndicalist influences from their workforces by locking out any employee who did not formally renounce the ITGWU.297 As a result, around 15,000 workers were locked out and violence broke out between striking workers and the police. Between 400 and 600 people reportedly sustained injuries after being batoned by police officers in a conflict known as ‘Bloody Sunday’ on 31 August 1913.298 British authorities perceived that the militant and uncompromising actions of the ITGWU during this dispute appeared to indicate objectives that surpassed the immediate needs of the dispute at hand. Lord Askwith, the chief conciliator of the British government, stated that although disturbances in government were “founded on poverty, low wages and bad conditions”, they also “included a determination to establish … ‘one big union’ and put into practice the doctrines of syndicalism. The influences … [for] the overthrow of Capitalism, and revolution against existing authority, were all present”.299 While this may be a sensationalised account, Larkin certainly
295 Greaves 1982, p. 35. 296 Ibid. 297 Yeates 2001, p. 33. 298 Ibid., p. 32. 299 Darlington 2016, p. 48.
54 attempted to use the Lockout to provoke sympathetic striking in Britain.300 His attempts to involve British unions reveal that he hoped the Lockout could act as a catalyst for widespread industrial conflict. Therefore, Larkin invested the Lockout with radical objectives as set out by the ITGWU manifesto. He was, however, unsuccessful in courting sympathetic strike action, which resulted in the demise of this episode of labour agitation in Dublin.301 The events of the Limerick Soviet also indicate an endorsement of the idea that a singular act of direct action could be a catalyst for broad class conflict which would unsettle the foundations of capitalism. As discussed in the previous chapter, the actions and writings of the Strike Committee display a conviction that unrest in Limerick could “overwhelm” the basis of the social order by producing nationwide resentment.302 This belief in the transformative, revolutionary potential of the strike action is consistent with the significance invested in strikes within the wider syndicalist movement. Emmet O’Connor asserts that syndicalism in Ireland conceived of two paths by which the emancipation of workers and upheaval of capitalism could be obtained. The first of these was the reconstruction of trade unionism along industrial lines, which would culminate in the formation of “One Big Union” to unite workers across all industries. The second strategy was the promotion of class consciousness through strike action, which would culminate in a general strike in which the proletariat would seize power.303 Consequently, general strike action within a specific locality was imbued with great revolutionary importance, as it was believed to contain the potential to provoke a major upheaval of the socio-economic order. As explained by Darlington, “the general strike … is for syndicalism the revolutionary conclusion [which] will signal the passage of economic power – and consequently of political and legal power – from the hands of the capitalists to the hands of the proletariat”.304 This interpretation of the potency of direct action was popularised by Larkin through the establishment of the ITGWU and the vision of revolution which he imbued on this organisation. Although Larkin ceased to be the leader of the ITGWU in 1914, his popularisation of militant labour strategies played a significant and enduring role in promoting and facilitating syndicalism in Ireland. Major disputes led by Larkin, from the height of ‘new unionism’ to the Dublin Lockout, heightened awareness of syndicalist strategies and revolutionary ideals.305 By calling a general strike and seizing control of local industries, workers in Limerick displayed an embrace of “Larkinism”. Their use of direct action was consistent with “Larkinist” methods, and their conceptualisation of strikes as a catalyst for revolutionary change aligns with the revolutionary outlook of the original ITGWU manifesto. Therefore, while Strike Committee documents and workers’ newspapers do
300 Yeates 2001, p. 35. 301 Ibid. 302 Worker’s Bulletin No. 7, 27 March 1919. 303 O’Connor 1988, p. 5. 304 Darlington 2008, p. 40. 305 O’Connor 2011, p. 95.
55 not make frequent references to Larkin himself, the profound influence of “Larkinism” on the Irish labour movement is visible in the actions and rhetoric of workers in Limerick.
Connolly and “Socialist Republicanism”
Another national leader who left a significant mark on the ITGWU and the broader labour movement is James Connolly. Connolly exerted influence over the Irish labour movement through his involvement in numerous, diverse organisations. Alongside Larkin, he played a prominent role in the Lockout, and he formed the Irish Labour party together with Larkin and William O’Brien.306 Connolly also engaged in labour movements outside of Ireland, as he spent a few years living in the United States, where he became a member of the Chicago-based syndicalist organisation Industrial Workers of the World.307 Following his return to Ireland, Connolly attempted to enact principles of industrial unionism which he had encountered in the US.308 He succeeded Larkin as leader of the ITGWU in 1914 but was executed due to his involvement in the Easter Rising just two years later. During his lifetime, Connolly had a significant influence on the political landscape of Ireland, in part through his interweaving of socialist and nationalist objectives. Before the twentieth century, socialist and nationalist objectives were perceived by many socialist movements to be incompatible, as the socialist conceptualisation of the proletariat as a united entity defined by common class interests superseded loyalties based upon national affiliation. Accordingly, Lenin stated that “workers who place political unity with ‘their own’ bourgeoisie above complete unity with the proletariat of all nations, are acting against their own interests, against the interests of socialism and against the interests of democracy”.309 Deviating from this norm, Connolly played an important role in propagating a vision of labour and national liberation as synchronous and interconnected processes. In 1896, Connolly established a party based upon this model, which was named the Irish Socialist Republican Party (ISRP).310 The first public statement Connolly published on behalf of this Party summarised its ideology as follows:
"The struggle for Irish freedom has two aspects: it is national and it is social. Its national ideal can never be realised until Ireland stands forth before the world a nation free and independent. It is social and economic, because no matter what the form of government may be, as long as one class owns as their private property the land and instruments of labour, from which all mankind derive
306 O’Connor 2011, p. 89. Connolly’s newspaper, the Irish Worker, produced its own account of the ongoing Lockout in 1913 which argues that the disturbance “will only hasten the day when the working class will lock- out the capitalist class for good and all” (Connolly, “Dublin Lockout: On the Eve”, 30 August 1913). 307 Powell 2017, p. 49. 308 Ibid., p. 50. 309 Bryce 2017, p. 51. 310 Powell 2017, p. 49.
56 their substance, that class will always have it in their power to plunder and enslave the remainder of their fellow-creatures."311
While the Irish Socialist Republican Party itself did not gain many members, Connolly had greater success propagating his vision for Ireland through various newspapers and pamphlets. In Ireland, he wrote hundreds of articles for newspapers including the Worker’s Republic, the Worker and the Irish Worker. The latter paper was edited by both Connolly and Larkin during different periods, and had unusually high readership figures, with some issues selling tens of thousands of copies.312 Among his most famous pieces of writing is a pamphlet entitled ‘Socialism Made Easy’, which was extremely influential for ITGWU activism between 1917 and 1923.313 The pamphlet includes a section entitled ‘Socialism and Nationalism’ which humorously criticises models of nationalism that fail to account for the needs of working-class people. Connolly imagines an interaction between a “patriot who won’t touch Socialism” and a ‘town worker”. The worker asks what will happen after the nationalists have “crushed the Saxon and freed Ireland”, to which the patriot responds, “Oh, then you can go back to your slums, same as before”. This exchange is followed by a refrain of “Whoop it up for liberty!”314 Through these popular and engaging pamphlets and newspapers, Connolly helped to establish an alternative vision of republicanism which asserted that national liberation cannot be fully achieved without workers’ liberation. Due to such interweaving of republican and socialist principles, the Irish labour movement derived inspiration and impetus from the nationalist movement in addition to strictly class and industry-based movements. Accordingly, the ITGWU celebrated militancy enacted by advanced nationalists and regarded its own objectives to be connected to the nationalist project. For example, the ITGWU Annual Report of 1918 reflected upon the significance of the Easter Rising, stating that this uprising “linked up the Labour Movement with the age-long aspiration of the Irish people for emancipation from political thraldom”, and claimed the Rising led to an increase in membership figures for the ITGWU.315 Republicanism was a powerful force in the political landscape of Limerick in the years preceding the general strike. According to police reports, fifty-six Sinn Féin clubs had been established in Limerick by the end of 1917.316 The Factionist characterised Limerick as having been gripped by the fervour of advanced nationalism, stating that “Sinn Féin clubs are spreading like wildfire, three more have been started in the City since our last issue, which makes six in all”.317 Consequently, both explicitly nationalist and socialist newspapers extensively used imagery and
311 Boyle 1988, p. 196. 312 O’Connor 2011, p. 86. 313 Ibid., p. 194. 314 James Connolly, “Socialism Made Easy” (1909), IWW archive. 315 ‘Irish Transport and General Workers' Union Annual Report for 1918, Issued by the authority of the Executive Committee’, National Library of Ireland. 316 O’Callaghan 2011, p. 183. 317 The Factionist, Vol. 1, No. 22, 28 June 1917.
