seamus dubhghaill

Promoting Irish Culture and History from Little Rock, Arkansas, USA


Leave a comment

Plantation Agreement Between the Crown & the Irish Society of London

The agreement on January 28, 1610, between the Crown and the Irish Society of London to carry out the plantation of Derry, Coleraine, and part of Tyrone refers to a significant historical event known as the Plantation of Ulster. This event takes place in the early 17th century and is part of the broader policy of the English and later British colonization of Ireland.

The Plantation of Ulster is a process initiated by the English Crown, primarily under King James I, to colonize the province of Ulster in the north of Ireland with English and Scottish Protestant settlers to defend against a future attack from within or without. This follows the Flight of the Earls in 1607, when several Gaelic Irish lords leave Ireland, leading to the confiscation of their lands by the Crown.

In his survey, James I finds that the town of Derry (renamed Londonderry) can become either a great asset as a control over the River Foyle and Lough Swilly, or it can become an inviting back door if the people of the area are against him. He pressures the guilds of the City of London to fund the resettlement of the area, including the building of a new walled city.

The Irish Society is formed by the City of London in response to James I’s royal request to participate in the plantation. The Society is a consortium of London livery companies, which are trade associations and guilds.

The Crown grants the Irish Society lands in Ulster, particularly in modern-day County Londonderry (then including what is now County Tyrone), to establish new settlements. The key areas are the city of Derry and the town of Coleraine.

The primary objective is to settle Ulster with loyal Protestant subjects, thus consolidating English influence in Ireland. The plantation aims to bring about economic development and to establish control over what is considered a rebellious and unruly region.

The livery companies of London undertake the establishment of new towns, fortifications, and the settlement of the land with tenants. However, the implementation faces various challenges, including resistance from the native Irish population, logistical difficulties, and issues of mismanagement.

The Plantation of Ulster has profound and lasting demographic, social, and political impacts. It leads to significant changes in land ownership and contributes to the religious and cultural diversification of the region. The plantation is also a root cause of the sectarian divide in Northern Ireland, contributing to centuries of conflict between the Protestant and Catholic communities.

The agreement between the Crown and the Irish Society of London to carry out the Plantation of Ulster is a pivotal event in Irish history. It plays a crucial role in shaping the historical trajectory of Ireland, particularly Northern Ireland, and its effects are still felt in the region’s complex socio-political landscape.

The Plantation of Ulster remains a subject of historical analysis and debate, reflecting the complex interplay of colonization, cultural identity, and conflict in Irish history.

(From: “The Crown and the Irish Society of London, Agree to Carry Out the Plantation of Derry, Coleraine and Part of Tyrone,” McManus Family History, http://www.mcmanusfamilyhistory.com | Pictured: The crest of the Irish Society of London)


Leave a comment

U.S. Senate Inquiry into the RMS Titanic Sinking

william-alden-smith

The April 15, 1912 sinking of the RMS Titanic, the trans-Atlantic passenger liner built by Harland & Wolff in Belfast, results in an inquiry by the United States Senate, which begins at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City  on April 19, 1912. Chaired by Senator William Alden Smith (R-Michigan), the inquiry is a subcommittee of the Senate’s Committee on Commerce. The hearings later move to the Russell Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C. and conclude on May 25, 1912 with a return visit to New York.

Seven senators serve on the subcommittee, with three Republicans and three Democrats in addition to Smith as chair. The other six senators are Jonathan Bourne (R-Oregon), Theodore E. Burton (R-Ohio), Duncan U. Fletcher (D-Florida), Francis G. Newlands (D-Nevada), George Clement Perkins (R-California), and Furnifold McLendel Simmons (D-North Carolina). The composition of the subcommittee is carefully chosen to represent the conservative, moderate and liberal wings of the two parties.

During 18 days of official investigations, punctuated by recesses, testimony is recorded from over 80 witnesses. These include surviving passengers and crew members, as well as captains and crew members of other ships in the vicinity, expert witnesses, and various officials and others involved in receiving and transmitting the news of the disaster. The evidence submitted varies from spoken testimony and questioning, to the deposition of correspondence and affidavits. Subjects covered include the ice warnings received, the inadequate (but legal) number of lifeboats, the handling of the ship and its speed, RMS Titanic‘s distress calls, and the handling of the evacuation of the ship.

The final report is presented to the United States Senate on May 28, 1912. It is nineteen pages long and includes 44 pages of exhibits, and summarises 1,145 pages of testimony and affidavits. Its recommendations, along with those of the British inquiry that concludes on July 3, 1912, lead to many changes in safety practices following the disaster.

The report is strongly critical of established seafaring practices and the roles that RMS Titanic‘s builders, owners, officers and crew had played in contributing to the disaster. It highlights the arrogance and complacency that had been prevalent aboard the ship and more generally in the shipping industry and the British Board of Trade. However, it does not find the International Mercantile Marine Company, an American consortium, or the White Star Line negligent under existing maritime laws, as they had merely followed standard practice, and the disaster could thus only be categorised as an “act of God.”

The inquiry is heavily criticised in Britain, both for its conduct and for Smith’s style of questioning. Many newspapers publish scathing editorial cartoons depicting Smith in unflattering terms. The British government is also hostile towards the inquiry. The British Ambassador to the United States, James Bryce, demands that President William Howard Taft dissolve the committee and refuses to recognise its jurisdiction.

Some British writers, however, applaud the inquiry. G. K. Chesterton contrasts the American objective of maximum openness with what he calls Britain’s “national evil,” which he describes as being to “hush everything up; it is to damp everything down; it is to leave the great affair unfinished, to leave every enormous question unanswered.” The American reaction is also generally positive. The American press welcomes Smith’s findings and accepts his recommendations, commending the senator for establishing the key facts of the disaster.

(Pictured: U.S. Senator William Alden Smith, chairman of the Senate inquiry into the RMS Titanic disaster)