1. HIS 3026 StudentNo.120193028
1
What were the causes of division within the rural Irish parishes c.
1908-1914?
In the autumn of 1908 the ‘Ranch War’ which had been waged by the United Irish League (UIL) was
theoreticallybroughttoanend.This‘war’ wasa crusade of agrarian agitation withthe aimof forcing
landlordstosell their estates to the tenants at what was deemed a ‘fair’ price, as well as aiming to
eradicate the grazing system.1
However following the introduction of the Birrel’s Land Bill into
Parliamentthe UILnow discouragedthe agitationsdue to fears that it would hinder the progress of
the Bill in the House of Commons.2
The UIL’s leadership’s faith in the Westminster system was not
sharedby all inIrelandasthe final yearsof the Ranch War had coincidedwiththe growth of support
for Sinn Fein and its abstentionist policy following the Liberal Party’s failure to deliver Home Rule
after their victory in the 1906 General Election.3
The period from 1908 to the outbreak of War in
Europe in1914, whichwouldsignificantlyalter the Irish situation once more, was crucial in shaping
the attitudes, motivations and crucially the divisions that were to be so prominent in the fight for
independence and civil war that were to follow. This essay will aim to analyse and explain some
possible causesof division within rural Irish parishes that other historians have identified as being
prominent during this period.
A keyhistoriographical debateonthe issue hasbeen betweenMichael Wheatley and Fergus
Campbell who disagree on the causes of division within rural Irish parishes during this period.
Wheatley argued in his work Nationalism and the Irish Party: Provincial Ireland, 1910-1916 that
much of the division within rural Ireland, or at least the middle counties of rural Ireland which his
workfocusedon,was the resultof personal feuds,statingthat“Alliances that appeared to be based
1 Fergus Campbell, Land and Revolution – Nationalist Politics in the West of Ireland 1891-1921 (Oxford
University Press:New York), 86.
2 Ibid, 184-185.
3 Ibid, 170.

2. HIS 3026 StudentNo.120193028
2
on social class, ideology, or political principle were instead the product of personal, family or
parochial interests”.4
This is supporting of Theodore Hopkins claim that the norm for Irish politics
was for it to be dominated by ‘dances around local gods’5
. Campbell on the other hand makes the
case in his work Land and Revolution - Nationalist Politics in the West of Ireland 1891-1921 that in
County Galway these divisions can be attributed to social and ideological differences.
Wheatleyusesthe arrival of Father Thomas Cummins in the town of Rosscommon as a case
study to support his personal feud explanation. He describes how in the spring of 1910 Cummins
arrivedinthe townto become the parishpriestwithareputationof beinga strongcharacter. After a
yearof involvinghimself in different aspects of public life in the town, Cummins got into a dispute
with the towns UIL branch over the nomination of their candidate for the county council election.
The candidate favoured by the towns UIL branch won, whereas Cummins’ preferred nominee did
not. This led to a sustained feud between Cummins and the town’s UIL branch which Wheatley
claimed weakened the unity of the county’s nationalists in the immediate pre-war years.6
Referring to the Rosscommon dispute Wheatley claimed that it “…had not been in anyway
ideological.”Thisisaclaimthat Campbell understandablydisputesinhisreview of Wheatley’s work,
as he pointsout thatWheatleyhimself explainshow Cummins promoted a radical agrarian policy in
Rosscommon through founding a committee in the town which aimed to force the sale of estates
and redistributegrazinglandtothe benefitof small tenantfarmersinthe region,aswell as referring
to members of the town UIL as ‘land grabbers’ further suggesting his support for the small tenant
farmers.7
Inresponse tothiscritique Wheatley argued that although the rhetoric used by Cummins
and his associates was consistently anti-landlord and anti-grazer, this was not unusual compared
withothersimilarfigures and organizations across the middle counties and that despite Cummins’
4 Michael Wheatley, Nationalism and the Irish Party: Provincial Ireland, 1910-1916 (Oxford University Press:
Oxford, 2005),7.
5 Ibid.
6 Ibid, 111.
7 Fergus Campbell,‘Nationalismand the Irish Party:Provincial Ireland,1910-1916 by Michael Wheatley –
Review’, Reviews in History, No. 503, (1 March 2006).