57 rhetoric derived from the traditions of Irish nationalism. An example of this is their use of a rhetorical convention known as the ‘cult of martyrdom’. Reverence for historical figures and recent activists who died as ‘martyrs’ in the pursuit of Ireland’s liberation was pervasive in the Irish nationalist movement during the Revolution.318 Therefore, references to martyrdom are recurrent in the Factionist. For example, a poem printed in this newspaper titled ‘The Year of Revolutions’ includes the passage, “Be it blood of a tyrant or blood of the slave, we’ll cross it to Freedom or there find a grave. Lo! A throne for each worker, a crown for each brow, the palm for each martyr that dies for us now”.319 This passage is indicative of the interlinkage of labour and nationalist causes, as it appears to conflate the struggle of workers for autonomy with a nationalistic reverence for martyrdom. Thus, it endorses a self-sacrificial struggle of Irish people in the capacity of both nationalists and workers. Hero-worship and a ‘cult of martyrdom’ also infiltrate the pages of the Bottom Dog when describing Connolly himself. In addition to popularising the concept of “socialist republicanism” through parties and propaganda, Connolly himself engaged in a self-sacrificial act by participating in the Easter Rising, an insurrection which some republicans claimed was a deliberate republican “blood sacrifice”.320 After the Easter Rising, Connolly was executed by a firing squad alongside other leaders of the rebellion. Consequently, after 1916, Connolly entered into the ‘cult of martyrdom’ and was revered by socialists and nationalists alike.321 Therefore, while he did not live on to oversee labour struggles during the War of Independence, Connolly’s ideas and image assumed a symbolic status among socialists and nationalists after 1916. Such reverence is illustrated by a poem by Maeve Cavanagh published in the Bottom Dog. Cavanagh personifies Labour as a grieving widow who must honour the ideals of James Connolly, asserting that “…she shall not his teaching shame, But onward forge to his great aim”.322 In line with the republican notion that today’s activists inherit the cause of fallen martyrs, Cavanagh’s poem assigns Irish labour responsibility for upholding Connolly’s political vision. Therefore, the poem exemplifies the fusion of republican and socialist principles, as it embraces the nationalistic ‘cult of martyrdom’ while also inciting workers to pursue socialist objectives on behalf of Connolly. Just as the Bottom Dog and the Factionist combined nationalistic imagery with class-based objectives, the Limerick Soviet was a labour dispute surrounded by the imagery and ideals of advanced Irish nationalism. Many workers in Limerick were participants in both republican and labour organisations, exhibiting what Jérôme Aan de Weil describes as a “double loyalty” to both
318 Reverence for martyrs is discussed in Richard English, Irish Freedom: The History of Nationalism in Ireland (2007). It is also very prevalent in the writings of the iconic republican figure Pádraic Pearse, including in his essays “The Coming Revolution” (1913) and “Ghosts” (1915). 319 The Factionist Vol. 1, No. 22, 28 June 1917. 320 O’ Hegarty 1998, p. 3. 321 O’Connor states that Connolly was “fetishised and then buffeted between iconography and iconoclasm” (Ferriter, 2015, p. 78). 322 Bottom Dog No. 26, 13 April 1918.
58 class and nation.323 Therefore, while the general strike in Limerick was a response to an infringement on the rights of workers, this cause was perceived to be intimately connected to the question of national autonomy against a foreign coloniser. Accordingly, the general strike was described as a protest “against British military tyranny”.324 Therefore, the integration of republican imagery into the Irish labour movement was influential in the enaction and conceptualisation of the Limerick Soviet. While the concept of “socialist republicanism” cannot be attributed to Connolly alone, he played a central role in propagating this ideology through political organisations, writings and the iconography generated by his ‘blood sacrifice’ during Easter Week in 1916. Therefore, the labour movement in Limerick both directly endorsed the continuation of Connolly’s legacy and used rhetoric that conformed to an ideological framework that Connolly was preeminent in popularising.
Local Agitators and Activists
One interpretation of radicalism in Limerick propagated by the British media in 1919 was that the Limerick Soviet was the result of specific ideological promoters imposing their ideas upon the local working population. An article published in the Daily Star during the Soviet exemplifies this interpretation, stating the Limerick Soviet was not a strike but, rather, a “revolutionary display” orchestrated by local agitators. The Daily Star claims that these prominent local actors picked up the ideas of “insurrectionary cranks” while abroad and have now returned to “make good the boasts of the wonderful Irish revolution in which they indulged while abroad”.325 The paper goes on to suggest that, to these well-travelled agitators, the idea of an Irish republic seemed “commonplace”, and their objectives were far more radical.326 Such explanations can be considered an example of ‘agitator theory’, which emphasises the radicalising role of a small number of activists in a community.327 In contrast to ‘rank-and-filist’ explanations, agitator theory assumes that radicalism is foisted upon the ranks of ‘ordinary’ workers by ideologically driven individuals. Such explanations of labour militancy entail assumptions that the majority of workers involved in direct action do not hold authentic revolutionary commitments nor have their own ideological motivations. For example, the Manchester Guardian explains the establishment of the Limerick Soviet by stating that “a group of strike leaders have taken the rule of the town into their own hands”, and that the general population merely displays a “passive acquiescence”.328 In a later article, the same newspaper claims that while the “Limerick tradesman has shown a great capacity
323 Aan de Weil 2007, p. 196. 324 Casey 2009; Worker’s Bulletin No. 9, 29 March 1919. 325 ‘By the way’, Daily Star, 28 April 1919. 326 Ibid. 327 Darlington 2008, p. 84. 328 ‘Law in Disrepute’, Manchester Guardian, 23 April 1919.
