We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
The events of the Easter Rising have been subjected to extensive analysis by historians who have focused on military strategy as a means of explaining the occupation of specific sites. However, Jacob's Biscuit Factory and the South Dublin Union have proven resistant to this paradigm. The political value of both places can be understood by giving close attention to the long history of antagonism between these two institutions and the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union, out of which the Irish Citizen Army that fought in the rising was formed. In his articles for the Irish Worker and Workers' Republic, James Connolly adapted traditional republican discourse of economic emancipation through political sovereignty to address a contemporary urban context. An understanding of the way that this discourse functioned facilitates an understanding of the role of Jacob's Biscuit Factory and the South Dublin Union in the Easter Rising: as sites of actual and symbolic liberation. This analysis of popular discourse in the contemporary press offers a new approach to the study of events that have been termed the Irish Revolution, and it presents a model for understanding the way that republican discourse accommodated the very different political objectives of Irish separatists.
1 The Writings of James Fintan Lalor (Dublin, 1847), 67–68Google Scholar.
2 Grant, Adrian, Irish Socialist Republicanism 1909–36 (Dublin, 2012), 37Google Scholar.
3 “Citizen Army,” Irish Worker (28 March 1914), 2. Tone, founder of Irish republican thought, organized the United Irishmen who launched a rebellion in 1798.
4 For example, women's suffrage was unambiguously declared in the Easter Proclamation, but equal suffrage was not accorded until the Irish Free State was established in 1922, while partial suffrage was granted in 1918 as part of UK legislation; for a discussion of women in the leadership of Sinn Féin, see Paseta, Senia, Irish Nationalist Women, 1900–1918 (Cambridge, 2013), 230CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 Martin, F. X., “The 1916 Rising: A ‘Coup d'Etat’ or a ‘Bloody Protest’?,” Studia Hibernica 8 (1968), 110Google Scholar.
6 Martin, F. X., “1916: Myth, Fact, and Mystery,” Studia Hibernica 7(1967), 7–126, 9Google Scholar.
7 Townshend, Charles, Easter 1916: The Irish Rebellion (London, 2005), 159Google Scholar.
8 Townshend, Easter 1916, 166.
9 Ibid., 181.
10 Ibid., 173.
11 McGarry, The Rising: Easter 1916 (Oxford, 2010), 188Google Scholar.
12 Townshend, Easter 1916, 173.
13 The Writings of James Fintan Lalor, 67–68.
14 Daly, Mary E., Dublin, the Deposed Capital: A Social and Economic History, 1860–1914 (Cork, 1984), 33Google Scholar.
15 Dempsey, Pauric J., ‘Jacob, William Beale,’ Dictionary of Irish Biography, ed. McGuire, James and Quinn, James (Cambridge, 2009)Google Scholar: http://ezproxy.ouls.ox.ac.uk:5725/viewReadPage.do?articleId=a4249-A (Accessed 23 August 2011).
16 “Jacobs and Their Workers,” Irish Worker (6 December 1913), 3.
17 “Takes the Biscuit: How Miss G.M. Jacob Got Some of Her Wedding Presents,” Irish Worker (17 June 1911), 2.
18 “A Few Biscuits from Jacob's,” Irish Worker (24 June 1911), 2.
19 D. L., “Women Worker's Column,” Irish Worker (21 September 1912), 2.
20 “W. and R. Jacob's and Co., Ltd. Charge,” Irish Worker (6 September 1913), 2.
21 “Women Workers' Column,” Irish Worker (13 September 1913), 2.
22 The lockout ended in early 1914, when the British Trades Union Council refused to support the ITGWU through a sympathetic strike. Jim Larkin left for the United States in October.
23 James Connolly, “The Outrages at Jacob's,” Irish Worker (14 March 1914), 2.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid.
26 Wright, Arnold, Disturbed Dublin: The Story of the Great Strike of 1913–14 (London, 1914)Google Scholar, v.
27 Ibid., 23.
28 Quoted in Fox, Citizen Army, 99.
29 Arthur Ascott, Letter to the Editor, “Jacob's As Recruiting Officers,” Workers' Republic (13 November 1915), 5.
30 “Dublin Employers Asked to Become Recruiting Sergeants,” Workers' Republic (27 November 1915), 3.
