exploitation and plunder; and his splendid sentimental and kindly nature
did have a modifying effect on the character of the brutal Saxon and if
much of the land of America in colonial days was claimed as the land of
the Saxon the sun that gave it national heat and light was Celtic love
of God, Celtic love of justice, Celtic valor, Celtic zeal, Celtic
intelligence that made it the greatest country on earth.
He who has read American history has read it in vain, if he does not
know that had it not been for the moral and physical aid given by not
only the Irish colonists, but by the people of Ireland, American
independence would not have been achieved. Washington, himself,
acknowledged publicly the great indebtedness to Ireland.
The admirers of the prefix and hyphen in American history probably had
in mind the attempts of that brilliant young Irish scientist, John
Butler Burke, to produce life artificially. The preface to Burke’s book,
“Origin of Life,” somewhat changed, is “Although it is not the object of
this book to lend support to the doctrine of abiogenesis or the
development at the present day of living from absolutely non-living
(Scotch-Irish) matter, the more hopeful, though as it must be admitted
less gratifying view to take is that we have arrived at a method of
structural organic synthesis of artificial (Scotch-Irish) cells, which
if it does not give us organic life such as we see around us, gives us,
at least, something which, according to (Eliot, Lodge, Fisk and others)
admits of being placed in the gap, or, as it might be preferably called,
the borderland between living and dead matter.” Dr. Burke says: “The why
and wherefore we may ask, but get no answer to; the how is our only
consolation; and even in that do the most careful steering to avoid the
pitfalls and precipices of error.”
The afore-mentioned “historians” did not share Dr. Burke’s doubt, but
went ahead and created a new set of cellular tissue and called it the
Scotch-Irish. With characteristic zeal and industry begotten of their
love of justice and fair play, “that the world may know” a Murray, a
Linehan, a Roache, a Gargan and hosts of others of beloved memory have
shed lustre on Ireland not only as men of Irish blood but as
disseminators of historical truths as to the priceless part taken by men
of Irish blood from the earliest days of the country’s history until the
present time for the permanency of American institutions and government.
In no man’s heart do the Stars and Stripes awake a more sincere and
ardent patriotism than the Irish-American.
Rev. Edward Everett Hale writes in the _Boston Daily Advertiser_,
January, 1852, the following:
“PROPORTIONS OF ORIGINAL RACES IN AMERICA.
“In writing these letters to the _Boston Daily Advertiser_, I
attempted to confine myself to the facts which directly affect
legislation or charitable action. There is, however, a curious
question as to the effect to be produced on national character by
intermixture of blood and race, produced by such large emigration as
we see. What I have said in my last letter has been carefully guarded,
so as to refer everywhere to the absolutely unmixed Celtic race. Of
its value intermixed I have spoken as highly as I could.
“An anxious question is asked, however, by men of the old American
blood, whether there is not an over-preponderance of the Celtic
element coming in upon us? I do not profess to answer the question,
how far the origin of the native American blood is Celtic.
“In what proportions do the Celtic and Gothic or Germanic elements
mingle in the Englishman of today (1852) and, of course, in the
American of today? Dr. Kombst estimates in 1841 that there are of pure
German blood in England 10,000,000. Of mixed blood where the Teutonic
prevailed in England and the northeast of Ireland, 6,000,000. Of mixed
blood, where the Celtic prevailed in England, Scotland and Ireland,
4,000,000. And of pure Celtic in Scotland, Wales and Ireland,
6,000,000.
“But Dr. Lantham, with more reason, I think, doubts the purity of any
Germanic blood in England, saying that ‘a vast amount of Celticism,
not found in our tongue, very probably exists in our pedigrees.’ And
in another place he says that in nine-tenths of the displacements of
races made by conquest the female half ancestry of the present
inhabitants must have belonged to the beaten race.
“I think the history of the Saxon invasions is such as to give color
to this idea in the case of England. And I am not sure, but what it
could be made out, that the American people, before the recent Irish
invasion, showed in their proportion of black-haired men of dark
complexion and other Celtic signs that as large a fraction as
two-thirds of its blood ran in the dark ages of the past in Celtic
veins. If this be so, if the proportion, two-thirds Celtic to
one-third Gothic or Germanic, is the proportion which makes up that
‘perfect whole,’ the ‘true American,’ which considers itself so much
finer than either of the ingredients, the recent emigrations furnish a
happy co-incidence with the original law. For five past years the
arrivals at New York, which are three fourths the whole, and represent
it in kind exactly, have been 547,173 Irish; 278,458 Germanic; 153,969
English and Scotch; 71,359 others. Now keep these 71,359 ‘others’ for
condiments in the mixture. There are Norwegians and French, Belgians
and Spaniards, Swiss and Italians, balanced against each other (and a
few Magyars).