59 for passive endurance”, he is unlikely to endure too much political disruption, as he has “pretty keen business instincts” and is, therefore, unwilling to economically jeopardise himself.329 While this interpretation of the Soviet recognises the radical objectives espoused by the Strike Committee, it falls short of conceding that the majority of the population might share such objectives. Rather, the ‘common worker’ is assumed to be a pragmatist who yields to the will of ideologues only when radical projects align with commercial interests. Aside from perpetuating the stereotype that working-class people are fundamentally ‘unideological’, one issue with this explanation for labour militancy is that it assumes that ‘agitators’ and ‘ordinary workers’ are two discrete groups with entirely separate interests and agendas. As Zeitlin argues, a similar simplification of relationships within labour organising is also evident within ‘rank-and-filist’ explanations, as this model does not account for how distinctions between leaders and the ‘rank-and-file’ could, in practice, become blurred.330 This ambiguity of roles is particularly evident in syndicalist-inspired labour organisations, due to their emphasis on self- sufficiency and distaste for the input of ‘outsiders’. Within the political landscape of Limerick, some local agitators assumed a more ambiguous role than is accounted for by dichotomised models of labour relations. Local actors occupied an intermediary role in the labour movement, popularising radical ideas within their local community without assuming a formal leadership position by lobbying within trade union organisations and producing newspapers. Therefore, these agitators cannot be easily ascribed to the role of ‘rank-and-file’ or ‘leader’. One example of such an individual is the local socialist and trade unionist activist Sean Dowling, whose contribution to Limerick’s labour movement during and after the Limerick Soviet has been particularly emphasised by Dominic Haugh. Dowling was active in socialist activism in Dublin from his youth, and originally went to Limerick under the instructions of Connolly, tasked with assisting the organisation of the local workforce. In pursuit of this aim, Dowling attempted to pressure the conservative leaning Limerick United Trades and Labour Council (LUTLC) to assume a more political orientation, with limited success.331 He also had an impact on the local labour movement as a prominent organiser of direct action, and he was involved in the majority of industrial disputes from 1919 to 1922, including the Limerick Soviet and the occupation of Knocklong creamery in 1920.332 While Dowling was by no means a leading figure within the ITGWU, he joined the Limerick labour movement with a specific ideological objective, seeking to unite the local workers and endorse industrial action. As a socialist and supporter of Connolly, his contributions to the labour movement served to perpetuate radical ideological positions and
329 Ibid. 330 Zeitlin 1989, p. 54. 331 Haugh 2016, pp. 149—150. 332 Ibid., pp. 153—155.
60 ‘politicise’ the local trade union movement. For this reason, Dowling has been referred to as the “philosophical begetter” of the Limerick Soviet.333 In addition, Ben Dineen and the other authors of the Bottom Dog occupy an ambiguous space within the local trade unionist movement, acting as ideological promoters without holding a prominent official position or wielding influence outside of the local community. The newspaper’s founder and editor, Ben Dineen, was active within a local baker’s union and the Limerick United Trades and Labour Council.334 He oversaw the publication of forty-eight editions of the Bottom Dog before dying of the Spanish flu in November 1918, just months prior to the initiation of Limerick’s general strike.335 While he did not survive to participate in the strike, the rhetoric of this newspaper likely played some role in promoting a socialist interpretation of the conditions which workers contended with in Limerick.336 In accordance with the ideological frameworks propagated by Connolly and Larkin, the rhetoric of the Bottom Dog invited local workers to perceive their poor material and working conditions as symptomatic of the oppressive systems of capitalism. In an issue published in April 1918, the Bottom Dog asserted that “Labour always pays in life, in cost of living, in bad housing, in starved women and children, in ruined houses – and Capitalism (Top Dogs) always wins. Labour gives everything produces everything and Capitalism lends at 6 percent”.337 In light of this oppression, the newspaper advocated direct action which would hasten the demise of the oppressive structures of capitalism. In the first issue, the newspaper outlined its aims by saying that while it is true that “every dog has its day”, “the Bottom Dog’s day appears to be a long way off, shrouded in the misty future. The work at hand then – hastening the day of the Bottom Dog”.338 Consequently, the authors of this newspaper could be regarded to have assumed the role of the “worker intellectual”, as defined by Darlington. Dineen and other contributors reframed the struggles of the local community as a class struggle and incited the working classes to redress their oppression through direct action, thereby hastening the ascension of the ‘Bottom Dog’. In summary, Dineen, Dowling and other prominent trade unionists facilitated direct action by applying the fundamental principles advocated by Larkin and Connolly to the local environment. Their rhetoric offered anti-capitalist interpretations of the material conditions workers faced and advocated direct action as the most appropriate means for addressing specific grievances.
333 Haugh 2019, p. 25 334 Ibid., p. 82. 335 Cahill 2019, p. 217. 336 Ibid., 218 337 Bottom Dog No. 26, 13 April 1918. 338 Cahill 2019, p. 216.
61 Adapting Ideologies: Women’s Revolutionary Role
While local agitators advocated for ideologies and strategies popularised by national figures including Connolly and Larkin, their activism was still rooted in the specific grievances of local workers. The rhetoric of socialist newspapers maintained a focus on workers’ experiences of poverty and hardship but represented these experiences as symbolic of systematic oppression. Consequently, aspects of socialist and republican ideologies which best resonated with the immediate, material needs of the local community were emphasised. The local labour movement thereby adapted and amended forms of rhetoric used in the broader republican and socialist movements in order to amass wide support from the local community. One particularly noteworthy example of such adaptation is the local movement’s emphasis on the role of women in industrial action, an emphasis that ran counter to the contemporary gender norms of both the republican and trade unionist movements. Within Irish nationalist traditions of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Irish women were commonly represented as emblematic of the suffering of the Irish nation. A famous example of this is the iconography of Kathleen ni Houlihan, also known as the ‘Poor Old Woman’. This mythical figure, popularised in a play by William Butler Yeats and Lady Gregory, brought a gender dimension into the republican ‘cult of martyrdom’, as Kathleen is typically represented as a suffering, dispossessed woman for whom Irish men must sacrifice their lives.339 Therefore, the spirit of Ireland was represented by the symbol of a suffering woman. Within some sectors of the republican movement, this romanticised iconography of womanhood superseded recognition of women’s practical contributions to the Revolution. In particular, Eamonn de Valera, the first president of Dáil Éireann and the Irish Republic, is renowned for having had a dismissive attitude towards the contribution of female republican activists, once describing them as the most ‘unmanageable’ of Revolutionaries.340 As discussed in Margaret Ward’s seminal research, the symbolism of womanhood in the nationalist tradition had implications for women’s role in Irish political life. Due to the interlinkage of the concepts of womanhood and nationhood, women were believed to be representatives of the moral character of the nation, and their primary contribution to the national struggle was regarded by some leading republicans to be ‘spiritual’ rather than practical.341 Some nationalistic newspapers published in Limerick perpetuate this symbolic infatuation with womanhood, displaying a greater preoccupation with the moral character displayed by Irish
339 Pocock 2008, pp. 101—2. 340 Gerry Moriarty, ‘De Valera, Dillon’s ‘jaundiced’ view of women’s suffrage’, Irish Times 27 April 2012. 341 Ward argues that women were expected ‘simply to vote for whichever candidate Sinn Féin might put forward and nothing was said on what kind of free Ireland [women] wanted, or how a free Ireland could benefit women’, (Ward 1995, p. 125). Famous republican activist P. S. O’Hegarty described female republican activists as ‘practically unsexed’ and incapable of understanding the complexities of politics (Paseta 2016, p. 12).
62 women than their contributions to activism. Such concerns are particularly pronounced in republican newspapers’ commentary on the romantic and sexual conduct of women and girls in Limerick. Both the Factionist and the Soldier Hunter conceive of relations between Irish women and British soldiers as a microcosm for colonial enslavement. For example, in an article that largely praises Ireland’s denouncement of English cultural norms, the Factionist concludes that it is shocking that “apparently respectable Limerick girls” are talking to British officers and “doing their level best to hide their nationality”.342 Addressing the same behaviours, the Soldier Hunter positions itself as the protector of local women and girls against the corrupting influence of British soldiers. The newspaper decries the fact that even in “Catholic Limerick”, young, innocent girls are made victim to khaki-clad “demons in human form”.343 This policing of women’s conduct and endeavour to protect the ‘purity’ of Irish women is symptomatic of the republican movement’s conflation of womanhood and national character. The rhetoric of these newspapers indicates that women and girls were expected to exemplify the spirit of the nation by denouncing British influence and exhibiting Catholic principles.344 While the Bottom Dog and Workers’ Bulletin also endorse Irish nationalism and anti-English sentiment, their rhetoric generally does not conform to the gender representations prevalent in the contemporary republican movement. Instead of relegating women to a symbolic role, the Bottom Dog is concerned with the lived experiences and practical contributions of working women and pays particular attention to female workers’ grievances. For example, the newspaper specifically discusses the working conditions of the female employees of a local employer referred to as “O’Mahony”, stating that these women were made to work until ten pm and were “afraid they will lose their jobs if they tell the truth and shame O’Mahony”.345 In another issue, the newspaper accuses a local shopkeeper of religious discrimination against a female employee, claiming that this shopkeeper acted “true to his orange principles” in dismissing a “girl assistant”.346 The newspaper implies that this was an unfair dismissal by arguing “the fact that she is a Papist and different in politics to [the employer], undoubtedly, has something to say to it too”.347 In both examples, the authors of the newspaper use their platform in order to advocate for the rights of presumably young, female workers against their employers, particularly those who the authors perceived to be unable to advocate for themselves without personal risk.
