¹ Whittier, J.G., Sketch of Daniel O’Connell (N.P., N.D.)3 reprinted from Pennsylvania Freeman, 25 Apr. 1839.Google Scholar

² O’Connell centenary record, 1875 (Dublin, 1878), pp 6, η, 399, 547–59.

³ Report of Loyal National Repeal Association (hereafter cited as L.N.R.A.) meeting, 10 May 1843, in Freeman’s Journal, 11 May 1843.

⁴ Thoughts on the discontent of the people last year respecting the sugar duties (Dublin, 1781), pp 29, 41–4, Donnan, Elizabeth, Documents illustrative of the slave trade to America (4 vols, New York, 1965), 2, 258 Google Scholar; introduction to Millin, S.S., Sidelights on Belfast history (Belfast, 1932).Google Scholar

⁵ Burn, W L., Emancipation and apprenticeship in the British West Indies (London, 1937), p. 234,Google Scholar Klinberg, F J , The anti-slavery movement in England (New Haven, 1926), pp 122–3.Google Scholar

⁶ Charlton, Kenneth, ‘The state of Ireland in the 1820s: James Cropper’s plan’ in I.H.S., 17, no. 67 (Mar. 1971), pp 320–9Google Scholar; Cropper’s proposals were incorporated as resolutions of the Society of the Friends °f Ireland, which was established by O’Connell.

⁷ Minutes of the executive committee of the American anti-slavery society, i, 18 Oct. 1838 (Boston Public Library, MS B.8.2.Ì, p. 98).

⁸ Richard, Henry, Memoirs of Joseph Sturge (London, 1865), pp 175–6.Google Scholar

⁹ W L. Garrison to Helen Garrison, 29 June 1840 (Boston Public Library, MS A. 1.1., p. 82); Proceedings of the anti-slavery convention (London, 1841), pp 11–13.

¹⁰ O’Connell was influenced by a report of a speech by Dr R. R. Madden which appeared in the Dublin Weekly Register, 1 Feb. 1840, and which urged the Irish people and clergy to try to change the opinions of the Irish-Americans on the slavery issue.

¹¹ Edwards, O. Dudley, ‘The American image of Ireland : a study of its early phases’ in Perspectives in American history, 4 (1970), pp 265–8.Google Scholar

¹² Nelson, Isaac, Slavery supported by the American churches, and countenanced by recent proceedings in the Free Church of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1847), p.83.Google Scholar

¹³ McNeile, Hugh, Anti-slavery and anti-popery: a letter addressed to Edward Cropper Esq. and Thomas Berry H or sfall (London, 1838), PP 17–18.Google Scholar In general, however, most visiting American abolitionists seemed anxious not to appear as anti-catholic. Richard Allen, the Dublin quaker, objected to parts of William Howitt’s Colonization and Christianity on the ground that they might alienate Irish catholics whom Allen was anxious to enlist in the abolition cause.

¹⁴ Sixth annual report of the Glasgow Emancipation Society (Glasgow, 1840), appendix 4.

¹⁵ National Anti-Slavery Standard (New York), 3 Sept. 1840. In 1840 the American Anti-Slavery Society had split, the seceding anti-Garrison forces re-forming as the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society.

¹⁶ Freeman’s Journal, 4 June 1840; Dublin Evening Mail, 3 June 1840.

¹⁷ Freeman’s Journal, 18 June 1840.

¹⁸ Ibid., io, 14 Apr. 1841. A small but energetic group of dissenters in Dublin—in particular Richard Allen, James Haughton and Richard Davis Webb—were instrumental in spearheading British support for the Garrison abolitionists.

¹⁹ Ibid., 7 Nov. 1840.

²⁰ Ibid., 3 Aug. 1841 Some London quakers in 1826 objected to the word ’ emancipation 5 in reference to the slaves because it smacked too much of Roman Catholic emancipation. John Grubb to Joseph Grubb, 16 June 1826 (Society of Friends’ Historical Library, Dublin, Grubb letters, S.G.D.a, folder 10, no. 256).

²¹ Hernon, Joseph, Celts, Catholics and Copperheads (Ohio State U.P., 1968), p. 79.Google Scholar

²² The Freeman’s Journal, η Feb. 1844, cited quaker practices as a precedent for O’Connell’s arbitration courts.

²³ R. D. Webb to Edmund Quincy, 16 Aug. 1843, 2 Feb. 1844 (Boston Public Library, Webb-Quincy correspondence).

²⁴ Freeman’s Journal, 23 Mar 1841 ; Nation, 25 Dec. 1847.

²⁵ Report of the parliamentary committee of the Loyal National Repeal Association, founded upon Dr Kane’s treatise (Dublin, 1844), P- 36. Haughton also condemned the use of tobacco on the ground that it was a noxious weed and slave-produce. John O’Connell, in contrast, argued that, given repeal, Ireland could grow her own tobacco and thus would no longer be dependent on Virginian slave-produce.

²⁶ O’Connell proposed a mixed tribunal of Americans and British to solve the right-of-search question, while the Freeman’s Journal, less mindful of the slaves, asserted that the American refusal to allow their ships to be searched was ‘worthy of the children of the Stars and Stripes ’

²⁷ National Anti-Slavery Standard, 17 Feb. 1842. In May 1842, Garrison in the Liberator had declared his opposition to the Irish union. While O’ConnelPs abolitionism also delighted more moderate American abolitionists, his speeches were given most publicity by the American Anti-Slavery Society, which had contacts with O’Connell through its allies in Dublin.

²⁸ National Anti-Slavery Standard, 24 Mar. 1842.

²⁹ Boston Pilot, 5 Feb. 1842.

³⁰ Ibid., 25 June 1842.

³¹ National Anti-Slavery Standard, 2 May 1842. The American abolitionists, unlike O’Connell, seem to have been aware of this problem.

³² Freeman’s Journal, 14 May 1842.

³³ L.N.R.A. meeting, 21, 23 May 1842.

³⁴ E. Ouincy to M. W Chapman, 20 June 1842 (Boston Public Library, Weston papers, MS A.9.2, xvii, p. 74).

³⁵ O’Connell had clearly more in common with such leading lights in the London Society as the wealthy Joseph Sturge than he had with Garrison and his supporters in Dublin and Boston.

³⁶ L.N.R.A. meeting, 10 Apr. 1843, in Freeman’s Journal, 11 Apr. 1843. Neither, in fact, went.

³⁷ L.N.R.A. meeting, 4, 5 Aug. 1843.

³⁸ Though some felt that Garrison was in danger of over-reacting to O’Connell’s statements.

³⁹ National Anti-Slavery Standard, 26 Oct. 1843. Garrison had certainly demonstrated even earlier his readiness to upbraid O’Connell when he thought the latter was in the wrong. Speeches delivered at the anti-colonization meeting in Exter Hail (Boston, 1833), p. 21

⁴⁰ L.N.R.A. meeting 24 Oct. 1843, in Nation, 28 Oct.; L.N.R.A. meeting, 30 Oct. 1843, in Freeman’s Journal, 31 Oct.

⁴¹ Smith, however, had previously rebuked O’Connell for his remarks °n Garrison’s religious views.

⁴² N.P Rogers argued that Garrison was being too ‘political ’ in advocating a dissolution of the American union, while Webb, though for different reasons, objected to the ‘foolish, high-go-mad ’ remarks in the Liberator in favour of Irish repeal. R. D. Webb to E. Quincy, 16 Aug. 1843 (Boston Public Library, Webb-Ouincy correspondence).

⁴³ W. Phillips to R. D. Webb, 12 Aug. 1842 (Boston Public Library, MS Α.ι.2, xii, pt 2, p. 76).

⁴⁴ Eleventh annual report of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society (Boston, 1843), p.27.

⁴⁵ L.N.R.A. meeting, 13 Apr. 1841, in Freeman’s Journal, 14 Apr.; Nation, 8 Apr.

⁴⁶ L.N.R.A. meeting, 27 May, 1 June 1844. In August 1844, John O’Connell claimed that on two or three occasions the L.N.R.A. had sent back money when it was accompanied by letters that tried to justify slavery, and Phillips said in 1872 that he had seen O’Connell in Conciliation Hall return a draft for £1,000 to slaveholders in New Orleans. Daniel O’Connell A lecture by Wendell Phillips (New York, 1873), p. 100. No evidence, however, has been found to corroborate these statements.

⁴⁷ Letter from Haughton read at L.N.R.A. meeting, io May 1842, in Freeman’s Journal, 11 May.

⁴⁸ W Phillips to R. D. Webb, 29 June 1842 (Boston Public Library, MS A.i.2, xii, pt 2,61).

⁴⁹ R. D. Webb to E. Quincy, 2 Nov 1845 (Boston Public Library, Webb-Quincy correspondence).

⁵⁰ It is probable that the ideological roots of the ’ send back the money ’ campaign directed by the abolitionists against the Free Church °f Scotland lay in these earlier discussions as to the propriety of the L.N.R.A. accepting southern money. See the National Anti-Slavery standard, 13 May 1847, 0Ω tne disagreements between Irish and American abolitionists on the question of the Central Relief Committee of friends in Ireland accepting southern money during the Irish famine.

⁵¹ Freeman’s Journal, 12 May 1843.

⁵² L.N.R.A. meeting, io May 1843, in Freeman’s Journal, 11 May; National Anti-Slavery Standard, 13 July.

⁵³ Freeman’s Journal, 22 July, ι Aug. 1843.

⁵⁴ L.N.R.A. meeting, 28 Aug. 1843, in Nation, 2 Sept.

⁵⁵ Still, Webb claimed that O’Connell, in the midst of political crisis, had composed the address only as a diversion to his mind, and to restore himself to the confidence of the American abolitionists.

⁵⁶ National Anti-Slavery Standard, 18 Nov. 1843.

⁵⁷ Twelfth annual report of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society (Boston, 1844), PP 23–6.

⁵⁸ Pilot (Dublin), 23 Mar. 1842.

⁵⁹ L.N.R.A. meeting, 27 Sept. 1843, in Freeman’s Journal, 28 Sept.

⁶⁰ Fortunately for O’Connell, the second national repeal convention ntet m New York before he issued his Cincinnati address.

⁶¹ Nation, 13 Jan. 1844.

⁶² L.N.R.A. meeting, 23, 27 Apr 1844.

⁶³ Freeman’s Journal, 29 Dec. 1840.

⁶⁴ Ibid., 7 Nov 1840.

⁶⁵ Ibid., 18 May 1844; Pilot (Dublin), 20 May 1844; The Times, 15 May.

⁶⁶ L.N.R.A. meeting, 20 May 1844, in Freeman’s Journal, 21 May; article, Our own corespondent’, in Pilot, 15 May 1844. The American correspondents of the Irish repeal press were frequently hostile to the abolition movement. Thomas Mooney, for example, was American correspondent of the Pilot, 1841–2, and of the Nation, 1842–6, and his comments on abolitionism were repudiated by O’Connell in May 1842.

⁶⁷ L.N.R.A. meeting, 31 Mar. 1845, in Nation, 5 Apr.

⁶⁸ Ibid., 12 Apr 1845.

⁶⁹ Freeman’s Journal, 21 Apr. 1845 ; Nation, 21 June. The Baltimore Repeal Association dissolved temporarily. O’Connell claimed in July that the Americans resented his speech only because of its abolition contents. He had also threatened in Apr. 1845 that if America attacked England, American slaves would be incited to revolt by black regiments from the West Indies Such statements could hardly fail to be badly received in the American south.

⁷⁰ Letter from Haughton, in Freeman’s Journal, 11 July 1846.

⁷¹ L.N.R.A. meeting, 4 Aug. 1845, in Nation, 9 Aug. John O’Connell did say that England would benefit from the American annexation of lexas, since a strengthened south would be in a position to pass tariff laws favourable to England.

⁷² Duffy, G. Gavan, Young Ireland, a fragment of Irish history, 1840–1845 (London, 1896), pp 196–201 Google Scholar

⁷³ Pilot, 12 Sept. 1845, Tipperary Free Press, 6 Sept.

⁷⁴ L.N.R.A. meeting, 6 Oct. 1845, in Nation, 11 Oct.

⁷⁵ Freeman’s Journal, 21 Feb. 1845. O’Connell was again considerably embarrassed at the attempts by the whig government to reduce the sugar duties. He opposed such attempts on principle, but he did not wish to see the whigs defeated on the question.

⁷⁶ Ibid., 20 Apr. 1844, 17 Feb. 1844.

⁷⁷ Ibid., 31 July 1845. The Nation, 13 Dec. 1845, felt that America had ’ no just claim ’ to Oregon, but nevertheless supported American interests there as opposed to those of England.

⁷⁸ Freeman’s Journal, 17 Sept. 1842.

⁷⁹ These were later printed in book form and dedicated to O’Connell, . Letters of the late Bishop England to the Hon. John Forsyth on the subject of domestic slavery (Baltimore, 1844).Google Scholar

⁸⁰ The great range of attitudes on slavery existing within the catholic church in America is demonstrated in Rice, M.H., American Catholic opinion on the slavery controversy (New York, 1944).Google Scholar Dr Canili was a rare instance of a catholic cleric who was prepared in Ireland to condemn American slavery. Webb, however, always inimical to slavery and Catholicism, went out of his way to ridicule the elementary blunders that Cahill had made in his Lecture on slavery (Waterford, 1846).

⁸¹ This article was later reviewed in the Tablet, vi, no. 276 (16 Aug. l845) PP 5–5.

⁸² This process is examined in Gilbert Osofsky, ‘Abolitionists, Irish immigrants, and the dilemmas of romantic nationalism ’ in A.H.R., lxxx, no. 4 (Oct. 1975), pp 889–912, but Osofsky in general ignores the Irish pressures on O’Connell, and oversimplifies the reasons for the abolitionists’ interests in Ireland.

⁸³ L.N.R.A. meeting, 12 Oct. 1846, in Nation, 17 Oct.

⁸⁴ Though see the assessment of his influence on Irish anti-slavery made by the English abolitionist George Stephens, cited in Klinberg, Anti-slavery movement, pp 248–9.

⁸⁵ Nation, 6 Feb. 1842; Cobden, J.C., The white slaves of England (Cincinnati, 1853), pp 284–369 Google Scholar; O’Brien, J. Bronterre, The rise, progress and phases of human history (London, 1885), pp 47–53.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ John Mitchel and Fr Kenyon later afforded notable exceptions, though few of the former’s Irish colleagues approved of his defence of slavery when he was in America, nor of his advice that they answer in the affirmative if asked whether they would like an Irish republic with an accompaniment of slave plantations. Even Kenyon rejected Mitchel’s proposal that America re-open the slave trade. Duffy, G. Gavan, My life in two hemispheres (2 vols, London, 1898), 1, 242.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ The Irish patriot. Daniel O’Connell3 s legacy to the Irish-Am eri cans (Philadelphia, 1863).

⁸⁸ Letter to Louis Kossuth concerning freedom and slavery in the United States (Boston, 1852), pp 4—49; Thoughts and recollections of a tour in Ireland, n.d. (Library of Congress, Frederick Douglass papers).

⁸⁹ Davis, D.B., The problem of slavery in the age of revolution (London, 1975), pp 249–55, 346–85.Google Scholar Given such concerns, it is understandable why the abolitionists reacted as they did to Mitchel’s claim that slavery provided the slave with more security and reward than did the industrial capitalism of the north the white factory worker, and that there was nothing incompatible in supporting both Black slavery and Irish freedom.