31 “Dublin Employers and Recruiting,” Weekly Irish Times (27 November 1915), 6.
32 Ibid.
33 “Lord Wimborne Explains,” Irish Independent (24 November 1915), 5.
34 “Enlist or Starve,” Workers' Republic (27 November 1915), 4.
35 Munitions of War Bill 1914016 (109), House of Commons Parliamentary Papers, http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&res_dat=xri:hcpp&rft_dat=xri:hcpp:fulltext:1914-018430 (Accessed 3 August 2011).
36 Davis, Mary, Sylvia Pankhurst: A Life in Radical Politics (London, 1999), 47–48Google Scholar.
37 Matthew Nathan to Askwith, 17 December 1915, MS Nathan 465/543–55, Bodleian Library, Oxford. Askwith exerted pressure to resolve the strike of quay workers for the Dublin Steam Packet Company. Jacob's was one of the Dublin employers whose trade was affected by the strike, and Charles E. Jacob approached Nathan, advocating that a resolution to the dispute be forced. See “Deputation from Dublin Citizens Association,” 7 February 1916, MS Nathan 469, Bodleian.
38 At the Trade Union Congress of September 1914, Jim Larkin led a resolution “condemning economic conscription.” See Mitchell, Arthur, Labour in Irish Politics, 1890–1930: The Irish Labour Movement in an Age of Revolution (Dublin, 1974), 62Google Scholar.
39 “Dublin Trades Council,” Workers' Republic (4 December 1915), 3. Daly was imprisoned after the Rising, along with other trade union leaders who had shown themselves to be sympathetic with separatism. See Mitchell, Labour in Irish Politics, 70.
40 “Dublin Trades Council,” Workers' Republic (4 December 1915), 3. Jim Smyth argues that despite the various historiographical interpretations of Tone's phrase, “the men of no property,” the participants in the Easter Rising used the phrase in its populist sense. Smyth, “The Men of Property: Politics and the language of Class in the 1790s,” in Politics, Society and the Middle Class in Modern Ireland, ed. Lane, Fintan and Luddy, Maria (Basingstoke, forthcoming), 7–20Google Scholar.
41 “Notes on the Front,” Workers' Republic (18 December 1915), 1.
42 Ibid.
43 “Notes on the Front,” Workers' Republic (15 January 1916), 1.
44 “The Slums and the Trenches/News on the Front,” Workers' Republic (26 February 1916), 1.
45 “A Union of Forces,” Workers' Republic (18 March 1916), 1.
46 Ibid.
47 Ibid.
48 See Cathasaigh, P. O. (pseudo. Sean O'Casey), The Story of the Irish Citizen Army (Dublin, 1919)Google Scholar; “The Irish Flag,” Workers' Republic (8 April 1916), 1.
49 “Miss Harrison and John Scully and Others,” Workers' Republic (26 February 1916), 1. D. R. O'Connor Lysaght recounts the claim of a subsequent general secretary of the ITGWU, Michael Mullen, that following the rising, a meeting of the union executive (“probably inquorate”) was held and voted “to deprive Connolly of his position and union membership”; regardless of the veracity of Mullen's statement, O'Connor Lysaght argues that “this reflected a real attitude” and “even had Connolly survived, he would have had major problems continuing his strategy”; he characterizes Connolly as “a revolutionary and a defeatist”; see “Labour in Waiting: The After-Effects of the Dublin Lockout,” History Ireland 21, no. 4 (2013): 44–47Google Scholar.
50 As Cullen outlines, after 1872 the Local Government Board oversaw the Poor Relief (Ireland) Act, 1838. Ireland was divided “into 159 districts known as ‘poor law unions.’” The South Dublin Union was constituted in June 1839. Cullen, Frank, Cleansing Rural Dublin: Public Health and Housing Initiatives in the South Dublin Poor Law Union, 1880–1920 (Dublin, 2001), 5–6Google Scholar.
51 Cullen, Cleansing Rural Dublin, 6.
52 Board of Guardians: Minute Books: South Dublin Poor Law Union, National Archives Ireland (NAI), MFGS 49/084.
53 “South Dublin Union/Annual Meeting of Guardians,” Irish Times (10 June 1911), 10.
