Many of you will have noted that I have become consumed- to an ever-increasing degree over recent months- by the lives of the ordinary men, women and children impacted by the war. The poignancy of many of their stories, told through documents such as census returns, widow’s pension files, wartime memoirs and newspaper articles is often very difficult to read and can be even harder to write. I normally spend quite a number of hours each week looking at these cases. I find it hard to do this type of research without being deeply affected by it. Somewhere along the way this has developed into an extremely strong feeling of responsibility, bordering on obligation, to tell as many of these people’s stories as I can. Perhaps this has grown out of the fact that their stories have been largely forgotten in Ireland. Interest in their history was ‘left at the port’ when they emigrated. Many are only represented as numbers used to demonstrate the depopulation of this country during the Famine and it’s aftermath, their later lives are thus decoupled from their experiences in Ireland and by extension become almost an irrelevancy in the story of Ireland’s history. This realisation has grown hand-in-hand with a rising despondency about the continuing failure of the Irish Government to take serious steps to acknowledge the effect of the American Civil War on the hundreds of thousands of Irish people in America (and indeed a wider lack of serious recognition of the history of the Irish diaspora worldwide). It would now seem that the sesquicentennial may slip by with no serious efforts to commemorate any of these people in Ireland. I find this is all the more poignant when one considers that many Civil War soldiers took special efforts not to forget the people at home, even when facing the prospect of imminent death themselves.

The blogging world can take you down some unexpected paths. One the completely unexpected outcomes of setting up the blog was the invitation last year from The History Press Ireland to write a book based on some of the stories covered in it. I was delighted to take them up on the offer, particularly as only a few months previously some portions of the site had been plagiarised, one of the risks inherent in putting research up on the internet. The plagiarism in question appeared in a self published book (which you can see here) that contained a number of posts directly lifted from the site. Everyone who starts publishing material on the internet knows that such an occurrence is a possibility, and there is little that can be done about it- however in my view the rewards of blogging more than outweigh the risk. The work in question is no longer available from the major online bookshops, and in the meantime as a result of that History Press offer I have had an opportunity to publish in book form some of this work myself.

My book, titled the Irish in the American Civil War, came out towards the end of February and I am delighted to say it has already sold out. It is currently the subject of a reprint which will be completed by the end of this month. Many thanks to all of you who have already purchased it (I hope you enjoyed it!). It has received excellent coverage on a number of national radio stations (including RTE Radio One, Newstalk and Today FM) and also positive reviews in national newspapers such as The Sunday Times and The Irish Independent. It seems to be having a positive effect on raising the profile of the conflict in Ireland. One drawback is that the book is not as yet available on bookshelves in the United States; we are currently seeking publication options there and hopefully this can be rectified in the coming months.

The site has also brought me the opportunity to present a number of talks about the American Civil War around the country (you can seen an example of one of these presentations here). As anyone who knows me is aware, I love to prattle on about historic topics, none more so than the Irish in the American Civil War. I find that these talks often present opportunities to reach a different audience to those who read the blog. It also provides a forum to champion the case for greater awareness of the conflict and highlight the huge number of people from individual localities who were affected by the war, which in turn can heighten a sense of connection with those who emigrated in the nineteenth century. This is also something a number of colleagues and I (Robert Doyle, James Doherty and Ian Kenneally) are trying to achieve through the Irish American Civil War Trail initiative.

One other major benefit this site has bestowed on me is an increased knowledge of social media, its applications and its potential. When I sat down at my computer three years ago I had only the vaguest idea of what a blog was. The intervening years have taught me to fully embrace the potential of the internet and social media as an educational tool; it is undoubtedly the most powerful form of mass communication available to us today. I have been able to bring the lessons learned at Irish in the American Civil War to other blog sites I have set up that focus on heritage businesses and community heritage projects (by the way if you are interested in any of them, they are the Rubicon Heritage Blog, Bere Island Heritage Project, Midleton Archaeology & Heritage Project and the Know Thy Place Blog).

Perhaps the most significant lesson of all though is a simple one. I have discovered that I love the writing style that blogging engenders. Blogging can be all things to all people. There are no rules as to how you write, or to how many, or indeed few, writing conventions you choose to adhere to. Having written many papers in refereed and academic publications over the years (and such publications have their value and their place), I have found in blogging an opportunity to try to write in an engaging style for a general audience while still trying to be rigorous in the use of referencing. It is perhaps not the most usual of blogging styles (and can certainly be a bit time-consuming), but I hope it allows the site to stand up more as an educational resource. Blogging also allows you to mix and match; thus I try to combine the personal story aspect of the site with a strong resource component for those interested in the Irish in the American Civil War, with pages providing more detailed information on aspects such as Books, the Medal of Honor, Generals and Regimental Nativity.