342 The Factionist No. 2, Vol 5, 16 Aug 1917. 343 Soldier Hunter Vol. 1, No. 1, 23 February 1918. 344 The cultural and spiritual role women were viewed to fulfil in the Irish nationalist movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is discussed by Frank Biletz (2002) in his study of the ‘domestic nationalism’ of Mary Butler. 345 Bottom Dog No. 25, 6 April 1918. 346 Bottom Dog No. 24, 30 March 1918. 347 Ibid. The term “orange” is used to suggest that the shopkeeper is a protestant loyalist, while the word ‘Papist’ suggests that the employee is Catholic. Consequently, the Bottom Dog implies religious prejudice is at play.
63 These efforts to advocate for women’s rights are indicative of a desire to incorporate women into Limerick’s vision of revolutionary change. Unusually for leftist newspapers of the early twentieth century, the Bottom Dog, the Workers’ Bulletin and the Red Flag each explicitly include women in their conceptualisation of the proletariat, repeatedly referring to the ‘working men and women’ of the local community. For example, the Red Flag argues that “it is disgraceful to see men and women toil from early morn till eleven at night and after”.348 Similarly, the Worker’s Bulletin states that “every man and every woman must receive the full produce of his or her labour without deduction”, a small but significant sign of gender inclusivity in the authors’ political outlook.349 The inclusion of women in the local labour movement’s conceptualisation of oppression is best encapsulated by the slogan of the Bottom Dog, which was printed in the header of every issue of the newspaper: "We must look at life in all its aspects from the point of view of the ‘Bottom Dog’— the oppressed — be it nation, class, or sex." In addition to describing the proletariat in a gender-inclusive manner, labour activists in Limerick took measures to ensure trade union organisations incorporated women. Women were excluded from joining the majority of branches of the ITGWU nationwide, instead being relegated to a women’s organisation called the Irish Women Workers’ Union, led by Jim Larkin’s sister, Delia Larkin.350 The first ITGWU membership survey which included female members was conducted in 1921, in which year five per cent of members were reported to be women. Therefore, there is no data to indicate how many women were members of the union before 1921, but the figure can be assumed to be low.351 However, Limerick was one of a minority of counties which admitted women into its ITGWU branch during the War of Independence.352 As a consequence, women played a crucial and active role in local labour disputes, including the Limerick Soviet. Regrettably, since the Bottom Dog and other newspapers analysed in the development of this thesis were produced by anonymous authors, it is not possible to discern whether they give voice to the perspectives of women. Additionally, since the Bureau of Military History primarily provides testimony from combatants and members of major republican organisations, it has limited utility for understanding women’s perspectives on labour disputes. However, while it cannot be verified that women directly contributed to the Bottom Dog or other newspapers, it is evident that women played an active and significant role in the economic and political life of Limerick and were full participants in the general strike and subsequent workplace occupations. Following the imposition of the military zone in Limerick, it was the employees of Cleeve’s Condensed Milk and Butter Company who first announced strike action. This factory lay outside of the boundaries of the military zone, and so its six hundred workers, the majority of whom were
348 Red Flag Vol. 1 No 3, 27 November 1919. 349 Workers’ Bulletin No. 9, 28 March 1919. 350 Haugh 2019, p. 91. 351 Devine 2011, p. 73. 352 Haugh 2019, p. 91.
64 women, were directly affected by the new restrictions.353 Prior to the initiation of the general strike, Cleeve’s employees rejected the offer of permits that would allow them to pass through the military zone, instead announcing strike action would commence the following week. Some commentators have suggested that this decision placed pressure upon the Trades and Labour Council to endorse strike action.354 Consequently, the initial momentum behind the Limerick Soviet can be partially attributed to the important contributions of female workers. The significance of their role is recognised in James Casey’s recollections of the general strike, in which he acknowledges that “the women of Limerick, true to their grand traditions, played a noble part in the general strike, and the spirit of even the poorest was inspiring”.355 While Limerick’s efforts to facilitate and celebrate the practical contributions of women to industrial and anti-imperial action were unusual, they were not at odds with all strains of republican thought. In addition to endorsing socialism, Connolly is also associated with broadly egalitarian principles, including gender inclusivity. Connolly’s ideology not only united socialist and nationalist principles, but also addressed the ways in which gender-based forms of oppression could intersect with oppression based on class and nationality. In his pamphlet ‘The Re-Conquest of Ireland’ (1915), he stated that if the worker is a “slave of capitalist society, the female worker is the slave of that slave.” Having described the suffering and neglect of women living in poverty and facing industrial exploitation, Connolly concluded,
“None so fitted to break the chains as they who wear them, none so well equipped to decide what is a fetter. In its march towards freedom, the working class of Ireland must cheer on the efforts of those women who, feeling on their souls and bodies the fetters of the ages, have arisen to strike them off, and cheer all the louder if in its hatred of thraldom and passion for freedom the women’s army forges ahead of the militant army of Labour”.356
In this passage, Connolly applies the syndicalist principle of self-sufficient direct action and applies it to the needs of working women. In doing so, he deviates from the norm of relegating women to a symbolic status, instead portraying women as revolutionaries in their own right who must take the fore in militancy. These principles were enshrined in the 1916 Proclamation, a document produced by participants in the Easter Rising which asserted the creation of the Irish Republic in 1916. Connolly was one of the signatories of the Proclamation and his influence is visible in the text, which is addressed to “Irishmen and Irishwomen” and guarantees “religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens”.357 Connolly’s death is regarded
353 Cahill 2019, p. 74. 354 Ibid., p. 75. 355 Casey 2009, p. 192. 356 Connolly, “The Reconquest of Ireland” (1915), CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts. 357 “Proclamation of the Irish Republic”, 24 April 1916, CAIN.
65 by many commentators to have been a pivotal moment in the decline of such egalitarian principles, enabling a more conservative and patriarchal vision of republicanism to come to the fore.358 Therefore, by embracing and emphasising women as revolutionaries and members of the proletariat, Limerick’s labour movement revived principles that were becoming increasingly marginalised in Irish political life on a national scale. In emphasising the centrality of women’s role in industrial struggle, workers in Limerick deviated from the norms of both the wider trade union movement and much of the republican movement. Women were not accommodated in most trade unions on a national scale, even being excluded from the radical ITGWU, and certain leading republican figures preferred to relegate women to a symbolic role in the national struggle rather than applaud their practical contributions. However, in light of the prominence of women in local industrial life, activists in Limerick chose to propagate a more gender-inclusive vision of anti- imperial and industrial struggle. The Strike Committee and authors of the Bottom Dog explicitly included women in their conceptualisations of oppression and revolution in accordance with the ideals previously propagated by James Connolly. Specific struggles of women were voiced and incorporated into local newspapers’ critiques of capitalism and endorsements of direct action. Therefore, while “Larkinism” and Socialist Republicanism were pervasive in Limerick, local activists played a crucial role in adapting these ideologies to suit local circumstances, ensuring that their vision of change accommodated the needs of all sectors of Limerick’s labour force. This chapter has demonstrated that workers themselves played a crucial role in advocating for syndicalism in Limerick by adapting radical principles to the particular needs of Limerick’s working classes. While the ideas of leaders such as Connolly and Larkin were highly influential in Limerick, working people themselves were intrinsic to the dissemination of socialist and syndicalist principles within Limerick. Therefore, local activists facilitated the wave of labour militancy which culminated in the Limerick Soviet and subsequent workplace seizures.