54 NAI, MFGS 49/084.
55 The motion passed 28 to 11. See Irish Worker (8 July 1911), 3. For comprehensive list of guardians, see “South Dublin Union/Annual Meeting of Guardians,” Irish Times (10 June 1911), 10. Lawlor, O'Carroll, O'Toole, Alderman Thomas Kelly (Sinn Féin), and Helena Molony (secretary of the Irish Women Workers Union) were exceptions as advocates of labor on the board.
56 “South Dublin Union: another attempt to suppress letter,” Irish Worker (19 August 1911), 3.
57 “South Dublin Union,” Irish Times (20 July 1911), 3. Minute books for this period are incomplete.
58 The hospitals were segregated according to religion and sex.
59 “South Dublin Union,” Irish Times (20 July 1911), 3.
60 “South Dublin Union,” Irish Worker (29 July 1911), 3.
61 “Nibbling in the South Dublin Union,” Irish Worker (19 August 1911), 1.
62 “Guardians of the Poor,” Irish Worker (16 September 1911), 2.
63 “South Dublin Union,” Irish Times (14 September 1911), 10.
64 Probably the incident recorded in the minute books for 24 January 1912: “He [the master, Scully] submits a letter from some inmates in the G. I. [Garden Infirmary] re their diets. Diet scale cannot be interfered with without notice of motion to Visiting Committee.” NAI, MFGS 49/085 (120).
65 “Union Rascalities: Pauper's Slander Suit,” Irish Independent (29 January 1912), 7.
66 Ibid.
67 Visiting Committee Report, 30 September 1912, NAI, MFGS 49/085 (1460).
68 A. J. O'Brien, “South Dublin Union Scandal,” Irish Worker (2 November 1912), 4.
69 Ibid.
70 Ibid.
71 A. J. O'Brien, “South Dublin Union Scandal,” Irish Worker (2 November 1912), 2. The suppression of these complaints is suggested by the absence of correspondence in the South Dublin Union's minute books. On 30 October 1912, the master's report contains the first mention of A. J. O'Brien: “That he submits letter from an inmate named Matthew Fisher with reference to a letter which appeared in the Irish Worker from an inmate named O'Brien.” NAI, MFGS 49/085 (1595).
72 A. J. O'Brien, “South Dublin Union,” Irish Worker (2 November 1912), 4.
73 “South Dublin Union,” Irish Times (28 November 1912), 3.
74 “Distress Committee Inquiry Scandal,” Irish Worker (30 November 1912), 2.
75 Also see Charles H. O'Connor to the Board of Guardians, 3 December 1912, NAI, MFGS 49/085 (1792–93).
76 “South Dublin Union,” Irish Times (5 December 1912), 10, and “South Dublin Union” (12 December 1912), 11.
77 “Dublin Workhouse Administration,” Irish Times (11 January 1913), 11, and “South Dublin Union,” Irish Times (27 January 1913), 10.
78 “South Dublin Union,” Irish Times (27 January 1913), 10.
79 Vartry Water, “Robbing the Poor in South Dublin Union,” Irish Worker (15 February 1913), 3.
80 Michael Mullen, “The Treatment of Pigs and Christians in the South Dublin Union,” Irish Worker (1 March 1913), 3.
81 “The Food Fakirs,” Workers' Republic (15 August 1914), 4.
82 “Miss Harrison and John Scully and Others,” Workers' Republic (26 February 1916), 1. Harrison was bringing the case against Scully and was praised by Connolly.
83 “Harrison v. Scully,” Workers' Republic.
84 Martin, “The 1916 Rising,” 2.
85 Lüsebrink, Hans-Jürgen and Reichardt, Rolf, The Bastille: A History of a Symbol of Despotism and Freedom (Durham and London, 1997), 241–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Bastille Day festivals in Ulster were important occasions for civic and military display in the eighteenth century; in fact, the Society of United Irishmen arose out of an anniversary parade in Belfast on 14 July 1791; see MacBride, Ian, Eighteenth-Century Ireland: The Isle of Slaves (Dublin, 2009), 379Google Scholar.
86 McGarry, The Rising, 6.
87 BMH WS 297 (Annie Mannion).
88 BMH WS96 (John Hanratty).
89 NAI BMH WS1755 (Thomas Johnson).
90 NAI BMH WS906 (James Larkin).