Over the past three years this site has been a central part of my life, and I imagine and hope that it (and the Irish experience of the American Civil War in general) will remain so for many years to come. If it were possible I would quite happily spend all of my time researching and telling the stories of the Irish in nineteenth century America, but alas I have to be contented with a few hours at evenings and weekends. For those of you who read this blog, thanks for coming along on the journey so far, and for helping to make it so much fun!

Colors of the 20th Maine Infantry (Image via Wikipedia)

In 1864 Patrick H. Finney, a native of Loughrea, Co. Galway, arrived in Ireland to work as an agent, ostensibly recruiting men to work on industrial projects in the United States. The authorities quickly began to suspect that this was just a cover story, and that in reality Finney was looking for men to serve in the Union army. That such activities might occur is hardly surprising, given the large bounties available at this point in the war for enlistment- there were potentially big profits to made. Finney was barely off the boat before the police began to monitor him; the Sub-Inspector of the Constabulary in Galway reported that ‘steps have been taken to watch the man’s movements.’  That January he was arrested in Loughrea on suspicion of breaching of the Foreign Enlistments Act, which made it illegal in British territories to recruit for service in foreign armies. However there was not enough evidence to hold the Galway man, and he was soon released. (1)

Unperturbed, Finney continued to travel around Ireland to gain recruits. He remained under suspicion, and somewhat foolishly failed to keep a low profile. On 28th January he was brought to court in Dublin by William Pike, who alleged that Finney owed him money. A Mr. McKenna took the stand as a witness for Pike, and stated that Finney was hoping the men he recruited would join the Union army:

…Finney, after his return from Galway, said he wanted tip-top men…Finney showed him [McKenna] the bounty that was being given for the American army, and from some conversation with him he believed that that was the purpose for which he wanted the men; Finney said he conceived they would all join the army when they saw the amount of wages and the bounty that were being given..’ (2)

Despite this evidence Finney was able to produce documentation which showed he intended to recruit only for businesses, and so he escaped sanction. He continued his work. On 16th February 1864 it was reported to the Dublin Metropolitan Police that he had recruited 70 men around the Loughrea-Galway area. Finney next set up an office in the back room of a cottage on Guild Street in Dublin, where he continued to sign up more men. They had been offered free passage, steady work, and the equivalent of £2 a month with board and two new suits a year. The text of the declaration that each man signed survives, and is worth reproducing in full:

We, the undersigned, hereby agree with Patrick H. Phinney [Finney], that in consideration of the said Patrick H. Phinney advancing the money necessary for the payment of our respective passages to Boston, in the United States of America.- that we, each of us hereto signing our names (or making our marks in presence of witnesses), hereby agree with said P.H. Phinney, that we will on our arrival at Boston aforesaid, commence to labor for said Patrick H. Phinney or his assigns, either on the Charlestown waterworks, in the City of Charlestown, or the Webster and Southbridge Railroad, in the employ of Wall and Lynch; or the Boston, Hartford and Erie Railroad, in the employ of E. Crane, in the State of Massachusetts; or the Pacific Railroad; or the Bear Valley Coal Company, in the employ of George P. Sanger; or the Franklin Coal Company, in the employ of E.C. Bates, in the State of Pennsylvania. 

And we hereby agree that we will, each of us hereto signing as aforesaid, continue to labour and work to our best ability for the said P.H. Phinney, or his assigns, for the term of twelve months, from the date of our arrival in said Boston, for and at the rate of ___ dollars per month, in addition to our board and lodging, which is to be furnished to us by the said P.H. Phinney.

And we each of us hereby agree that we will repay to said P.H. Phinney, or to his assigns, the amount which will have been paid by the said P.H. Phinney, or his assigns, for each of our passages to Boston as aforesaid, and also those of us who shall have had our inland passages paid for us by the said P.H. Phinney, or any other advances which may have been made to us by the said P.H. Phinney, or that the same shall be deducted from or repaid from our wages first earned as aforesaid, and paid to said P.H. Phinney or his assigns by our employers.

It is understood that the wages aforesaid of each of us will commence within one week after our arrival in Boston, or as soon as we commence work. (3)

In all 102 men agreed to travel from Dublin. Finney instructed them to proceed to the Office of Mr. Delany at 13, North Wall, where they were given tickets for their passage to the United States via Liverpool. Although suspicious, the authorities were unable to procure enough evidence of Finney’s real intentions to prevent their departure. The men set sail from Liverpool aboard the Nova Scotia bound for Portland in Maine, from where they were to proceed by train to Boston. The Nova Scotia arrived in Portland on 9th March, 1864. Seven of the men got not further, apparently coerced into the ranks of the famous 20th Maine. The majority got as far Boston, where they were soon informed that there was no work to be had. It was put to them that perhaps they might like to enlist in the 28th Massachusetts. The actions in both Portland and Boston caused consternation among the local Irish-American populations, and became a major news story. Part Two of the post will examine the fate of the men after their arrival- particularly those who went to war with the 20th Maine- and the political tug of war that their cause created. (4)

(1) Hernon 1968:31, North American Correspondence 1864: 5 (2) North American Correspondence 1864:6, Hernon 196832; (3) North American Correspondence 1864: 2-3, 13, Sydney Morning Herald; Hernon 1968:32; (4) North American Correspondence 1864:13;

References

Hernon, Joseph Jnr. 1968. Celts, Catholics and Copperheads: Ireland Views the American Civil War.