“The English, of course, we need not count; but of pure Celts and pure
Germans we have to fraction just two to one; and in that proportion
are they to affect the blood of the American people.
“This computation which I had prepared before I read a courteous
article in the _American Celt_ of January 24, 1852, will, perhaps,
show to the writer of that paper, that we are not so far apart in our
views as he supposed.”
Mr. James Anthony Froude, in his history of Ireland, maligned the Irish
people and did much to prejudice the world against them. Previous to his
death he tried to undo the injustice he had done them. The following
letter from Mr. Philbrick, superintendent of schools, explains itself:
_Donohue’s Magazine_, August, 1855, taken from _Boston Transcript_
letter by Mr. Philbrick, superintendent of schools in Boston.
“James Anthony Froude, in his recent rapid passage across the country
on the homeward stretch of his round-the-whole trip, was interviewed
in New York and among other things was asked for reminiscences of his
visit to the United States.
“The reading of the notice of his interview revived the memory of an
incident of that visit, which is perhaps worth relating.
“During this visit, Mr. Froude delivered lectures in the principal
cities on the Irish question. The theory which he propounded and
advocated was, that the troubles in Ireland were not the result of bad
government at all, but of bad blood in the Irish race. But he was
anxious to get more light on the subject, if possible, and so, when in
Boston, he wanted to visit public schools which were frequented by
children of the Irish race. Accordingly, I took him to some boys’
schools and some girls’, where the children were almost wholly of
Irish parentage. At the last of these girls’ schools, of the grammar
grade installed in a splendid new school house of large size, after
passing through twelve or fourteen rooms, filled with bright,
well-dressed girls full of animation in their recitation in the
various branches of instruction, Mr. Froude asked: ‘Do you mean to
says that these are the children of Irish immigrants?’ ‘Yes,’ I
answered, ‘I believe there is not a single pupil in this school of the
Yankee race.’ ‘Well,’ he continued, ‘I must confess I’m staggered.’
‘Now,’ said I, ‘I will take you to a mixed school (boys and girls
being in separate rooms and classes), which stands on a spot that two
years ago was a mud hole in a marsh surrounded by poor dwellings,
mostly occupied by Irish immigrants.’
“After passing through most of the rooms in the fine building, in
which were neatly-dressed pupils in the most perfect order, earnestly
engaged in their work, we came to a boys’ room where a recitation in
history was in progress. Here he took a seat and proceeded to question
the class, from which he got very prompt and appropriate answers. At
length, he singled out a little tan-headed boy of the Irish
nationality and plied him with a lot of pretty hard questions, but
every one was answered with admirable promptness and accuracy. Mr.
Froude stopped, remained silent for a short time with his eyes cast
down as though in a profound study. He then addressed the boys again
and said: ‘My boys, where did you learn this?’ ‘Out of a book, sir,’
was the ready reply. ‘And where did you get the book?’ ‘Out of the
public library,’ was the answer.
“Mr. Froude then arose to leave and I said: ‘Now, Mr. Froude, I will
take you to the Girls’ High School, where you will find
representatives of the Irish nationality in a higher grade of
instruction.’ ‘Well,’ replied Mr. Froude, ‘you may take me where you
please; it makes no difference; I’m full; I can’t hold any more.’”
Spencer says: “The Irish had the use of letters long before the English,
and that Oswald, a Saxon king, applied to Ireland for learned men to
instruct his people.”
Camden says: “Ireland abounded with men of genius and erudition when
learning was trampled on in every other quarter of the globe.”
Plutarch calls Ireland, “Ogygia,” _i.e._, the most ancient isle.
Ralph Waldo Emerson says: “The sources from which tradition derives
their stock are mainly three. And, first, they are of the oldest blood
in the world, the Celtic. Some people are deciduous or transitory.
“Where are the Greeks? Where the Etrurians? Where the Romans?