358 Allen 2016; Barry Roche, ‘Loss of James Connolly ‘incalculable’ to Irish socialism – historian’, Irish Times, 4 May 2016; Caroline O’Doherty, ‘James Connolly’s vision for equal society “still to be realised”’, Irish Examiner, 16 May 2016.
66 Chapter 6 Conclusion
This thesis has examined various explanations for the growth of labour militancy in Limerick between 1916 and 1919. Through the evaluation of these explanations, it has demonstrated that the Limerick Soviet occurred at the intersection of pragmatic and ideological motivations as well as syndicalist and republican principles. This result challenges the assumption that radical motivations were of peripheral importance to the actions of the Trades and Labour Council and strike participants. In numerous analyses of the Limerick Soviet, the very labour force which seized control of their locality, produced their own propaganda and currency and compelled the nation to strike against ‘British military tyranny’ are presented as pragmatists with no sincere ideological commitments.359 Some accounts even imply that the architects and participants of the Limerick Soviet didn’t truly comprehend the radical ideologies they appeared to endorse. Liam Cahill suggests that the local population “subconsciously” absorbed radical rhetoric espoused by leaders, and, therefore, “spontaneously” utilised syndicalist strategies.360 However, he maintains that “few, if any, Limerick workers were either socialists or syndicalists”.361 This is an interpretation of worker militancy which has surrounded the Limerick Soviet since its creation. In a publication likely written immediately before the initiation of the general strike, a member of the Dáil ridiculed the notion of a Soviet system being used in Ireland, arguing, “Can any sane man really advocate the handing over of, say, Limerick or Cork to the local Trades Council? Anyone who knows anything of the inner state of Irish Labour must realise how uneducated and narrow-minded and incompetent the workers are as yet … they cannot be induced to read social literature”.362 Thus, the trade union movement was regarded to be insufficiently knowledgeable to conduct activism according to its own design. Therefore, upon the initiation of the general strike in 1919, citizens of Limerick were assumed to be acting either out of a passive, non-committal acceptance of the radical objectives of outside forces or out of strictly pragmatic interests. Close analysis of workers’ writings and rhetoric undermines the stereotype that working-class people are “unideological” by nature and only resort to revolutionary strategies under exceptional circumstances. While the creation of the Limerick Soviet was, in part, a direct response to the newly imposed military restrictions, workers’ interpretations of this military suppression and responses to its imposition were determined by their existing ideological frameworks. Contrary to the narratives of the official press at the time, population-wide compliance in the strike was not an act
359 D. Lee 2003, p. 295; Queally 2010, p. 5; Cahill 2019, p. 275, 293. 360 Cahill 2019, pp. 274—5. 361 Ibid., p. 274. 362 Fitzpatrick 1977, pp. 263—164.
67 of passivity, but an illustration of the pervasiveness of revolutionary ideas and fervent anti- imperialism in Limerick. Indeed, one of the reasons syndicalism appealed to Limerick’s population was precisely because the movement rejected the notion that radical labour activism requires ‘outside intellectuals’ to steer its course. The ITGWU proposed a model of activism which placed control over the methods and form of revolution in the hands of the workers themselves. The syndicalist movement in Ireland did not have a cohesive, singular vision for revolution, but was grounded in a Marxist model of economic relations which understood the interests of workers to be oppositional to the interests of the capitalist class.363 As demonstrated in chapter two, workers in Limerick were concerned about economic and industrial changes and felt their demands were side- lined within parliamentary politics. The ITGWU capitalised upon these concerns by providing an alternative model of self-sufficient activism. The strategies of “Larkinism” lay at the heart of the union’s operation, and from its inception the union had revolutionary aims, declaring that the proletariat would one day “become entitled to the fullness of the earth.”364 Therefore, the organisation promised a future in which workers’ rights would no longer be subordinated to the pursuit of profit or subject to the whim of ‘Middle-’ and ‘Top Dogs’ While poor living and working conditions inspired feelings of neglect by the political establishment, antagonistic attitudes towards the state were further exacerbated by political and industrial unrest prior to April 1919. The events preceding the general strike support Ralph Darlington’s thesis that strikes can themselves contribute to labour militancy by fostering antagonism between workers and authorities.365 In the months preceding the general strike, workers and the local authorities engaged in a cycle of protest and suppression, with each stage of the cycle fuelling mutual distrust. However, this cycle itself constitutes one part of a bigger picture of growing animosity between the local workforce and the local authorities. Newspapers report upon the repressive approaches of the police and employers towards local workers between 1916 and 1920, representing these forms of repression as evidence of the need for greater worker militancy. Workers in Limerick also witnessed first-hand the possibilities of direct action in the form of successful agitation by local branches of the ITGWU and large anti-conscription protests. Therefore, workers’ lived experiences – encompassing their working lives, living conditions and previous attempts at protest – encouraged them to view syndicalist strategies as a favourable and viable method of bettering their circumstances. However, the fact that their embrace of syndicalism was grounded in lived experiences rather than radical theory does not necessitate that their motivations were ‘unideological’. Rather, workers in Limerick encountered various ideologies which influenced their interpretations of local socio-economic conditions. Local agitators, fulfilling
363 Darlington 2008, p. 21. 364 Greaves 1982, p. 35. 365 Darlington 2013.
68 a role Darlington refers to as “worker intellectuals”, played an active role in perpetuating this radical re-framing of local socio-economic circumstances.366 Prominent members of local trade unions, including the authors of the Bottom Dog and the Workers’ Bulletin, reported upon specific disputes and struggles faced by workers, weaving them into a Marxist framework of class struggle and endorsing direct action as the solution. Therefore, while workers in Limerick drew inspiration from both national and international intellectuals and agitators, they were active agents in reformulating various revolutionary ideas in order to suit the particularities of their circumstances. In particular, Limerick’s unusually gender-inclusive vision of labour activism demonstrates that workers do not merely “subconsciously absorb” ideas provided by leaders but can amend and interpret ideologies according to the interests and circumstances of the local population. While workers’ ideas and strategies were rooted in the struggles of the local community, they were also clearly influenced by radical activism occurring elsewhere in Europe between 1917 and 1919. In the post-war period, societies across Europe questioned the norms and institutions which underpinned the organisation of society prior to the war.367 The Russian Revolution of 1917 inspired a belief that a radical re-structuring of society was within reach, and subsequent Soviets and unrest across Europe consolidated the perception that the capitalist system was in a vulnerable position. Workers in Limerick were not necessarily extremely knowledgeable about the details of labour unrest taking place elsewhere in Europe. However, the rhetoric of the Strike Committee and other socialist activists demonstrates that workers considered themselves to be part of a global proletariat and believed that the demise of capitalism was imminent.368 It is, therefore, evident that some participants in the strike had aims far more expansive than overturning local military restrictions. Instead, some workers invested revolutionary hopes into strike action and believed themselves to be contributing to a global challenge to capitalism. However, workers in Limerick did not only conceive of themselves as opponents of the capitalist class, but also opponents of imperialism. Therefore, while local workers repeatedly clashed with employers between 1916 and 1919, police officers stationed in Limerick were the subjects of particular animosity.369 While syndicalist movements in other nations commonly rejected nationalism, the ITGWU in Limerick perceived the struggle against capitalism to be intimately connected to the struggle for national liberation from British colonialism. Accordingly, workers’ revolutionary rhetoric incorporated mythology and iconography associated with Irish nationalism, including the veneration of historical national martyrs. Therefore, the imposition of the military zone was strongly opposed not just because of the inconvenience it caused workers, but because it was a mechanism of police suppression of the
366 Darlington 2008, p. 20. 367 Darlington 2013, p. 47. 368 Worker’s Bulletin No. 17, 8 April 1919; No. 7, 27 March 1919. 369 O’Callaghan 2011, p. 184.