3. HIS 3026 StudentNo.120193028
3
support for the small tenant farmer he refused to sanction any form of intimidation or agrarian
‘crime’.8
Evenif Wheatleyiscorrectin hisanalysisof the divisioninthe town of Rosscommon, in that
it wasindeed‘adance aroundlocal gods’and that the dispute was ‘innoway ideological’,butrather
Cummins stance on certain issues was a front used in order to gain popular support, it would be
naïve to dismiss the role played by social and ideological motives in the significance of the
disagreement. A contributingfactortofiguressuchas Cumminsandotherlocal figuresbeingseenas
‘strong characters’ in the parishes of rural Ireland would have been due to the level of popular
supporttheyhad behindthem. If itnotbeenforthissupportthenthe ‘personal feuds’inwhich they
were part of wouldnothave beenas significantoras influential for them to be worth discussing. As
Campbell pointsout,hadWheatleyexploredthe social composition of the rank and file of the RAEC
and the towns UIL then it may have been possible to add weight to either the personal feud or
ideological argument by seeing whether there was any correlation between the social groups and
the side they supported.9
Exploration of the social composition of the rank and file members of the organisations
associated with key figures in a local dispute in the town of Craughwell was a method used by
Campbell in his research of case study in Land and Revolution. Campbell analyses a dispute in the
town involving Tom Kenny and, among others, Martin Hallinan. Kenny was a local blacksmith who
was a leading member of the town’s secret society, as well as the local UIL, Gaelic Athlectic
Associaiton (GAA), Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) and later Sinn Fein. The secret society was
dedicated to the cause of land distribution from landlords and big farmers to the rural poor. The
secret society was responsible for killing a local policeman over a local land dispute where the
landlord gave a farm to a wealthy widow whereas Kenny wanted the plot divided up amongst his
8 Michael Wheatley, Author’s Response (6 December 2009) - Fergus Campbell,‘Nationalismand the Irish Party:
Provincial Ireland,1910-1916by Michael Wheatley – Review’, Reviews in History, No. 503,(1 March 2006).
9 Campbell,Nationalismand the Irish Party,Wheatley – Review.

4. HIS 3026 StudentNo.120193028
4
followers. Violent agrarian agitation, orchestrated by Kenny, continued over the years but was
violently resistedbythe nowleaderof the UIL Martin Hallinanandotherprominentmembers of the
local bourgeoiswhofelt their positions were threatened by Kenny’s ideology. With the support of
the state,the church and the Home Rulersthe Hallinanites defeatedKenny andthe both agreed to a
financiallybeneficial truce aftertheirdispute wasthreateningtoseriouslyharmthe local economy.10
If one were to take Wheatley’s approach then one could view this as a personal feud over
local influenceandprominence between Kenny and Hallinan. Despite Hallinan being the leader of
the local UIL and KennyhavinglaterjoinedSinnFein,Wheatley might have argued that the rhetoric
usedbyboth was not the motivationbehindthe division but rather maintaining local status was. As
unlikely as this may be, it cannot be completely disregarded. However Campbell offers an array of
statisticsthatadd weightto hisclaimthat thiswas primarilyaclasswar, withKennyrepresentingthe
small farmers, tradesman and labourers of the parish whereas Hallinan represented the local
bourgeoisie whose prestige and position was threatened by the aims of the Kenny led agrarian
agitation.11
Forexample the figuresofferedin Campbell’sresearch shows how supportersof Kenny’s
party were primarily the younger, smaller farmers and landless men, whereas the supporters of
Hallinanwere the older,largerfarmersandshopkeepers who would be the ones to lose out should
land distribution take place.12
This statistical research supports the argument that even if the
Craughwell dispute wasmerelyapersonal feudbetweentwohighprofile characters, then the social
composition of their supporters suggests that there was an ideologically motivated force behind
each side.
Roy Foster’s work Vivid Faces concentrates on the aspect of generational conflict in the
periodpreludingthe Irish Revolution, although the work focuses mainly on the experiences of the
young,middle classintellectualradicalswhowere to play a role in the forthcoming revolution. One
10 Cambell,Land and Revolution, 172-192.
11 Fergus Campbell,‘Reign of terror at Craughwell:Tom Kenny and the McGoldrick murder of 1909’, 18th-19th
Century Social Perspectives, Features, Irish Republican Brotherhood/Fenians, Vol. 18, Issue1 (Jan/Feb 2010).
12 Campbell,Land and Revolution, 162-164.

