Abstract
‘Nine out of ten Irishmen entering the British Parliament with honest intentions are corrupted soon’, declared John O’Leary in March 1878. ‘It is the same even in Dublin; when once they get drawn into the whirlpool of British corruption in Dublin, with the West British society, the jobbery, the servility, very soon all the manliness goes out of them. If Irishmen are to save their honour, they must keep aloof from everything English.’
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes and References
This conversation is quoted in Marcus Bourke, Jhon O’Leary — A study in Irish separatism (Tralee, 1967) p. 153, and was recorded by O’Donnell.
The IRB’s Constitution declared that: The IRB, whilst labouring to prepare Ireland for the task of recovering her independence by force of arms shall confine itself in time of peace to the exercise of moral influences — the cultivation of union and brotherly love amongst Irishmen — the propagation of Republican Principles and a spreading of a knowledge of the national rights of Ireland. The IRB shall await the decision of the Irish Nation as expressed by a majority of the Irish people as to the fit hour of inaugurating a war against England and shall, pending such an emergency, lend its support to every movement calculated to advance the cause of Irish independence, consistently with the preservation of its own integrity. On this basis, from 1873 to 1877 the society supported Irish parliamentarians in an attempt to secure home rule, and withdrew its support when home rule was not achieved, reacting violently against the Irish Party (at that stage still a loose confederation of Irish MPs). On 20 August 1876 the IRB supreme council resolved: that the countenance which we have hitherto shown to the Home Rule movement be from this date, and is hereby, withdrawn, as three years’ experience of the working of the movement has proved to us that the revolutionary principles which we profess can be better served by our organisation existing on its own basis pure and simple, and we hereby request that all members of our organisation who may have any connection with the Home Rule movement will definitely withdraw from it their active co-operation within six months from this date. (State Paper Office, Dublin, Doran papers, 13229) The reversal of this resolution with the New Departure involved a great deal of soul-searching on the part of senior IRB members, as well as splits in the society’s leadership. The support for Parnell by IRB hard-liners, notably John Devoy, and by IRB men who had been elected to Parliament during the earlier period of co-operation, changed the balance in favour of another try.
John Devoy, for example, was last in Ireland in 1879, and did not return again until 1924.
For a discussion of Roman Catholic teaching on secret societies and how it affected the IRB, see Diarmuid Lynch, The IRB and the 1916 Rising (Cork, 1957) pp. 22–3: ‘Often when after tedious investigation a man was deemed fit in every respect, the inquisitor found himself “up against a stone wall” — that of religious scruples in the matter of joining a “secret organisation.” This was a stumbling block in the matter of numerical progress.’
See also F. X. Martin, ‘Eoin MacNeill on the 1916 Rising’, in IHS, XII, no. 47 (March 1961)
, and Donal MacCartney, ‘The Church and secret societies’, in T. Desmond Williams (ed.), Secret societies in Ireland (Dublin, 1973).
NLI, Florence O’Donoghue papers, f. 72.
Of course, the IRA’s recruitment was restricted by the availability of weapons. But RIC (and British army) recruitment stayed high, and only began to decline after Collins directed IRA attacks on RIC men and barracks in 1920.
Hobson was instrumental in assembling this team, rather than Clarke’s connection with northern Ireland. Of the ten principal men involved, six hailed from the north.
Sinn Fein Rebellion Handbook (Dublin, 1917) pp. 69–86.
See also B. Mac Giolla Choille (ed.), Intelligence Notes, 1913–16 (Dublin, 1966) pp. 258–69;
Oliver Snoddy and Stein Ugelvik Larsen, ‘1916 — A Workingmen’s Revolution? An analysis of those who made the 1916 revolution in Ireland’, in Social Studies, II, no. 4 (August–September 1973);
and Jim Thomas, ‘Theory, method, and the Irish revolution’, in Social Studies, III, no. 4 (September 1974).
Snoddy and Larsen argue that ‘this was a revolution undertaken by workers in alliance with small farmers, many middle and a few upper class people. From the figures it does look like a perfect picture of a socialist revolution in the way Lenin and Marx envisaged it in their writings.’ Thomas challenges this assessment on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence for such a sweeping statement.
September 1919 ‘Constitution Amendments,’ clause 20a and clause 22.
John O’Beirne Ranelagh, ‘The Irish Republican Brotherhood, 1914– 1924,’ unpublished Ph.D. thesis.
Quoted in Desmond Ryan, Sean Treacy and the 3rd Tipperary Brigade (Tralee, 1945) pp. 55–6.
Treacy personally considered that ‘the IRB outlived its usefulness after 1916’, and devoted himself to IRA activity (ibid., p. 54), but found that he had to depend upon IRB men. He did not oppose the IRB, and he remained a member. ‘Damn it!’ he once declared to Terence MacSwiney, ‘I’d rather take one peeler’s barracks than all your moral victories!’ (ibid., p. 45).
Ryan’s book was commissioned by the old IRA members of the 3rd Tipperary Brigade, and they gave him freely of their memories and records. It is important not only for its detail, but for the way it captures the governing IRA/IRB attitudes of the time.
IRB Constitution, 1917.
Quoted in Seamas O Maoileoin, B’Fhiu An Braon Fola (Dublin, 1972) p. 138. Collins was speaking to O Maoileoin.
For a discussion of the IRB and IRA in this period, see John O’Beirne Ranelagh, ‘The IRB from the Treaty to 1924’, in IHS, xx, no. 77 (March 1976).
While orders were not given, personal and political pressures were brought to bear by supporters and opponents of the Treaty.
IRB Constitution, 1922, clause 1; clause 27a.
IRB Constitution, 1923. See O’Beirne Ranelagh, ‘The IRB from the Treaty to 1924’.
Quoted in Sean O Murthuile, History of the IRB, unpublished MS, pp. 220–3 (AD UCD, Mulcahy papers, P7/C/I/52).
Richard Mulcahy, ‘Statement to Committee of Inquiry into Army mutiny’, 29 April 1924 (AD UCD, Mulcahy papers, P7/C/I/13).
Dail Eireann proceedings, vol. VII, pp. 3110–24.
Michael O Foghludha to Diarmuid O’Hegarty, 13 October 1923 (AD UCD, Mulcahy papers, P7/C/I/12).
Editor information
Copyright information
© 1988 John O’Beirne Ranelagh
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ranelagh, J.O. (1988). The Irish Republican Brotherhood in the Revolutionary Period, 1879–1923. In: Boyce, D.G. (eds) The Revolution in Ireland, 1879–1923. Problems in Focus Series. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18985-4_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18985-4_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-40389-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-18985-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)