North American Correspondence N0.8, 1864 Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty. Correspondence Respecting Recruitment in Ireland For The Military Service of the United States.

Sydney Morning Herald 23rd June 1864. Recruiting in New York.

A History of Ireland in 100 Objects promises to be a major book for many years to come, and does a fine job of providing an overview of the island’s history. However, one thing the book does not do (and doesn’t claim to do) is tell the story of the Irish people. Few of the 100 objects relate to the history of the Irish diaspora, and those which do tend not to follow them beyond Ireland’s shores. A ‘History of the Irish’ would include the stories of not only the Irish on this island, but also those millions who made new lives in countries around the globe. Ireland is a country where the term ‘diaspora’ is often used, a consequence of our long history of emigration. These emigrants need to be fully incorporated into the history of Ireland and the Irish.

The economic collapse recently suffered by the Irish State has heralded a new interest in Ireland’s diaspora. This has principally been driven by economic necessity; the millions world-wide who can claim Irish heritage are a huge potential financial resource who could provide assistance in the country’s hour of need. In an effort to tap into this resource initiatives have been launched such as the Global Irish Economic Forum and The Gathering. These moves are largely positive, but it does seem at times that Ireland views the obligations of the diaspora as inward only. We forget that we have outward obligations to our diaspora, particularly in regard to remembering and acknowledging their histories, and preserving their memory. All too often major events that profoundly affected them (such as the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War) pass virtually unnoticed on Irish shores.

I have previously discussed on this site how we have a tendency in Ireland to ‘leave our emigrants at the port’. One example of this is how we deal with the Famine. Although we commemorate and remember those who died and those who were forced to leave during that great tragedy, the lives of those emigrants once they departed the island tends to illicit only sporadic interest. We have successfully divorced the experiences of those who endured the Great Famine from the very same people who lived out the remainder of their lives in countries such as the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. This separation of memory blinds us to the true consequences the Famine had for many; for example for thousands the failure of the potato in Ireland in the 1840s set them on a path that would end in their (or one of their children’s) deaths on an American battlefield in the 1860s. The result of this insular view is that the histories of generations of the Irish diaspora in different countries around the globe have become hidden in Ireland, and virtually unknown to many of her citizens.

Our failure to learn or seek to understand the history and experiences of our diaspora is not just a failing on the part of the Government and state agencies. Our citizens are taught little about the diaspora in the country’s school history curriculum, which concentrates largely on the story of the Irish in Ireland. Given the fact that history appears to be on the verge of being made optional for the Junior Certificate future generations are doomed to learn even less. The problem can also be seen among historians. Dr. Enda Delaney of the University of Edinburgh argues that it is time for Irish historians to move from what he terms ‘island-centric history’ towards a global history. He also observed that many studies ‘chart the causes and extent of emigration in synthetic surveys, but the coverage invariably ends with the tearful farewells at Irish ports.’ (1)

Why does any of this matter? It matters because Ireland is a country that has experienced large-scale emigration for generations; to fully tell the story of our people we have to start to include those who lived their lives outside of Ireland. The numbers alone demand it. Dr. Delaney presents some revealing figures in this regard. In 1851 the population of Ireland stood at 6,552,000, but a further 1,986,000 Irish-born people lived in the U.S., Canada, Australia and Britain that year. The figures for 1871 are even more startling. While 5,412,000 people called Ireland home, a staggering 3,068,000 Irish-born people lived abroad in the aforementioned countries- over 35% of the entire Irish-born population of the world at that time. These huge numbers of Irish people have lost their voices in Irish history. We need to let them speak, and by so doing finally understand what the Irish diaspora really represents for Ireland and her people. (2)

(1) Delaney 2011: 84-85; Delaney 2011: 85;

I am grateful to Dr. Irial Glynn of the UCC Emigre Project for bringing Dr. Delaney’s article and the Diaspora Strategies report to my attention.

References & Further Reading

Delaney, Enda 2011. ‘Our Island Story? Towards a Transnational History of Late Modern Ireland’ in Irish Historical Studies 37, 148, pp. 83-105.

Delphine A., Boyle M. & Kitchin R. 2009. Exploring Diaspora Strategies: An International Comparison. Workshop Report, NUI Maynooth.

Recruiting Poster for the Excelsior Brigade (Civil War Treasures from the New York Historical Society)

DEMOCRATS IN THE CIVIL WAR

The Fight Was for the Union, Not for the Abolition of Slavery.

To the Editor of the Sun–Sir: Your correspondent of Nov. 2, Dr. Isidor Singer, said: “Hundreds of thousands of noble American patriots, forty years ago, laid down heroically their lives in order to free the negroes from the fetters of slavery.”

Not a life was so sacrificed or “laid down,” except in the cases of John Brown and the Lovejoys and their followers before the war.

The platform upon which Lincoln was elected in 1860 declared no intention of freeing the slaves; and Lincoln, probably, would not have run on one that did. The party that elected him only proposed to confine slavery within the bounds where it existed, and not to permit its extension to any new state or territory, and it was upon these lines the war was conducted until it became evident that the entire white male population of the seceding states could take the field, so long as they had something like four million of slaves at home to till the soil and care for the wives and children of the fighting men. 

We even returned escaping slaves to their masters, and it was not unusual to see a fugitive repossessed by a claimant right in our camps. 

If my memory is correct, it was General Butler who first recognized the folly of this course, and refused to return escaping slaves, on the ground that they were contraband of war, just as powder, shot, provisions, medicines or any other necessities would be. 

The president did not sign the emancipation proclamation until (and then reluctantly) it was apparent that we could not conquer the  Confederates, at least for an indefinite time, unless we converted their four millions of slaves into allies of our own; and it was a problem whether an announced intention to “free the niggers” wouldn’t discourage enlistments and stimulate desertions to such a degree as to offset the advantage of the proposed step.

The intimation of Dr. Singer that it was the Republicans, and not in any degree the Democrats, who won the right for the Union is ridiculous to one cognizant of all the facts at the time.

Was the Tammany Regiment, organized in the same building where the Sun is now published, and which left so large a percentage of officers and men on the field, made up of Republicans?

Were there any Abolitionists to be found in the Excelsior, or Sickles, brigade? Or, for instance, in the first five regiments from Connecticut, including General, then Lieutenant, Hawley’s?

The claim of the Republicans to have been Abolitionists came at a later date. 

Their call upon the gratitude of the negroes and the admiration of mankind for having put an end to slavery in this country is unworthy of consideration. They did, to be sure, start the movement which had that result ultimately, but they foresaw that result as little did the cow that kicked over the lantern and started the great fire of Chicago. –W.J.L.D., in New York Sun, Nov. 12.

References

Augusta Chronicle 16th November 1903. Democrats in the Civil War: The Fight Was for the Union, Not for the Abolition of Slavery.

Draft Rioters Burn the Colored Orphans Asylum, New York, July 1863 (Harper’s Weekly/Library of Congress)

It is perhaps inevitable that we tend to view the majority Irish attitude of the 1860s towards African-Americans, slavery and emancipation with modern eyes and with modern sensibilities. As a result we are rightly disgusted and horrified at the level of latent racism prevalent in Irish-American communities of the war-era. However, it is often an affliction of modern society to view the past with a degree of over-confident righteousness, confident in our convictions that we would have done differently had we been alive. Such a superficial view does the past (and those who lived it) an injustice, and ultimately falls short of revealing any true understanding of the realities which led to the views expressed by historic communities. There were numerous factors at play that affected the dynamic between Irish and African-Americans in the nineteenth century, all of which are worthy of detailed consideration. This melting pot of ’causes’ includes elements as diverse as poverty, education, social status, discrimination, religion, constitutionality, political affiliation, survival and even fear.

There is little doubt that unique factors influenced Irish attitudes towards African-Americans from almost the moment they stepped off the boat in the United States. This was recognised by none other than Frederick Douglass, himself a former-slave who knew the Irish well, having travelled through Ireland in the mid-1840s (where he befriended Daniel O’Connell, a stalwart proponent of slave emancipation):

‘The Irish, who, at home, readily sympathize with the oppressed everywhere, are instantly taught when they step upon our soil to hate and despise the Negro. They are taught to believe that he eats the bread that belongs to them. The cruel lie is told them, that we deprive them of labor and receive the money which would otherwise make its way into their pockets. Sir, the Irish-American will one day find out his mistake. He will find that in assuming our avocation, he has also assumed our degredation. But for the present we are the sufferers. Our old employments by which we have been accustomed to gain a livelihood are gradually slipping from our hands. Every hour sees us elbowed out of some employment to make room for some newly-arrived emigrant from the Emerald Isle, whose hunger and color entitle him to special favor. These white men are becoming house-servants, cooks, stewards, waiters and flunkies. For aught I see they adjust themselves to their stations with all proper humility. If they cannot rise to the dignity of white men, they show they can fall to the degredation of black men. But now, sir, look once more! While the colored people are thus elbowed out of employment, while a ceaseless enmity in the Irish is excited against us, while state after state enacts laws against us, while we are being hunted down like wild beasts, while we are oppressed with a sense of increasing insecurity, the American Colonization Society, with hypocrisy written on its brow, comes to the front, awakens to new life, and vigorously presses its scheme for our expatriation upon the attention of the American people. (1)

Frederick Douglass as he appeared at the time of his visit to Ireland in the 1840s (Art Institute of Chicago)

Douglass has identified two of the major drivers that led to conflict between the Irish and African-Americans. Discrimination immediately placed Irish immigrants at the base of the white social order, where they necessarily viewed freed African-Americans as their closest social rivals. In turn, this led to the two communities often directly competing for employment. In such circumstances, the Irish often felt they had to turn to their one ‘advantage’ in mid-nineteenth century America- their white skin.