69 republican movement. Whereas various other unions rejected militancy and continued using strategies favoured by the British trade union movement, the ITGWU embraced radicalism and militant republicanism. During the Limerick Soviet, the Strike Committee was explicit in its renouncement of imperialism, and James Casey defined its actions as a protest against “British tyranny”.370 Therefore, the strike wove together anti-capitalist and nationalist objectives, and can be regarded as an outgrowth of the ‘socialist republicanism’ movement. In the aftermath of the Easter Rising of 1916, Leon Trotsky provided an astute summary of the interweaving of socialist and nationalist objectives in Ireland, observing,
‘The young working-class Ireland, formed as it was in an atmosphere saturated with heroic memories of national rebellion, and coming into conflict with the egotistically narrow and imperially arrogant trade unionism of Britain, has wavered accordingly between nationalism and syndicalism, and is always ready to link these conceptions together in its revolutionary consciousness.’371
Accordingly, Limerick’s general strike constituted one part of a global movement of anti- colonial agitation which occurred after 1918. After the First World War, Wilson’s Fourteen Points invited optimism that colonised societies would soon obtain control over their own territories.372 Therefore, Ireland’s republican movement sought international recognition for its claim to national independence in 1918. While it was denied such recognition at the Paris Peace Conference, the nationalist movement maintained a conviction in its entitlement to self-governance and sought to forge connections with anti-colonial nationalist movements elsewhere in the world.373 Pervasive international anti-colonial activism framed the debate surrounding the Limerick Soviet as commentators regarded the strike to be emblematic of Ireland’s claim to self-determination. Participants in the Soviet also emphasised the anti-colonial aspect of their struggle, representing the British authorities as a foreign oppressor and denouncing the “enslavement” of the people of Limerick.374 Therefore, close analysis of the perspectives of workers in Limerick destabilises dichotomies which are evident in various analyses of direct action. Existing scholarship displays a tendency to evaluate the importance of different ideologies, implicitly assuming that they are competing rather than focusing on the various way different ideologies could intersect. However, analysis of workers’ perspectives illustrates that concepts of class-struggle and national struggle were deeply interwoven and direct action was viewed simultaneously as an anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist act. Secondly, some accounts of the broader syndicalist movement are inclined to dichotomise labour relations, perceiving of “leaders” and the “rank-and-file” as discrete groups with separate agendas. However, newspapers produced by workers in Limerick problematise this dichotomy by
370 Casey 2009. 371 Leon Trotsky quoted in O’Connor 2011, p. 193. 372 Gerwath and Kitchen 2015, p. 177. 373 Walsh 2021. 374 Strike Committee Proclamation: see ‘Figure 2’ in Appendix.
70 demonstrating that local activists played an intermediary role in the dissemination of revolutionary ideas, applying radical frameworks to local realities. Lastly, numerous accounts of the Soviet dichotomise ‘pragmatic’ and ‘ideological’ motives, most commonly asserting that the underlying aims of workers were fundamentally pragmatic. However, this thesis has demonstrated that while workers were certainly motivated by a ‘pragmatic’ desire to improve their living and working conditions, some perceived revolutionary change to be the most viable path to protecting their interests. Rather than dismissing their revolutionary commitment on the basis that it lacked theoretical engagement, it is necessary to recognise how radical ideas resonated with the objectives and experiences of working-class people. Having experienced poor living and working conditions, neglect by political elites, severe repression by the police and limited support from conventional unions, many workers in Limerick were inspired by the prospect of radical socio-economic change. The Limerick Soviet, therefore, can be understood as an expression of their optimism for a future in which working-class people would be empowered to advocate for themselves free from the suppressive forces of the ‘Top Dogs’.
71 Appendix
Figure 1
One shilling token produced by the Limerick Trades and Labour Council and printed at the Strike Committee’s headquarters at the Mechanic’s Institute, Limerick.
Source: National Museum of Ireland
72
Figure 2
Proclamation of End of Strike. Issued by the Strike Committee, April 24th, 1919.
Source: The Red Phoenix: Newspaper of the American Party of Labor
73 Timeline
1913 August: Dublin Lockout 1914 July: First World War begins 1916 April: Easter Rising May: Execution of ‘Easter Rebels’ 1917 July: Irish Convention begins 1918 April: Anti-conscription pledge signed November: Armistice December: Sinn Féin wins a landslide victory in general elections 1919 January: First meeting of Dáil Éireann. Beginning of Irish War of Independence April 6th: Robert Byrne is shot April 9th: It is announced that Limerick will be declared a Special Military Area April 10th: Robert Byrne’s funeral April 12th: Cleeves condensed milk factory employees agree to strike action against military restrictions April 13th: Trades and Labour Council declares a general strike April 14th: military restrictions come into effect April 25th: most strikers resume work (excluding those who require a military permit to go to work) April 27th: Strike Committee proclaims full resumption of work May 5th: Military restrictions are lifted
Sources: Liam Cahill 2019, pp. 298 – 303; ‘1912-1923 Timeline’ compiled by Dr Conor Mulvagh, UCD Decade of Centenaries.
74 Sources and Literature
Unpublished Sources
Dáil Éireann, 1919, ‘Democratic Programme’, National Library of Ireland, Seán T. Ó Ceallaigh
and the Ryans of Tomcoole papers, 1854-1983, [catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000824953]
(accessed: 11/05/2021).
Irish Transport and General Workers’ Union, 1918, “Irish Transport and General Workers’
Union Annual Report for 1918, Issued by the authority of the Executive Committee,
1918”, National Library of Ireland, William O’Brien (1881-1968) Papers,
[catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000628954#page/2/mode/1up] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
Mansion House Conference, 1918, “Ireland’s Solemn League and Covenant: a national pledge”,
National Library of Ireland [catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000020979] (accessed:
11/05/2021).
Published Sources
Bottom Dog, 7 December 1917 –1 June 1918.
Connolly, James, 1909, ‘Socialism Made Easy’, Charles H. Kerr & Co., Chicago, IWW archive,
[archive.iww.org/PDF/history/library/Connolly/SocialismMadeEasy.pdf] (accessed:
11/05/2021).
Connolly, James, 1913, ‘The Dublin Lock Out: On the Eve’, Irish Worker, Marxists Internet
Archive [www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1913/08/lckoutev.htm] (accessed:
12/05/2021).
Connolly, James, 1915, ‘The Re-Conquest of Ireland’, CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts,
[celt.ucc.ie//published/E900002.002.html] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
Daily Express, 16 April 1919 – 28 April 1919.
Daily Star, 28 April 1919.
75 De Valera, Eamonn, 1919, ‘Message to the Free Nations of the World’, Documents on Irish
Foreign Policy, [www.difp.ie/volume-1/1919/message-to-the-free-nations-of-the-
world/2/#section-documentpage] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
The Factionist, 17 May 1916 – 20 September 1917.
Geiser, Karl, 1918, May, ‘The Irish Convention’, The American Political Science Review 12 (2), p.
292—296.
Hyde, Douglas, 1904, "The necessity for de-Anglicising Ireland", in The Revival of Irish Literature:
Addresses by Sr Charles Gavan Duffy, KCMG, Dr. George Sigerson, and Dr Douglas Hyde, London,
p. 115.
Irish Labour Party and Trade Union Congress, 1919, ‘Report of the Twenty-Fifth Annual
Meeting held at Whitworth Hall, Drogheda’, Wood Printing Works, Fleet Street, Dublin,
National Archives of Ireland, [centenaries-ituc.nationalarchives.ie/wp-
content/uploads/2014/10/25th-annual-report-1919.pdf] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
Irish Republic, 16 February 1918 – 27 October 1917.
Jeremiah Cronin WS 1423, Bureau of Military History,
[www.militaryarchives.ie/collections/online-collections/bureau-of-military-history-1913-
1921/reels/bmh/BMH.WS1423.pdf#page=1] (accessed: 16/05/2021).
John M. Maccarthy WS 883, Bureau of Military History,
[www.militaryarchives.ie/collections/online-collections/bureau-of-military-history-1913-
1921/reels/bmh/BMH.WS0883.pdf#page=1] (accessed: 16/05/2021).
Manchester Guardian, 15 April 1919 – 27 April 1919.
Michael Brennan WS 1068, Bureau of Military History,
[www.militaryarchives.ie/collections/online-collections/bureau-of-military-history-1913-
1921/reels/bmh/BMH.WS1068.pdf#page=1] (accessed: 16/05/2021).
76 Michael J. Stack WS 525, Bureau of Military History,
[www.militaryarchives.ie/collections/online-collections/bureau-of-military-history-1913-
1921/reels/bmh/BMH.WS0525.pdf#page=1] (accessed: 16/05/2021).
New York Times, 20 July 1919.
Pearse, Pádraic H., 1913, ‘The Coming Revolution’, CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts
[celt.ucc.ie//published/E900007-003.html] (accessed: 12/05/2021).
Pearse, Pádraic H., 2015, ‘Ghosts’, CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts
[celt.ucc.ie/published/E900007-010.html] (accessed: 12/05/2021).
Red Flag, 27 November 1919.
Sinn Féin standing committee, 1918, ‘The Manifesto of Sinn Féin as prepared for circulation for
the General Election of December, 1918’, CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts
[celt.ucc.ie//published/E900009/index.html] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
Strike Committee, Proclamation of end of strike, April 24th, 1919, The Red Phoenix: Newspaper of the
American Party of Labor, [https://theredphoenixapl.org/2012/04/16/remember-the-
limerick-soviet] (accessed 12/05/21).
Soldier Hunter, 23 February 1918.
The Provisional Government of the Irish Republic, 1916, ‘Proclamation of the Irish Republic, 24
April 1916’, CAIN, [cain.ulster.ac.uk/issues/politics/docs/pir24416.htm] (accessed:
11/05/2021).
Wilson, Woodrow, 1917, ‘The Fourteen Points’, The National WWI Museum and Memorial
[www.theworldwar.org/learn/peace/fourteen-
points#:~:text=Most%20importantly%2C%20however%2C%20was%20Point,Fourteen%
20Points%2C%20and%20his%20League] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
Workers’ Bulletin, 27 March 1919 – 18 April 1919.
77 “One shilling token, Limerick Soviet, 1919”, National Museum of Ireland, [www.museum.ie/en-
IE/Collections-Research/Collection/Civil-Disobedience/Artefact/One-shilling-token,-
Limerick-Soviet,-1919/74684b26-794e-476a-b857-188984543470] (accessed 16/05/2021).
“The 1905 Proceedings of the Founding of the Industrial Workers of the World”, 1905, New
York Labor News Company, Marxists Internet Archive
[www.marxists.org/history/usa/unions/iww/1905/convention/index.htm] (accessed:
16/05/21).
Literature
Aan de Wiel, Jérôme, 2017, "Ireland and the Bolshevik Revolution", History Ireland, 25 (6), p. 38–
42.
Aan de Wiel, Jérôme, 2020, "The Shots that Reverberated for a Long Time, 1916–1932: The Irish
Revolution, the Bolsheviks and the European Left", The International History Review, 42 (1),
p. 195–213.
Allen, Kieran, 1990, The Politics of James Connolly, London.
Allen, Kieran, 2016, ‘James Connolly’s vision never realised’, Irish Times,
[irishtimes.com/culture/heritage/james-connolly-s-vision-never-realised-1.2556902]
(accessed: 15/05/2021).
Biletz, Frank A., 2002, "Women and Irish-Ireland: The Domestic Nationalism of Mary Butler",
New Hibernia Review / Iris Éireannach Nua, 6 (1), p. 59–72.
Boyd, Andrew, 2001, “Jim Connell and The Red Flag”, History Ireland 2(9),
[www.historyireland.com/20th-century-contemporary-history/jim-connell-and-the-red-
flag] (accessed: 16/05/2021).
Boyle, John W., 1988, The Irish Labour Movement in the Nineteenth Century, Washington, D. C.
Bryce, Colm, 2017, "Ireland and the Russian Revolution", Irish Marxist Review, 17 (6), p. 42–54.
78 Cahill, Liam, 2019, Forgotten Revolution: The Limerick Soviet 1919, a threat to British power in Ireland,
Cork.
Casey, James, 2009, "Limerick Challenge to British Tyranny", in Ruan O’Donnell (ed.), Limerick’s
Fighting Story 1916-21: Told by the Men Who Made It, Cork, p. 185—193.
Chase, Eric, 1993, ‘The Brief Origins of May Day’, IWW archive,
[archive.iww.org/history/library/misc/origins_of_mayday], (accessed: 15/05/2021).
Connell, Joseph E. A., 2011, “Inghinidhe na hÉireann/ Daughters of Ireland Clan na
nGaedheal/ Girl Scouts of Ireland”, History Ireland 5(19).
Connell, Joseph E. A., 2017, "The Irish Convention in Trinity College", History Ireland, 25 (6), p.
70.
Cronin, Michael G., 2012, Impure thoughts: Sexuality, Catholicism and literature in twentieth-century
Ireland, Manchester.
Darlington, Ralph, 2008, Syndicalism and the Transition to Communism: An International Comparative
Analysis, Abingdon.
Darlington, Ralph, 2013, "Syndicalism and Strikes, Leadership and Influence: Britain, Ireland,
France, Italy, Spain, and the United States", International Labor and Working-Class History,
(83), p. 37–53.
Devine, Francis, 2011, "‘Second Class Citizens Who Are Being Subsidised By the Men...’:
Women in the Irish Transport & General Workers’ Union and Workers’ Union of Ireland,
1945-1960", Saothar, 36, p. 73–86.
Dolan, Anne, 2012, "The British Culture of Paramilitary Violence in the Irish War of
Independence", in Robert Gerwath and John Horne (eds.) War in Peace, Oxford.
English, R., 2007, Irish Freedom: The History of Nationalism in Ireland, London.
Ferriter, Diarmaid, 2015, A Nation and not a Rabble: The Irish Revolution 1913-23, London.
Fitzpatrick, David, 1977, Politics and Irish Life 1913-1921: Provincial Experience of War and Revolution,
Dublin.
79 Fitzpatrick, David, 1980, "Strikes in Ireland, 1914—21", Saothar, 6, p. 26–39.
Fitzsimons, Fiona, 2014, "Military Archives", History Ireland, 22 (3), p. 45.
Foster, R. F., 2014, Vivid Faces: The Revolutionary Generation in Ireland 1890-1923, London.
Freeden, Michael, 2003, Ideology: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford.
Gallagher, John, 1981, "Nationalisms and the Crisis of Empire, 1919-1922", Modern Asian Studies,
15 (3), p. 355–368.
Gerwarth, Robert, & Kitchen, James E., 2015, "Transnational Approaches to the «Crisis of
Empire» after 1918 Introduction", Journal of Modern European History 13 (2), p. 173–182.
Greaves, Desmond C., 1982, The Irish Transport and General Workers’ Union: The Formative Years,
Dublin.