“But the Celts or Sidonides are an old family, of whose beginning there
is no memory and their end is likely to be still more remote in the
future; for they have endurance and productiveness. They planted
Britain, and gave to the seas and mountains names which are poems and
imitate the pure voice of nature.
“They are favorably remembered in the oldest records of Europe. They had
no violent feudal tenure, but the husbandman owned the land. They had an
alphabet, astronomy, priestly culture, and a sublime creed and
precarious genius. They made the best popular literature of the middle
ages in the songs of Merlin and the tender and delicious mythology of
Arthur.”
The most ancient manuscripts in the world are in the Irish language and
the oldest Latin manuscripts were written by an Irishman.
The Irish language is as old as Hebrew and more ancient than Greek or
Latin.
Matthew Arnold made the statement: “If Celticism had not moulded England
she would not have produced a Shakespeare.”
There were a few Irishmen evidently in business in Boston before 1847–8.
The Columbian Centennial of May 12 and March 17, 1812, gives James
Magee, owner of Coffee Exchange House; William Barry, Dealer in Hats and
Furs; William Sullivan, Corn Hill Square, Sale of farms; J. L. Sullivan,
Manager of Merrimac Boating Co.; William Sullivan’s orations for sale;
James Barry, Fish, Pork and Lard Dealer; Walter Welsh, Real Estate.
THE IRISH IN RHODE ISLAND, TO AND INCLUDING THE REVOLUTION.
BY JOHN J. COSGROVE, PROVIDENCE, R. I.
When it was first suggested to me that I prepare a paper dealing with
some phase of the history of the Irish in America I decided that I would
take as my subject the history of the Irish in Rhode Island up to the
present time. My belief was that the part played by the men and women of
Irish birth or descent in the early history of our state was so slight,
and the facts relating thereto so meagre, that I could in a few words
deal with the early history of the Irish in Rhode Island, and could pass
on to their history for the last three-quarters of a century.
Upon beginning my researches I was at once convinced of my mistake and
soon learned that if I adhered to my original intention, instead of
preparing a short paper I would be obliged to write a large volume.
Therefore, I have taken as my subject: “The history of the Irish in
Rhode Island to and including the Revolution,” with the hope that some
abler Irish man or woman will, at some future time, tell the story of
the part played by the men and women of Irish birth or extraction in the
modern history of the “lively experiment” of Roger Williams.
In discussing the history of the Irish in America it is not our
intention to belittle the work of others, or to steal from other nations
the glories of their achievements; neither are we seeking to dim the
lustre of the Puritan crown, nor to call our own the mighty deeds of the
pioneer Pilgrims who landed in New England and conquered the wilderness.
We have no desire to turn Plymouth Rock into a Blarney Stone. We are not
going to assert that Roger Williams was the grandson of Fin Mac Cumbal,
or that the clam was first planted in Narragansett Bay by the founder of
Clan McFadden.
Our object is simply to record the deeds of the men and women of our
race in the making of America; to enable Americans to judge us in true
perspective; to tell the world what we Irish have done and are doing in
the upbuilding of this state and nation. We are trying to bring to the
minds of the country a knowledge of the fact that we have been here from
the beginning, that we have given our service and our lives for the
promotion of America’s happiness, that, by our brain, by our brawn, by
our courage, tenacity of purpose, morality, we have fairly earned the
right to the highest and best that America can offer to its devoted sons
and daughters. We seek to tear away the veil of ignorance that has
blinded many to our worth and to bring into relief a better picture of
our race that has too often been falsely depicted. We are proving our
claim, not by appeals to race prejudice or bigotry, but by
incontrovertible evidence. In the words of the American-Irish Historical
Society, we are laboring “that the world may know.”
There is a very erroneous impression in the minds of many, even in this
enlightened age, that the struggle for liberty in Ireland has been a
religious struggle, a struggle for the principles of Catholicity and for
these principles alone. Our fight is not a religious fight. It is the
fight for the liberties of a race, not a religion; for the right of a
distinct, ethnic entity to work out its salvation in the way best suited
to its temporal needs. “Nations have no hereafter, their reward must be
of this world”; neither have they religions as nations.
Many are also of the opinion that unless a man or woman is a Catholic he
or she is not Irish, though bearing an Irish name. Thus we see people of
other faith with the name of Sullivan or Murphy classed as
“Scotch-Irish,” that race with no existence, repudiated alike by Irish
and Scotch, and which someone has called the “Equinoctial Gael.”