Another strong factor at play was Irish support for the Democratic Party. The Democrats opposed the Emancipation Proclamation, but had won Irish support through their pro-immigrant outlook and by welcoming the Irish vote into their ranks, at a time when the Irish were experiencing political discrimination from the likes of the ‘Know-Nothings’ in the 1850s. The Democratic strategy towards the Irish was not necessarily a platform shared by many in the Republican Party, or indeed by some of the most vocal proponents of emancipation. Herein lies another of the dualities that can be difficult to comprehend across 150 years of history. Some of those who had a progressive view towards the emancipation of the slaves nonetheless harboured strong anti-Catholic, and often as a result, anti-Irish, views. An example of this can be seen in Henry Ward Beecher. A Protestant clergyman and abolitionist, Beecher was also an advocate of female suffrage. His sister was Harriet Beecher-Stowe, who wrote the most influential of mid-nineteenth century anti-slavery novels, Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Despite these impressive progressive credentials, Beecher’s view towards the Irish did not match his other beliefs. Neither did his opinion necessarily dim with the passage of years. The New York Times reported on one of his sermons from Plymouth in 1882:

Mr. Beecher was not opposed to immigration. He wanted it. But there was one tide of immigration that made us trouble. He might as well speak plainly. He meant the Irish. The Irish vote gave a great deal of trouble in New York and Brooklyn. The mercurial Irish race stood alone. They were “the most admirable people that ever abominated the earth.” They had been the ablest destroyer of nations that ever existed, but they had never built a nation. The Irish, pure and simple and unadulterated as they came to us, were the greatest trouble to us. By and by they would prove one of the most enriching elements that ever came among us. Yet, good as they were in labor, they did make trouble in our municipal governments. “Thank God,” added Mr. Beecher, “we are able in our youth to stand it, and Ireland has not many more to send us.” (2)

Such remarks highlight the complex views that some abolitionists held. That they vocalised them in an anti-Catholic and often anti-Irish way helped to increase the antipathy with which they were held by many among the Irish community. Beecher’s 1882 sermon also reveals that despite Irish service in the American Civil War, there was still much work to do in order for the Irish community to cast off the shadow of the 1863 Draft Riots and be fully accepted in the United States.

Henry Ward Beecher, Clergyman and Emancipationist (Library of Congress)

It is also important to understand when looking at the Irish relationship with African-Americans that racism towards the black community was pervasive in virtually all aspects of mid-nineteenth century white American society, both north and south. The issue was far from just an Irish problem. Indeed the majority of American whites grew up believing in their racial superiority. Even many of those who supported emancipation of the slaves did not feel that African-Americans were in any way equal to them. Nonetheless, the factors that influenced Irish attitudes often produced an extreme intolerance of emancipation and racism. The New York Irish-American provided an exemplar of this in an article on 7th March, 1863:

NEGRO SOLDIERS

The Tribune, last week, went into exstacies over a report furnished by one of its own correspondents, that 5,000 negro soldiers from Gen. Hunter’s Department were about to make a raid into one of the most populous districts of the South. The impending blow was represented- in all the terrors of double-leaded type- as “irresistible as the avalanche;” and as the summing up of the whole it was declared that now, at last, the Republic was about to strike at the heart of the rebellion: the picture being framed in the usual artistic manner of the Tribune, with roaring cannons, trumpets, and the “Proclamation of Freedom.” 

Had the editors of the Tribune been a little better versed in the geography of the country, they might have known that the entrances to the most “populous districts of the Department of the South” are such ports as Charleston and Savannah, which are not available to us just yet. And, moreover, if the Tribune people were not so painfully afflicted with nigromania (or “nigger on the brain,” as George Francis Train calls it,) they would be aware that 5,000 half savage, undisciplined negroes are the most unlikely material to ensure success where 50,000 disciplined whitemen, led by able Generals, and backed by a powerful fleet, have effected absolutely nothing. The assumption of negro superiority is not flattering to the readers of the Tribune: but it may be safely doubted whether they have sense enough left to feel the slur cast upon them. The sober truth, however, is that the whole affair is one of the “romances” by which the Abolition organ amuses its dupes. The only negro corps that Gen. Hunter, with all his efforts, has been able to raise, does not number even one thousand: and their most remarkable feat has been to scuttle under hatches, when the steamer on which they were reconnoitering was fired on by the rebels. The “irresistible avalanche” of the 5,000 had no more reality than had Greeley’s “ninety thousand,” who have never yet “smelled battle,” or the “swarms” of Governor Andrew, whose appearance on the highways of Massachusetts we have yet to witness.” (3)

Despite knowledge of the factors that led to attitudes such as the one expressed by the Irish-American, such pieces are nonetheless difficult to read today without being shocked by the level of racism exhibited.

In future posts I will seek to further explore the causes of views such as these among the Irish community. I hope to look at many of the factors outlined above in further detail (poverty, education, social status, discrimination, religion, constitutionality, political affiliation, survival, fear) and also examine the views of some prominent Irishmen on the issue, such as Thomas Francis Meagher, Michael Corcoran, Daniel O’Connell and John Mitchel. I will also seek to draw out the views of ordinary Irish soldiers, north and south, wherever they discussed the issues of slavery, emancipation and African-Americans. It is also important to recognise that by no means all Irish were opposed to emancipation (Colonel Patrick Guiney of the 9th Massachusetts Infantry is but one notable example) and these men too will figure in future posts on the subject.

For any of us interested in the Irish experience of the American Civil War, it is important to address the Irish reaction to emancipation from late 1862 onwards. This is best achieved through an examination of the historical record in a search for the factors that influenced that reaction- hopefully allowing us to come to a fuller understanding of this complex question.

(1) Douglass 1892 (2003 Dover Reprint):214; (2) New York Times 27th March 1882; (3) New York Irish-American 7th March 1863;

References & Further Reading

Douglass, Frederick 1892 (2003 Dover Reprint). The Life and Times of Frederick Douglass

New York Times 27th March 1882. Beecher On The Chinese And His Poor Opinion of The Irish Immigrants

New York Irish American 7th March 1863. Negro Soldiers

Civil War Trust Emancipation Proclamation Page

National Archives Emancipation Proclamation

Related articles

• Emancipation Images, 150 Years Later (3quarksdaily.com)

Irish troops on parade (KFOR – Photo by OR3 J Reilly, Irish Army)

I admit to having mixed feelings regarding this event. While it is fantastic that the Irish State will have some representation and I hope it is a great success, it is also an opportunity lost. A small color-guard and a handful of dignitaries is perhaps not the level of recognition that this event warrants from Ireland. The 150th anniversary of Fredericksburg presents the Irish community with its main opportunity to participate in the 2011-2015 commemorations, given that it is the engagement most associated with the Irish. It is my view that it is worthy of major recognition by the Irish Government, where an increased Defence Forces contribution and the presence of some senior officials might have been considered. The attendance of the President of Ireland would have been appropriate, as the event presents an opportunity for the State to formally recognise the effect the war had on the 1.6 million Irish-born people living in America at the time. It may be that Gettysburg will incite more of a reaction from the Irish Government, and if that is the case then such an effort would be welcomed. Given the desire of the Irish Government to welcome back members of the Irish diaspora for next year’s Gathering, and the recent criticism those plans have elicited, it might be prudent for our country to be seen to be taking a vigorous interest in one of the historical events that has most affected that diaspora.

In Ireland’s Forgotten Famine Generation I put forward my view that we in Ireland tend to leave interest in our emigrant population at the port, and historically we have shown relatively little interest in the culture and history of immigrant Irish communities in the countries where they eventually settled. I believe that the lack of interest in the experiences of the 1.2 million Irish who were living in the United States in 1861 and the dearth of acknowledgement from the Irish State of the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War are examples of this mindset.

It would seem to me that given the scale of Irish involvement in the American Civil War, some form of national memorial would be an appropriate means to highlight this element of our shared history with the United States. Not everyone agrees with this, and a number of replies to the Journal.ie piece demonstrated that. To recap, these included the following points:

• ‘Why do we need memorials to those who kill one another no matter which side they were on? It says much about human nature or at least how daft it is.’

• ‘But should we make a memorial for them? Not in my opinion. They fought a war which didn’t involve Ireland when they decided to leave the country.’

• ‘Still think any future recognition should be clear in honouring those Irish people who gave their lives to fight for the Union and the abolition of slavery in the American Civil War’

• ‘There are countless wars that Irish have fought in and haven’t received recognition, from Rhodesia to the Arab israel wars and almost all modern conflicts’

In response to these points, I would put forward the following:

• It is extremely important that any memorial to the Irish experience of the American Civil War is one not just to the soldiers, but the entire Irish population- men, women, children- that were affected by the events of 1861-65. The suffering the war caused stayed with many of these families well into the twentieth century.