Green, Anna, & Troup, Kathleen, 2016, The Houses of History, Manchester.
Haugh, Dominic, 2006, "The ITGWU in Limerick, 1917-22", Saothar, 31, p. 27–42.
Haugh, Dominic, 2016, "Seán Dowling", in Emmet O’Connor & John Cunningham (eds.), Studies
in Irish Radical Leadership: Lives on the left, Manchester.
Haugh, Dominic, 2019, Limerick Soviet 1919: The Revolt of the Bottom Dog, Shannon, Co. Clare.
Hayward, Katy, 2009, Irish nationalism and European integration: The official redefinition of the island of
Ireland, Manchester.
Kemmy, James, 1972, May, "Part two: The Limerick Soviet", Limerick Socialist.
Kemmy, James, 1976, "The Limerick Soviet", Saothar, 2, p. 45–52.
Keohane, L., 2014, Captain Jack White: Imperialism, Anarchism and the Irish Citizen Army, Newbridge.
Keown, Gerard, 2019, "Knocking on the Door: The Irish Presence at the Paris Peace Conference
of 1919", Irish Studies in International Affairs, 30, p. 41–57.
Kostick, Connor, 2005, "Labour Militancy during the Irish War of Independence", in Donal Ó
Drisceoil & F. Lane (eds.), Politics and the Irish Working Class, 1830-1945, p. 187—207.
Kostick, Connor, 2015, “The Irish Working Class and the War of Independence”, Irish Marxist
Review, 1(14), p. 18—28.
80 Laffan, Michael, 1999, The resurrection of Ireland: The Sinn Féin Party,1916-1923, Cambridge.
Lee, David, 2003, "The Munster Soviets and the Fall of the House of Cleeve", in Debbie Jacobs
& David Lee (eds.), Made in Limerick Vol. 1, Limerick, p. 287—306.
Lee, Joseph J., 1989, Ireland, 1912-1985: Politics and Society, Cambridge.
Lynch, Robert, 2015, Revolutionary Ireland, 1912-25, London.
Lyons, Francis Stewart Leland, 1973, Ireland Since the Famine, London, available at
[archive.org/details/irelandsincefami00lyon/page/n3/mode/2up] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
McGarry, Fearghal, 2011, "‘Too many histories’? The Bureau of Military History and Easter
1916", History Ireland, 19 (6), p. 26–29.
Mitchell, Arthur, 1969, "Thomas Johnson, 1872-1963, a Pioneer Labour Leader", Studies: An Irish
Quarterly Review, 58 (232), p. 396–404.
Mokyr, Joel, 1980, "Industrialization and Poverty in Ireland and the Netherlands", The Journal of
Interdisciplinary History, 10 (3), p. 429–458.
Moriarty, Gerry, 2012, April 27, "De Valera, Dillon’s ‘jaundiced’ view of women’s suffrage", Irish
Times [www.irishtimes.com/news/de-valera-dillon-s-jaundiced-view-of-women-s-suffrage-
1.509488] (accessed: 12/05/2021).
Mulvagh, Conor, ‘1912-1923 Timeline’, UCD Decade of Centenaries [centenaries.ucd.ie/1912-
1923-timeline/#year-1] (accessed: 13/05/2021).
Murphy, William, 2014, Political Imprisonment and the Irish, 1912-1921, Oxford.
O’Callaghan, John, 2010, Revolutionary Limerick: The Republican Campaign for Independence in Limerick,
1913-1921, Dublin.
O’Callaghan, John, 2011, "A centre of turbulence and rioting: The republican movement in
Limerick, 1917-18", in William Sheehan & Maura Cronin (eds.), Riotous Assemblies: Rebels,
Riots & Revolts in Ireland, Cork, p. 175—191.
O’Connor, Emmet, 1988, Syndicalism in Ireland, 1917-1923, Cork.
O’Connor, Emmet, 2011, A Labour History of Ireland, 1824-1960, Dublin.
81 O’Connor, Emmet, 2000, "The Waterford Soviet: Fact or Fancy?", History Ireland, 8 (1), p. 10–12.
O’Connor, Emmet, 2002, James Larkin, Cork.
O’Connor, Emmet, 2005, "The age of the red republic: the Irish left and nationalism, 1909-36",
Saothar, 30, p. 73–82.
O’Connor, Emmet, 2011, "Syndicalism, Industrial Unionism, And Nationalism in Ireland", in
Steven Hirsch & Lucien van der Walt (eds.), Anarchism and Syndicalism in the Colonial and
Postcolonial World, 1870—1940, Leiden, the Netherlands, p. 193—224.
O’Connor Lysaght, D. R., 1979, The Story of the Limerick Soviet, April 1919, available at
[archive.org/details/thestoryofthelimericksoviet/page/n3/mode/2up] (accessed:
11/05/2021).
O’Connor Lysaght, D. R., 1996, “Letter: Trotskyism in Ireland”, Revolutionary History 6(2/3),
available at [www.marxists.org/history/etol/revhist/backiss/vol6/no2/lysaght.html]
(accessed: 16/05/2021).
O’Doherty, Caroline, 2016, May 16, "James Connolly’s vision for equal society ‘still to be
realised’", Irish Examiner.
O’Hegarty, P. S., 1998, The Victory of Sinn Féin: How it won and how it used it, Dublin.
Paseta, Senia, 2016, Irish Nationalist Women, 1900-1918, Cambridge.
Pelz, William A., 2016, A People’s History of Modern Europe, London.
Peterson, Larry, 1983, "The One Big Union in International Perspective:", in James E. Cronin &
Carmen Sirianni (eds.), Work, Community, and Power, Philadelphia, p. 49—87.
Pocock, Stephanie J., 2008, "Artistic Liminality: Yeats’s Cathleen ni Houlihan and Purgatory",
New Hibernia Review / Iris Éireannach Nua, 12 (3), p. 99–117.
Powell, Fred, 2017, The political economy of the Irish welfare state, Bristol.
Queally, Nicola, 2010, Rebellion, Resistance and the Irish Working Class: The Case of the ‘Limerick Soviet’,
Newcastle upon Tyne.
82 Roche, Barry, 2016, May 4, "Loss of James Connolly ‘incalculable’ to Irish socialism—historian",
Irish Times.
Rosenfeld, Gavriel D., 1997, "Monuments and the Politics of Memory: Commemorating Kurt
Eisner and the Bavarian Revolutions of 1918-1919 in Postwar Munich", Central European
History, 30 (2), p. 221–251.
Sheehan, W., & Cronin, M., 2011, Riotous Assemblies: Rebels, Riots & Revolts in Ireland, Cork.
Torstendahl, Rolf, 2003, "Fact, Truth and Text: The quest for a firm basis for historical
knowledge around 1900", History and Theory, 42 (3), p. 305–331.
Trouillot, Michel-Rolph, 2015, Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History, Boston.
Walsh, Maurice, 2021, February 28, "Ireland 1921: how republicans used their whiteness to win
freedom", The Guardian [www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/28/ireland-1921-how-
republicans-used-their-whiteness-to-win-freedom] (accessed: 11/05/2021).
Ward, Margaret, 1995, Unmanageable Revolutionaries: Women and Irish Nationalism, London.
Yeates, Padraig, 2001, "The Dublin 1913 Lockout", History Ireland, p. 31–36, available at
[www.irishlabourhistorysociety.com/pdf/The%20Dublin%201913%20Lockout.pdf]
(accessed: 16/05/2021).
Zeitlin, Jonathan, 1989, "‘Rank and Filism’ and Labour History: A Rejoinder to Price and
Cronin", International Review of Social History, 34 (1), p. 89–102.
“Timeline of the Russian Revolution”, British Library [www.bl.uk/russian-
revolution/articles/timeline-of-the-russian-revolution] (accessed: 13/05/2021).
83