Another fact to be borne in mind in connection with Irish names is that
many Irish men and women have come to America, and particularly to New
England, who, for one reason or another, bore names distinctly un-Irish.
Why this is so will be explained later.
FIRST TRACE OF THE IRISH IN NEW ENGLAND.
The first trace of the Irish in New England of which we have any record
is found in the story of the “Mayflower.” In his book, “Brave Little
Holland and What She Taught Us,” Rev. William Elliot Griffiths says: “In
the Mayflower were one hundred and one men, women, boys and girls as
passengers, besides captain and crew. These were of English, Dutch,
French and Irish ancestry.” History has established beyond the
possibility of doubt that Priscilla Mullins and John Alden were both
Irish.
Plymouth was founded in 1620. William Bradford, governor of the colony,
tells us that a ship arrived at Plymouth, 1626–7, and a large number of
passengers, “cheefe among these people was one Mr. Fells and one Mr.
Sibsie, which had many servants belonging unto them, many of them being
Irish.”
In Winthrop’s Journal it is stated that on March 15, 1636, a ship
arrived “called the Saint Patrick, belonging to Sir Thomas Wentworth,
Deputy of Ireland, one Palmer, Master.”
Soldiers of Irish birth or extraction had made their mark in the
colonies as early as the Pequot War, among them Darby Field and Daniel
Patrick or Gilpatrick. Field is mentioned as having explored the White
Mountains in 1642 with a band of Indians. (Winthrop’s Journal and
Sketches of Early Irish Settlers by Linehan.)
It is now necessary to turn to the history of England for an explanation
of why so many Irish came to this country, beginning in 1641, and why
some of them did not bear Irish names.
In the reign of Charles First there occurred what is known as “The
Revolution of 1641.” At that time many of the gentry of the west of
Ireland held their lands under what parliament claimed a defective
title. Charles, after promising the Irish that we would remove the cloud
on their title, immediately went back on his word, and, in order to give
his conduct some show of justification, had thousands of Irish men and
women tried on an absurd charge of treason and their lands and goods
confiscated. The history of England, gleaned from the records of the
House of Commons, tells us that in two days over two thousand Irish were
indicted, “tried,” convicted and sentenced for treason, or one for each
one and one-half minutes in a working day of twelve hours; a fair sample
of English “justice” in Ireland. The English army overran Ireland,
slaughtered a very large number of men, women and children, besides
shipping many thousands to New England as slaves. These exiles were
obliged to change their names and adopt English names.
After the fall of Charles First, Cromwell started a similar crusade in
Ireland. He also caused to be sent to the colonies many thousands of
Irish boys and girls who were given names different from those of their
fathers. Cromwell also shipped large numbers of adults to the colonies
from Ireland where they were sold as slaves. In 1652, the Cromwell
Commission recommended that “Irish women as being too numerous now be
sold to merchants and transported to ... New England.” In 1653 Captain
John Vernon contracted with Messrs. Selleck and Leader for 250 women of
the Irish nation and 300 men “to transport them into New England”; these
to be secured in the country within twenty miles of Cork, Youghal,
Kinsale, Waterford and Wicklow.
The women thus sold into slavery were to be given in marriage to the
colonists, as it was impossible to get English women to emigrate to the
colonies willingly. Sales were conducted and each man paid for his wife
as he did for his chattels at public auction. An interesting account of
the manner of conducting these sales may be found in the histories of
Virginia and in a popular book of fiction of a few years ago: “To Have
and To Hold.”
So brisk was this trade for a time that finally the ship owners, in
their greed, forcibly abducted some English women and children, and this
led to the stopping of the traffic.
We see, therefore, some reason for the fact that many people of
undoubted Irish origin did not bear Irish names, some of them taking the
names of their owners, and others dropping their Irish names to save
themselves from persecution. In addition to this, no ship could clear
for the colonies from an Irish port. She must first proceed to an
English port and thence outward. When she did clear all her passengers
were required by law to adopt some name other than an Irish one. Lest I
be accused of romancing I will quote the law of England of the time:
[Illustration:
JAMES THOMPSON, ESQ.,
Of Louisville, Ky.
Vice-President of the Society for Kentucky.