• The vast majority of those Irish who were in America in 1861 had fled an Ireland which had been struck by Famine and where poverty was rife, and so had little choice but to leave- to fail to remember them because they were not among those who managed to stay behind would seem harsh.

• Referring back to the first issue, any memorial should seek to encompass the Irish community in America that was affected, not just the soldiers. There is no doubt that the prime cause of the war was slavery, and that the emancipation of the slaves was its great achievement. However, many Irish soldiers who died in Union blue gave their lives for the Union, and only the Union. The abolition of slavery was not seen as a desirable outcome for many in the Irish-American community, whether they fought for the North or South. It is also true that the vast majority of Irish supported the side where they lived, so Louisiana Irishmen tended to fight for the South, and New York Irishmen for the North. It is also important to understand the mid-nineteenth century Irish-American view of slavery, and seek to avoid viewing race relations purely through the spectrum of our modern sensibilities, which rightly finds the levels of racism that was an everyday part of life at this time abhorrent.

• The Irish are indeed famed for having served in many wars around the globe. Remembrance of the American Civil War Irish has disappeared amidst the other foreign conflicts in which the Irish have fought. This has reduced the Irish experience of that conflict in the popular imagination to the equivalent of the Irish service in locations such as eighteenth century Continental Europe. It is not. The scale of Irish involvement in the American Civil War is only comparable to the Irish military experience of World War One, a historical event which is receiving more and more attention (and State expenditure) with each passing year.

As I alluded to above, two news items in recent weeks have led me to further consider the issue of our remembrance in Ireland of the American Civil War Irish. The Irish State has declared that 2013 will be the year of The Gathering, twelve months of community organised events which will seek to bring the diaspora back to Ireland. In principle I agree with this initiative, and there is no doubt that communities around Ireland are making superb efforts to arrange events for the occasion. However, the proposal has come in for criticism recently from Irish actor Gabriel Byrne, Ireland’s former Cultural Ambassador to the United States. He felt that the proposal amounted to little more than an attempt by the Irish Government to exploit the diaspora. Byrne commented: the bridge between the diaspora and the people is broken and I tried to fix that for two years and it’s still broken…. Most people don’t give a shit about the diaspora [in Ireland] except to shake them down for a few quid. In contrast, when The Tánaiste (Deputy Prime Minister) Eamon Gilmore launched The Gathering in New York in September he had said that there was ‘probably nowhere more appropriate to launch this event’. Despite my hopes that The Gathering is a success, it is hard to see what has so far been done to show the diaspora in countries like the United States that they are important to Ireland and the Irish, beyond being a source of potential revenue.

This is in contrast to recent developments in Britain, where the superb organisation The American Civil War Round Table UK were recently featured on the BBC News website as they attempt to develop plans for a memorial plaque project to remember those from Britain and Ireland who fought in the American Civil War. The Round Table President, Greg Bayne, noted that these men ‘came from all parts of the United Kingdom and they included many Irish’. It is telling that despite the fact that Irish people were impacted by the war to a significantly greater degree than the English, Scottish or Welsh, Ireland has no equivalent organisation to the American Civil War Round Table UK, where interest in the conflict is clearly stronger. It is also noteworthy that we may well soon be looking to the UK for a memorial to the Irish involved in the conflict, as we await any such development in Ireland itself.

Perhaps it is time that in addition to enticing the diaspora to Ireland, we in Ireland also begin to meaningfully celebrate and commemorate the diaspora, be they from the United States, Australia, Canada or other countries. The obvious way to do this is to highlight the unique cultural identities, histories and experiences that these Irish communities have built up in their respective countries, and organise a series of events around them. Such an initiative would also present an opportunity for us to remember those Irish-born emigrants of the last 150 years- emigrants that have thus far largely been excluded from Irish memory.

By far the most interesting aspect of the Journal’s piece were the comments it provoked among some of its readers. Although many of the comments were positive, there were others who raised interesting questions, particularly regarding the propriety of a memorial in Ireland to those affected by the war. Some of the most thought-provoking are below:

• ‘Why do we need memorials to those who kill one another no matter which side they were on? It says much about human nature or at least how daft it is.’

• ‘But should we make a memorial for them? Not in my opinion. They fought a war which didn’t involve Ireland when they decided to leave the country.’

• ‘Still think any future recognition should be clear in honouring those Irish people who gave their lives to fight for the Union and the abolition of slavery in the American Civil War’

• ‘There are countless wars that Irish have fought in and haven’t received recognition, from Rhodesia to the Arab israel wars and almost all modern conflicts’

All of the above opinions are reasonable and valid, and provide an insight into how some people in Ireland may view a memorial to those affected by the Irish in the American Civil War. I will be putting together a post in the coming days where I look at each of these points in turn and offer my views- in the meantime what do you think?

The World War One Memorial Garden in Dublin. Ireland has yet to recognise Irish involvement in the American Civil War with a national memorial. (Image via Wikipedia)

The Famine Memorial in Dublin. Those emigrants who departed have lost their individualism in Ireland, their later stories subsumed into a general image of the global Irish diaspora. (Image via Wikipedia)

Perhaps the most stark example of this is the way Ireland views the American Civil War. At the commencement of that conflict 1.6 million Irish-born people lived in the United States, the vast majority having arrived as a direct consequence of the Famine. In New York City, which in 1860 had a population of 793,186, a little over one in four people were born in Ireland. In the region of 170,000 Irish-born men fought during the conflict, and tens of thousands most certainly died. Irish communities in cities such as New Orleans and Memphis experienced the war up close, as did those who bore witness to the New York Draft Riots in 1863. The effects of the conflict on the families of those lost or severely injured often lasted well into the twentieth century. The Irish experience of the American Civil War is a popular theme in the United States, where a large number of historians and enthusiasts study, commemorate and remember the huge influence the war had on the Irish community. (1)

This is in stark contrast to the way the conflict is viewed in Ireland. Despite the sheer scale of Irish involvement, the American Civil War is largely viewed as just another foreign war in which the Irish fought, often regarded alongside Irish soldiers who fought in the service of France and Spain. There is little idea of the sheer scale of that involvement, or of what it meant to the hundreds of thousands of Irish people, survivors of the Great Famine, who with the Civil War had to endure the second great trauma of their lives. Many had survived the failure of the potato and the coffin ships only to fall on battlefields in Virginia or Tennessee. Few publications appear in Ireland on the Irish experience of the Civil War, there are few memorials, and its impact is little discussed. Although some of the more famous Irishmen involved do receive a level of recognition (a particularly impressive example being Thomas Francis Meagher in Waterford), those who had a connection with Fenianism or Irish nationalism are far more likely to be remembered than those who did not (for instance Patrick Cleburne remains virtually unknown in the land of his birth). This is particularly noticeable in the extremely low-level of interest generated thus far within the country on the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the conflict.

Gone and largely forgotten? Though Irish emigration is remembered, the later stories of Irish emigrants is largely ignored in the Ireland of today. (Image via Wikipedia)

An interesting comparison can be seen in relation to those Irish who fought in World War One. For decades the memory of these men was disgracefully set aside as a result of later political developments. However, in the last fifteen years a welcome rehabilitation has occurred and the Irish experience of World War One is once more discussed and debated. Indeed it has now become a dominant theme, with a proliferation of books on the Irish in the conflict, a renewal of interest in regimental associations and increasing focus on the war in the regional and national media. It seems certain that between 2014 and 2018 a major series of events will occur in Ireland around the centennial of  that war. In the region of 200,000 Irishmen fought in that war, and somewhere in the vicinity of 30,000 lost their lives. As David Fitzpatrick has stated, it represented ‘proportionately the greatest deployment of armed manpower in the history of Irish militarism.’ There is only one conflict that comes close to this in the Irish military experience- the American Civil War- where Irish involvement almost mirrors the figures seen in the Great War. Yet the respective attention and neglect could not be more stark. (2)

What is the reason for the difference in attention these two conflicts receive? Firstly, World War One is more recent, and has become a major focus of commemoration across Europe, as the last veterans have recently passed away and the centennial quickly approaches. Irish veterans of that war left from Ireland and came back to Ireland, where as Irish veterans of the American Civil War did not. But perhaps the main reason is that families in Ireland today can directly associate with World War One, as many of their antecedents fought in it. Interest in an event such as the Great War naturally grows when one can view the conflict through the prism of a direct ancestor. The Irish who were caught up in the American Civil War do not have this advantage, because they do not have any direct descendants here. The finality of their departure from Ireland in the 19th century is thus accentuated; the 1.6 million Irish in the United States in 1860 became divorced from their homeland, and ultimately interest in their experiences faded in the land of their birth. It was for their Irish-American descendants to remember them, a role which they continue to do admirably.

The World War One Memorial Garden in Dublin. Ireland has yet to recognise the similarly colossal scale of Irish involvement in the American Civil War with a national memorial. (Image via Wikipedia)

It is saddening that what these emigrants endured after they left Ireland is not of more relevance for Irish people and the Irish State today. Our failure to appropriately recognise their continued Irishness after their emigration perpetuates the tragedy caused by events such as the Famine. Although Ireland is and always will be proud of her global diaspora, surely the time has now come for us to reclaim an interest in the experiences of those first Irish emigrants who created it.

(1) Ural Bruce 2006:13; (2) Fitzpatrick 1997: 388;

References

Bruce, Susannah Ural 2006. The Harp and the Eagle: Irish-American Volunteers and the Union Army, 1861- 1865 

Fitzpatrick, David 1997. ‘Militarism in Ireland 1900-1922′ in Bartlett Thomas and Jeffery Keith (eds.) A Military History of Ireland