5. HIS 3026 StudentNo.120193028
5
mightpresume thatthese peoplewere unlikelyradicals as they were the ones whose parents were
part of the establishmentandthemselves would have a stake in the system. But Foster argues that
thiswas a time inIreland when ‘ancestor worship’ was now being challenged and there was now a
generation who sought real change. He uses a quote from Muriel Macswiney, a daughter of the
wealthyandprivilegedMurphy dynasty of Cork who went on to become a radical, speaking in 1920
which effectively captures a prevalent mood among the young, middle class revolutionaries,
“My parentsare not like myself.I think I am rather characteristic of a certain section of
Ireland.The youngerpeopleinIreland have been thinking in a way where some of the
older ones have not, they were well off and comfortable and thought only of
themselves. This is dying out now. The younger members of such families are
republican. I am only characteristic of a great many who were brought up and shut up
at home”.13
Although this may only give us an insight into the mind-set of a generation within a limited social
group,it isalsouseful inthatit provokesfurther thought into the motivations in causing division in
rural Irish parishes. The division may not be as straight forward to be labelled as being between
those with little versus those with much, or at least more. Idealist values and aspirations for the
future may contribute todivision,althoughthismaybe a more prominentmotivation for those who
are in a position which is sufficiently privileged so as to not be significantly concerned with a rival
groupwho in theirviewhasthe potential tothreatentheircomparativelymoderate qualityof life,as
couldbe argued was the case betweenthe Hallinanitesandthe Kennyitesinthe Craughwell dispute.
In Land and Revolution Campbell’sresearchintothe social compositionof groups also highlights the
generational factorinthe divisionbetweenrival groupsinrural Ireland. The majority of Hallinanites
were middle agedwhereasthe Kennyiteswere more commonlyof ayoungerage group.This adds to
13 Roy Foster, The Irish Revolutionary Generation, Audio Podcast,Historyhub.ie, March 2014.
http://historyhub.ie/podcast-roy-foster-irish-revolutionary-generation (Accessed 8 March 2015).

6. HIS 3026 StudentNo.120193028
6
Campbell’sclaimthatthe Hallinitessoughtamore moderate policyin agrarian matters compared to
the more land hungry Kennyites as it was this older, more prosperous generation that were more
likely to lose out if land redistribution were to occur.14
In conclusion it could be argued that there were numerous causes of division in the rural
Irishparishesfromthe end of the Ranch War in 1908 to the outbreak of the Great War in 1914, such
as Wheatley’s theory of personal feuds as a significant factor, Campell’s argument of social and
ideological clashes and Foster’s claim of this being a defining period for the clash of generations.
However Campbell’s argument appears to be the strongest of the three covered in this essay.
Wheatley’s personal feud theory can be undermined by the argument that the strong characters
involved in the feuds were only significant due to the popular backing they received which can be
attributed to their stance, regardless of whether it was genuine or token, on the land situation.
Fostermakesan interestingclaimforthe significance of generationalconflict as a cause for division,
however his work on the matter focuses mainly on young intellectuals of the middle and upper
classeswhose motivesmayhave beenmore idealisticthan the younger generations of rural Ireland
whose goals were more pragmatic in the form of improving their social and economic situation.
14 Campbell, Land and Revolution, 163-164.

7. HIS 3026 StudentNo.120193028
7
Bibliography
Campbell,Fergus., Land and Revolution –NationalistPoliticsin theWest of Ireland 1891-1921
(OxfordUniversityPress: New York).
Campbell,Fergus.,‘Nationalismandthe IrishParty:Provincial Ireland,1910-1916 byMichael
Wheatley –Review’, Reviewsin History, No.503 (1 March 2006).
Campbell,Fergus.,‘Reignof terrorat Craughwell:TomKennyandthe McGoldrickmurder of 1909’,
18th
-19th
Century Social Perspectives,Features,Irish Republican Brotherhood/Fenians,Vol.18,Issue 1
(Jan/Feb2010).
Foster, Roy., The Irish Revolutionary Generation, AudioPodcast,Historyhub.ie,March2014.
http://historyhub.ie/podcast-roy-foster-irish-revolutionary-generation(Accessed8March 2015).
Wheatley,Michael., Nationalismand theIrish Party:ProvincialIreland,1910-1916 (OxfordUniversity
Press:Oxford,2005).
Wheatley,Michael.,Author’sResponse(6December2009) - FergusCampbell,‘Nationalismandthe
IrishParty:Provincial Ireland,1910-1916 by Michael Wheatley –Review’, Reviewsin History, No.
503, (1 March 2006).