]
“An Act that Irishmen dwelling in the counties of ... go appareled
like Englishmen, and wear their beards after the English manner, swear
allegiance, and take English sirnames; which sirnames shall be of one
town, as Sutton, Chester, Trim, Skyrne, Corke, Kinsale; or colors, as
white, black, brown; or arts or sciences, as smith, carpenter; or
office, as cook, butler, etc., and it is enacted that he and his issue
shall use this name under pain of forfeyting his goods yearly.”
(Paternalism with a vengeance. If the law had required him to wear a
monocle in his left eye the picture would have been complete, and
instead of building railroads he could have married an American
heiress.)
We can from this easily perceive the policy of England: to wipe out from
the minds of the Irish all thoughts of nationality, and to exterminate
the race.
Many of these exiles, of course, obeyed the law, as being along the
lines of least resistance. The banished children did not even know their
right names; and thus we see the names of Smith, Carpenter, Chester,
Sterling, Kinsale, White, Butler, etc., borne by Irishmen. We shall also
see that names distinctly Irish were found in Rhode Island at that
period, demonstrating one of two things, or perhaps both: that many of
the Irish were smuggled out of the country without touching at English
ports, and that many others, on arriving in this country, resumed their
original names.
The popular histories of England and the colonies make no note of these
facts, but there is a more reliable source than the histories for
confirmation of these assertions, and that is the records of England. It
is one of the established customs of English law to sacredly preserve
all papers of this character, and it is from these, even more authentic
than histories, that we have discovered the facts.
Thomas Hamilton Murray, late Secretary-General of the American-Irish
Historical Society, has compiled a list of Irish names in the records of
Rhode Island, giving the years in which the men were known to have lived
here. These are all strictly Irish names and exclude those of doubtful
origin:
Larkin, Dunn, 1655; Casey, 1663; Kelly, Macoone, 1669; Heffeman, 1671;
Martin, Macarthy, Long, 1677; Devett, 1685; Malavery, 1687; Dailey,
1689; Linniken, 1690; Cary, 1693; Dring, 1696; Doyle, 1698; Higgins,
1699; Moore, 1700; Walch, Mitchell, 1703; Coursey, 1713; Murphy, 1718;
Lawless, 1720; Carty, 1721; MacKown, 1723; O’Harra, 1728; Phelon,
1730; Shay, Joyce, 1731; Connor, Cassidy, 1732; Gallagher, 1736; Lyon,
Mackey, 1737; Hurley, McCane, Sullivan, 1740; Whelan, 1741; McGonegal,
Delaney, Farrell, Mulholland, Rourk, 1742; Dempsey, Fitzgerald, 1743;
Hanley, Egan, McDonald, 1745; Donnelly, Tally, Byrn, 1747; Lanahan,
Maguire, 1750; O’Brien, Donovan, Barrett, 1751; Cavenaugh, Flynn,
Murray, Hickey, 1752; Hartagan, 1753; McMullen, 1754; Burke, 1755;
Dwyer, O’Neil, Ryan, 1756; Magee, Donohue, 1758; Sheehan, Hearn,
McGrath, 1759; Mullen, 1760; Gorman, Lary, Dermott, Fitzpatrick, 1761;
Dunphy, 1765; Carroll, 1768; Roach, 1773; Mahoney, Rohan, 1774.
These are all names of people who lived in Rhode Island prior to the
American Revolution. When such a large number of names is found in the
records it is but fair to assume that there were many others to us
unknown and who lived and died without ever having their names recorded
anywhere.
In the early history of New England there were of course no directories
of names, few, if any, records of births, marriages or deaths, and
practically the only time when men’s names were written was in time of
war or public danger, and it is in war that we first find the names of
any large number of Irishmen in Rhode Island.
THE IRISH IN KING PHILIP’S WAR.
King Philip’s War started in 1675 and was begun for the purpose of
ending the rule of the white man in the colonies. Time will not admit of
a detailed account of the part played by the Irish in that terrible
conflict and only passing mention can be made.
Again taking the writings of Thomas Hamilton Murray (“Irish Soldiers in
King Philip’s War”) we find the names of one hundred and fourteen men of
undoubted Irish birth or descent. I have verified these names. The list
excludes the names of doubtful origin. It is to be borne in mind that
the men who wrote the names were, in many instances, guided largely by
sound, owing to the inability of the bearer of the name to spell it
correctly, or at all. The list follows: