Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:49:22.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XXXI ‘What Mr Redmond thought’: An unpublished interview with John Redmond, December 1906

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2016

J.O. Baylen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In October 1912, Alfred Stead, who had succeeded his father, the veteran journalist, W. T. Stead, as editor of the Review of Reviews, after the elder Stead’s death on the Titanic during the preceding April, found Stead’s memorandum of his interview with John Redmond, in December 1906, among his father’s papers. In view of the current crisis of the Irish home rule bill, Alfred Stead planned to publish the memorandum under the title ‘What Mr Redmond thought : special interview by Mr W. T. Stead’ in the November issue of the Review of Reviews, and on 7 October, posted page proof of the interview to Redmond with a note requesting Redmond to inform him ‘whether there are any points which are not in accord with … [his] … remembrance of this interview’.

Type
Select documents
Information
Irish Historical Studies , Volume 19 , Issue 74 , September 1974 , pp. 169 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page no 169 note 1 The title of the projected publication was followed by a prefatory note in which Alfred Stead stated that the interview ‘took place in 1906’ and that he was publishing the memorandum of the interview ‘as Mr W. T. Stead dictated it at the time, but [did] not know how far he might have modified it or whether he would have excised any passages’ (my italics). Alfred Stead to John Redmond, 7 Oct. 1912 (John Redmond papers, N.L.I., MS 15228(4), by courtesy of the National Library of Ireland).

page no 170 note 2 See Gwynn, Stephen, Life of John Redmond (London, 1932), pp 213–18:Google Scholar Gwynn, Stephen, John Redmond’s last years (London, 1919), pp 71–2, 74.Google Scholar

page no 170 note 3 Redmond to Alfred Stead, copy, 8 Oct. 1912 (N.L.I., MS 15228(4).

page no 170 note 4 Alfred Stead to Redmond, 8 Oct. 1912 (ibid.).

page no 170 note 5 Redmond to Alfred Stead, copy, 8 Oct. 1912 (ibid.).

page no 170 note 6 Alfred Stead to Redmond, 8 Oct. 1912; see also Redmond to Alfred Stead, copy, 9 Oct. 1912 (ibid.).

page no 170 note 7 Redmond, John, ‘The “Ulster” question towards a United Ireland’ in Review of Reviews, 46 (Nov. 1912), pp 528–31.Google Scholar Redmond had submitted the manuscript of the article to Stead on 27 October.

page no 171 note 8 Ibid., p. 528.

page no 171 note 9 SirCarson, Edward to the editor, 2 Dec. 1912, in ‘What our readers think’, ibid. (Dec. 1912), p. 703.Google Scholar

page no 171 note 10 On the life and career of W T Stead (1849–1912), see Whyte, Frederic, Life of W T Stead (2 vols, New York, 1925),Google Scholar Stead, Estelle W, My father: personal and spiritual reminiscences (London, 1913)Google Scholar; Scott, J.W Robertson, The life and death of a newspaper: an account of the … editors of the ‘Pall Mall Gazette’ (London, 1952), pp 72ffGoogle Scholar; and Baylen, Joseph O., ‘W T Stead and the Boer war the irony of idealism’ in Canad. Hist. Rev., 11 (Dec. 1959), pp 304–14,Google Scholar ‘W T. Stead’s History of the mystery and the Jameson raid’ in J. Brit. Studies, iv (Nov. 1964), pp 104–32; ‘W T Stead and the “New Journalism”’ in Emory Univer-sity Quarterly, xxi (Fall 1965), pp 196–206; ‘Edmund Garrett, W T Stead and the “New Journalism”’ in Studies in History and Society, iii (Fall 1970), pp 1–13; The Tsar’s ‘lecturer-general’. W T Stead and the Russian revolution of 1905 (Atlanta Georgia State Univerity, School of Arts and Sciences research paper no. 23, 1969).

page no 171 note 11 See W Τ Stead to Redmond, 19 Mar., 8 May, 1895; 3 Jan., 4, 9 Oct., 1901; 24 Apr., 1, 15 May, 3, 18 June, 29, 30 July, 16 Dec, 1902; 12 Jan. 1904 (N.L.I., MS 15228(4)). There are but a few inconsequential Redmond letters in the W T Stead papers.

page no 171 note 12 See Stead, WT, ‘Character sketch Mr John Redmond, M.P., leader of the Irish party’ in Review of Reviews, 24 (Nov 1912), pp 476–82.Google Scholar Hereafter cited as ‘Character sketch Redmond’

page no 172 note 13 Stead to Redmond, 9 Oct. 1901 (N.L.I., MS 15228(4)).

page no 172 note 14 Stead, , ‘Character sketch: Redmond’, p. 482.Google Scholar In late July 1902, Stead endeavoured to arrange a meeting between Redmond and the powerful publisher and preceptor of ‘yellow’ journalism in the United States, William Randolph Hearst, who at this time was seeking to court Irish-Americans to advance his political ambitions. See Stead to Redmond, 29 July 1902, N.L.I., MS 15228(4).

page no 172 note 15 Stead, , ‘Character sketch Redmond’, pp 476–7, 479.Google Scholar

page no 172 note 16 Stead to Redmond, 18 Dec. 1902 (N.L.I., MS 15228(4)).

page no 173 note 17 See Stead, WT. (ed.), Coming men on coming questions (London, [1905]), pp 65–7, 68–79.Google Scholar

page no 173 note 18 Ibid., p. 65.

page no 173 note 19 Ibid., pp 65–6.

page no 174 note 20 See Wilson, John, C.B.: a life of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman (London, 1973), p. 111 Google Scholar; Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 115–16Google Scholar; Rowland, Peter, The last liberal government: the promised land, 1905–1910 (London, 1968), p. 132.Google Scholar

page no 174 note 21 Cf. Lyons, , Ir. parl. party, pp 113–14.Google Scholar

page no 174 note 22 Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, p. 113.Google Scholar Indeed, as early as April 1905, Redmond discussed with Morley ‘the merits of the possible candidates for the office of chief secretary should the liberals suddenly return to power.’( Lyons, , Ir. parl, party, p. 112).Google Scholar

page no 174 note 23 Spender, J.A., The life of the Right Hon. Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, G.C.B. (London, 1923), 2, 200.Google Scholar

page no 174 note 24 Harris, José F. and Hazlehurst, Cameron, ‘Campbell-Bannerman as prime minister’ in History, 55 (Oct. 1907), p. 370.Google Scholar

page no 174 note 25 Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, p. 461 Google Scholar Morley recalled that he was ‘puzzled’ when Campbell-Bannerman informed him that he had ‘earmarked’ Bryce for the Irish post. See Morley, John, Recollections (London, 1917), 2, 131–2.Google Scholar

page no 175 note 26 Fisher, H.A.L., James Bryce (London, 1927), 1, 339–40.Google Scholar

page no 175 note 27 Robbins, Keith, ‘ History and politics : the career of James Bryce’ in Jl. Contemp. Hist., 7 (July-Oct. 1972), pp 48–9.Google Scholar

page no 175 note 28 Lyons, , Dillon, p. 285.Google Scholar

page no 175 note 29 John Dillon respected Bryce as a scholar and liked him as a man, but ‘distrusted him as a politician . . [and had] grave doubts about Bryce’s fitness for the post …’ [ Lyons, , Dillon, pp 221, 281Google Scholar ] Similarly, when Tim Healy heard of the appointment of Bryce, he wrote : ‘Bryce will cut no figure here … He is a speaker with an unpleasant voice, and for all his learning, commands no weight’ ( Healy, TM., Letters and kadersof my day (London, [1928]), 2, 475).Google Scholar

page no 175 note 30 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 118, 120Google Scholar; Lyons, , John Dillon, p. 283.Google Scholar

page no 176 note 31 Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 339.Google Scholar

page no 176 note 32 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, p. 120 Google Scholar; Rowland, , The last liberal government, p. 130 Google Scholar; Lyons, , Ir. parl, party, p. 114.Google Scholar

page no 176 note 33 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 120–21Google Scholar

page no 176 note 34 Lyons, , Dillon, pp 282–3Google Scholar; Gywnn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 121–2Google Scholar; Rowland, , The last liberal government, p. 130.Google Scholar

page no 176 note 35 Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 342.Google Scholar

page no 177 note 36 Ibid., pp 342, 346–51, 356; Lyons, , Dillon, pp 283–5Google Scholar; Healy, , Letters and leaders, 2, 476.Google Scholar

page no 177 note 37 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 123–6Google Scholar; Rowland, , The last liberal government, p. 131.Google Scholar

page no 177 note 38 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 126–7.Google Scholar

page no 177 note 39 Ibid., p. 127; Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, p. 113 Google Scholar; Rowland, , The last liberal government, pp 131–2.Google Scholar

page no 177 note 40 Lyons, , Dillon, pp 281, 285–2.Google Scholar H. A. L. Fisher attributed the dissatisfaction of Redmond and his party with Bryce to their failure to obtain ‘a generous harvest of political appointments’ and to their ‘surprise and indignation when they discovered that the chief secretary was proof against political pressure …’ ( Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 359).Google Scholar

page no 177 note 41 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 134–5Google Scholar; Rowland, , The last liberal government, pp 132–3Google Scholar; Lyons, , Dillon, p. 289.Google Scholar

page no 178 note 42 Rowland, , The last liberal government, p. 132 Google Scholar; Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 132–3Google Scholar; Lyons, , Ir. parl. party, pp 114—15.Google Scholar To Dillon, Redmond declared that Bryce’s scheme was ‘beneath contempt’ ( Lyons, , Dillon, p. 289).Google Scholar

page no 178 note 43 Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, p. 115 Google Scholar; Lyons, , Dillon, p. 289 Google Scholar; Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, p. 135 Google Scholar; Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 355.Google Scholar

page no 178 note 44 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, p. 137 Google Scholar; Rowland, , The last liberal government, p. 133.Google Scholar

page no 178 note 45 Ibid., p. 133; Lyons, , Dillon, p, 289.Google Scholar

page no 179 note 46 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 139–40.Google Scholar

page no 179 note 47 Ibid., p. 140.

page no 179 note 48 Ö Broin, Leon, The chief secretary: Augustine Birrell in Ireland (London, 1969), p. 6.Google Scholar

page no 179 note 49 Lyons, , Dillon, p. 290.Google Scholar These facts belie Edmond Ions’s assertion that Campbell-Bannerman was keen on retaining Bryce in the Irish office and had to be persuaded by Sir Edward Grey to let Bryce go to Washington and that Bryce was reluctant to leave Dublin for the embassy in Washington. See Ions, Edmond, James Bryce and American democracy, 1870–1922 (London, 1968), pp 199–200.Google Scholar

page no 179 note 50 Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, p. 589 Google Scholar; Lyons, , Dillon, p. 290.Google Scholar

page no 179 note 51 Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, p. 589.Google Scholar Some nationalist leaders seemed uncertain of the appointment of Birrell until January 1907 ( Lyons, , Dillon, p. 290).Google Scholar

page no 180 note 52 Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, p. 141.Google Scholar See also Ó Broin, , The chief secretary, pp. 5–7 Google Scholar; Spender, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, 2, 323.Google Scholar

page no 180 note 53 Massingham, H.M., London Daily Press (London, 1892), p. 152 Google Scholar; ‘Mr W T. Stead : the Don Quixote of modern journalism,’ by One who knew him, in Evening News (London), 17 Apr. 1912.

page no 180 note 54 Cook, E.T, Literary recreations (London, 1918), p. 4.Google Scholar

page no 180 note 55 [Donald, Robert], ‘W T. Stead’ in Daily Chronicle (London), 17 Apr. 1912 Google Scholar; Shaw, Albert, ‘Stead’ in American Review of Reviews, 45 (June 1912), p. 691.Google Scholar

page no 180 note 56 Shaw, , ‘Stead’, p. 691.Google Scholar

page no 181 note 57 [Bryce, Lord], ‘A great journalist : tributes from public men’ in Review of Reviews, 62 (Aug.-Sept. 1920), p. 103.Google Scholar

page no 182 note 1 Birrell’s education bill, introduced on 9 April 1906, was designed to remove those features of the education act of 1902 repugnant to the nonconformists. Supported by the anglican and catholic hierarchy, the tory opposition sought to smother the bill with amendments. Thus, after its approval by the commons on 30 July 1906, the house of lords ‘turned the bill inside out’ during November and returned it to the lower house in early December. The Campbell-Bannerman government rejected the peers’ amendments, but resorted to private negotiations with the opposition to save the bill. Negotiations between Birrell and Lords Crewe and Lansdowne and a group of tory peers continued almost to Christmas, but failed to resolve the impasse. Rather than risk a general election over the bill, Campbell-Bannerman dropped it before the end of the parliamentary session on 21 December. See Spender, , The life of Campbell-Bannerman, 2, 276–7, 281, 298–31off.Google Scholar

page no 182 note 2 Patrick ‘Paddy’ O’Brien (d. 1917), Irish nationalist M.P. (1886–92), was one of Redmond’s most devoted friends and trusted counsellors. He served as one of the whips of the Irish parliamentary party, and his death in 1917 was a severe loss to Redmond. On O’Brien’s relationship with Redmond, see Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, p. 26 Google Scholar; Gwynn, , John Redmond’s last years, pp 38, 267Google Scholar; MacDonagh, Michael, The life of William O’Brien (London, 1928), p. 204 Google Scholar; Horgan, John J., Porrteli to Pearse: some recollections and reflections (Dublin, 1948), p. 307.Google Scholar

page no 182 note 3 Michael Edward Hicks-Beach (1837–1916), first Earl St Aldwyn, tory M.P, (1864–1906), was a bitter opponent of home rule.

page no 182 note 4 Augustine Birrell (1850–1933), liberal politician and man of letters, served as chief secretary for Ireland from 1907 to 1916. On the work of Birrell at the Irish office, see Ó Broin, Leon, The chief secretary: Augustine Birrell in Ireland (London, 1969)Google Scholar; Lyons, , Dillon, pp 290ff.Google Scholar

page no 182 note 5 Sir Alexander Fuller-Acland-Hood (1853–1917), first Baron St Audries, tory M.P (1892–1911), served as tory chief whip in the Balfour government (1902–5) and the opposition in the house of commons until elevated to a peerage in 1911

page no 182 note 6 James Bryce (1838–1922), first Viscount Bryce, distinguished himself as a jurist, historian and diplomat. A long-time liberal M.P., Bryce had previously served as under-secretary for foreign affairs and, subsequent to his service in the Irish office, as ambassador to the United States (1907–13).

page no 183 note 7 Sir Antony Patrick MacDonnell (1844–1925), first Baron MacDonnell of Swinford (1908), served in India (1890–1903) as chief commissioner of the Central Provinces, lieutenant-governor of the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh, and a member of the council of India before accepting the invitation of the tory chief secretary for Ireland, George Wyndham, to become permanent under-secretary in Dublin (1903–8). As ‘a strong, forceful, independent-minded civil servant’, MacDonnell was incapable of cajoling the Irish nationalists and unionists and as a result was bitterly disliked by both. Although he was certainly an ‘uncomfortable subordinate’ for any Irish secretary, Bryce got on well with MacDonnell largely because they had similar views on Irish educational reform, the improvement of the lot of the Irish peasantry, and the necessity for effecting a measure of home rule (devolution) in Ireland., See Ó Broin, , The chief secretary, p. 11 Google Scholar; Lyons, , Dillon, pp 228–9, 285–94Google Scholar; Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 341–2.Google Scholar

page no 183 note 8 After beginning his work in Dublin with the enactment of the land purchase act of 1903, MacDonnell was encouraged to believe that his ‘devolution’ proposal for the coordination of Irish boards under a central authority would be well received by the government and the Irish as a modest first step towards home rule for Ireland. Unfortunately, the scheme so enraged the unionists that the Balfour government compelled Wyndham to publicly repudiate MacDonnell’s plan and to resign as chief secretary. Thanks to powerful support in and out of parliament, MacDonnell remained in office, served under Wyndham’s successor, Walter Long, and, after the advent of the liberal government in 1906, Bryce and Birrell from 1906 to 1908. During the tenure of Bryce and Birrell in the Irish office, MacDonnell’s ‘devolution’ scheme was revived as the Irish councils bill. The nationalists’ initial reaction to the bill was confused with Redmond, T P. O’Connor, and William O’Brien viewing it as a step towards home rule and Michael Davitt and Sexton rejecting ‘devolution’ as MacDonnell’s device to breach Irish national unity. The nationalists’ dislike of MacDonnell as ‘a domineering Indian satrap’ was so intense and unrelenting that he was finally forced to resign in 1908. See Ó Broin, , The chief secretary, pp 11–13 Google Scholar; Lyons, , Dillon, pp 286–94Google Scholar; Healy, , Letters und leaders, 2, 476 Google Scholar; Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 355 Google Scholar

page no 184 note 9 Stephen Gwynn has observed that the Irish nationalists cherished an affection for Campbell-Bannerman, ‘as by far the most faithful of the liberals, such as they probably never felt for any prime minister before ’ ( Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, p. 154).Google Scholar Indeed, the Irish leaders deeply regretted Sir Henry’s resignation as prime minister in 1908, and Redmond was one of the last men Campbell-Bannerman spoke to ‘before he left Downing Street to die’ ( Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, p. 117).Google Scholar

page no 184 note 10 The ‘arms act’ or Peace Preservation Act (Ireland) of 1881 specified that any persons possessing or suspected of possessing arm and ammunition might be arrested with or without a warrant. The nationalists demanded the repeal of this act and of the crimes act of 1887 and, since coercion was repugnant to Campbell-Bannerman and the liberals, the cabinet sought to conciliate the nationalists by acceding to their demands. Despite Bryce’s opposition to the repeal of the acts on the ground that they were essential safeguards agains lawlessness [ Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 352],Google Scholar the government suspended the act of 1887 and later in 1906 omitted the arms act from the Expiring Laws Continuing Act. Nevertheless, Bryce hoped to have a bill enacted in 1907 which would restrict the sale of arms in Ireland. Bryce’s biographer intimated that the continuation of the arms arct might have prevented the Ulster unionists from arming in 1914. See ibid., pp 356–8; Rowland, , The last liberal government, pp 134–5.Google Scholar

page no 185 note 11 Richard Robert Cherry (1859–1923), professor of constitutional and criminal law, University of Dublin (1889–94); attorney general for Ireland (1905–9); lord justice of appeal for Ireland (1909–14); and lord chief justice of Ireland (1914–16).

page no 185 note 12 The embassy post in Washington became vacant when President Theodore Roosevelt secured the removal of the ambassador, Sir Mortimer Durand, in October 1906, and, in spite of Roosevelt’s known preference for Sir Cecil Spring Rice, Bryce was immediately mentioned for the post (see Blake, Nelson Manfred, ‘Ambassadors at the court of Theodore Roosevelt’ in Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 42 (July 1955), p. 202).CrossRefGoogle Scholar To rid himself of Bryce as soon as possible, Redmond pressed for the appointment of Bryce, as an authority on American government, to the embassy in Washington.

page no 185 note 13 Among the instalments of social legislation that the liberal government offered to Ireland in lieu of home rule was the much disputed town tenants bill which received a second reading on 18 May 1906. The bill offered safeguards for tenants’ improvements and provided for tenants in the towns some of ‘the earliest goals of the tenants on the land. ’. In spite of the unionists’ objections, the bill passed the second reading, but the struggle in committee was so bitter that it emerged from the commons only in November 1906. In the house of lords, the bill became involved in the conflict between the two houses provoked by the Education (Provision of Meals) and Land Tenure Bills. Yet the town tenants bill did not suffer unduly and was enacted in December 1906. See Lyons, , Ir. parl. party, p. 245.Google Scholar

page no 186 note 14 Thomas Shaw (1850–1937), first Baron Craigmyle, a close friend of Campbell-Bannerman and an ardent advocate of Irish home rule and land reform, was lord advocate (1905–9) in the liberal government. When Campbell-Bannerman was forming his cabinet in November 1905, Redmond and his friends indicated that they would like Shaw for the chief secretaryship. Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, pp 435, 456, 589.Google Scholar

page no 186 note 15 Stead was apparently referring to his differences with Shaw over Shaw’s misunderstanding with Andrew Carnegie in 1901. Although Shaw was his close friend, Campbell-Bannerman privately described him as possessing the weakness of being ‘maximus in minimis, minimus in maximis’ See earl of Oxford and Asquith, Memories and reflections (London, 1928), i, 250.

page no 187 note 16 Churchill was serving as under-secretary for the colonies (1905–8). Redmond shared Campbell-Bannerman’s suspicion of Churchill’s ‘ebullient ambition’, disapproval of ‘young men in a hurry’, and wariness of Churchill being ‘only a liberal yesterday.’ See Wilson, , Life of Campbell-Bannerman, pp 590, 592.Google Scholar

page no 187 note 17 John Elliott Burns (1858–1943), engineer, labour leader, socialist organiser, radical M.P (1892–1918), president of the local government board (1905–14), and president of the board of trade (1914).

page no 187 note 18 Timothy Michael Healy (1855–1931), nationalist leader and M.P (1880–1918), Q.C. (1899), and first governor-general of the Irish Free State (1922–27), had a low opinion of Redmond. Bitterly opposed to Birrell’s education bill, Healy delivered a very strong speech against the bill on 10 May 1906. (See Healy, , Letters and leaders, 2, 476–7.)Google Scholar In late 1905, Stead denounced Healy as ‘the outcast orator, the disclassed Thersites, who roams outside [Redmond’s] camp …’ Stead, , Coming men on coming questions, 66.Google Scholar

page no 187 note 19 William O’Brien (1852–1928), journalist and nationalist leader. As a nationalist M.P (1883–95), he was instrumental in the calling of the round-table conference which led to the land purchase act of 1903. Supported by Healy, O’Brien resigned from the nationalist party on 24 November 1903 in protest against the negative attitude of Redmond and Dillon towards the land purchase act and remained in retirement for almost four years. Redmond made no secret of his dislike of O’Brien and his obsession with round-table conferences to resolve Ireland’s problems. (On Redmond’s relations with O’Brien, see Lyons, , Ir parl. party, pp 107–10Google Scholar; Lyons, , Dillon, pp 229, 287Google Scholar; Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 137–8Google Scholar; Healy, , Letters and leaders, 2, 470 Google Scholar; MacDonagh, , Life of William O’Brien, pp 181, 190.)Google Scholar Concerning O’Brien and Earl Spencer (1835–1910), lord lieutenant of Ireland (1869–74 and 1882–5), Redmond was referring to incidents in O’Brien’s career during the 1880s. In 1883, when Spencer was relentlessly enforcing the coercion act in the wake of the Phoenix Park murders, O’Brien hatched an abortive scheme to use some disaffected Dublin policemen, members of the Royal Irish constabulary and Fenians to kidnap Spencer and the chief secretary and hold them as hostages until the Gladstone government dropped the coercion act and remedied the grievances of the police. O’Brien fondly recalled that in his only personal meeting with Spencer in the house of commons lobby Spencer remarked with ‘a gently cordiality’ : ‘it is a pity we did not know one another a little better. ’ O’Brien, however, never told Spencer of his plot and thereafter had great affection for the liberal peer. MacDonagh, , Life of William O’Brien, pp 20, 79–80.Google Scholar

page no 188 note 20 Dr William J. Walsh (1841–1921), archbishop of Dublin and primate of Ireland (1885-). Redmond’s relations with Walsh were never cordial. See Gwynn, , Life of Redmond, pp 88–9Google Scholar; Gwynn, , Redmond’s last years, p. 257.Google Scholar

page no 188 note 21 Dr Patrick O’Donnell (1856–1927), bishop of Raphoe (1888–1922), archbishop of Armagh and primate of all Ireland (1924- ), and cardinal (1925), was one of Redmond’s ‘oldest and most trusted allies in Ulster [and] closest and most devoted advisers, ’ A strong partisan of Irish home rule, O’Donnell’s 1 great intellectual ability and calm judgement exerted a powerful influence upon Redmond’ until they broke in 1918 over the Irish convention. On Redmond and O’Donnell, see Gwynn, Life of John Redmond, passim; Gwynn, , Redmond’s last years, pp 270, 303, 312Google Scholar; Horgan, , Parnell to Pearse, p. 319 Google Scholar; Lyons, , Ir pari, party, p. 215.Google Scholar

page no 188 note 22 Very Rev. Monsignor Michael O’Riordan (1857–1919), educated at the Irish College and the Propaganda and Gregorian University in Rome, served as a curate in Limerick before being appointed rector of the Irish College in Rome in 1905. In 1907, Pius X named O’Riordan pronotary apostolic. See Horgan, , Parnell to Pearse, pp 126, 133–6, 162.Google Scholar

page no 188 note 23 Redmond’s audience with Pius X (1855–1914) on 27 April 1905, lasted two hours. Gwynn, , Life of John Redmond, pp 112–13.Google Scholar

page no 189 note 24 At the bottom of his portrait, Pius X wrote : ‘To my beloved son, John Redmond, leader of the Irish party in the house of commons, with a wish that he, together with his equally beloved colleagues, using all legal and peaceful means, may win that liberty which makes for the welfare of the whole country, we impart our apostolic benediction with particular affection’ Ibid., p. 113.

page no 189 note 25 Rafael Merry del Val (1865–1930) was born in London and ordained at Westminster. He was created a cardinal in 1903 and served as papal secretary of state, 1903–14.

page no 189 note 26 When the appointment of Bryce was finally announced it was welcomed by the American press and by President Roosevelt because of Bryce’s Scotch-Irish ancestry, opposition to the Boer war, sympathy for Irish home rule, and wide knowledge of American affairs. Bryce fulfilled American expectations and his mission in Washington was extraordinarily successful. (See Blake, , ‘Ambassadors at the court of Theodore Roosevelt’ in Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 42 (July 1955), pp 303–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fisher, , Bryce, 2, 1–11.)Google Scholar In his letter of congratulations to Bryce on 27 December 1906, John Dillon wrote: ‘you are leaving a most tangled difficult and cross-grained problem and going to one of the greatest centres of human interest, where your work and character will be fully appreciated ., and it may fall to your lot as ambassador to the United States to do effective work for the redemption of Ireland’ ( Lyons, , Dillon, p. 290).Google Scholar

page no 189 note 27 Redmond was undoubtedly referring to Bryce’s life-long interest in the Icelandic sagas and Old Norse literature. [On this interest, see Bryce, , Memories of travel (London, 1923), pp ix, 1–43, 297–300Google Scholar; Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 142–5.]Google Scholar That Redmond was quite correct in divining Roosevelt’s interest in Bryce’s mastery of the siagas is apparent in Sir Courtnay Ilbert’s recollection that ‘when Bryce was in Washington, . Roosevelt would draw up his knees and slap them with delight if he succeeded in eliciting Bryce’s stores of knowledge about the sagas’ (See Ilbert’s statement in Bryce, , Memories of travel, 298 Google Scholar; Fisher, , Bryce, 1, 144.)Google Scholar Red-mond, however was mistaken in his assumption that Bryce had written a book on the sagas.