Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-5mhkq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T19:52:47.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Frewen’s Anglo-American campaign for federalism, 1910–21

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2016

Extract

In the literature of the Irish independence movement the question of a federal settlement involving the United Kingdom, and possibly the whole empire, in a grand scheme of ‘devolution’ has received relatively little attention. However, the papers of Moreton Frewen (1853–1924), now lodged in the Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., should add a great deal to any assessment of this aspect of the Irish Problem.

Frewen was a member of the Anglo-Irish gentry with business interests in America. He married a daughter of Leonard Jerome of New York, and was therefore an uncle of both Winston Churchill and Shane Leslie, both of whom had mothers who were Jeromes. Furthermore, his brother’s daughter became the second wife of Sir Edward Carson, and in addition to these family associations he was acquainted with the most prominent men of his generation on both sides of the Atlantic. His life was actually a series of business and political failures, but his papers hold the key to a fascinating chapter in the search for a federal solution to Ireland’s political problems, and most of what follows is based upon those papers.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 1967

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

1 A brief biography of Frewen is in Leslie, Shane, Studies in sublime failure (London, 1932).Google Scholar Frewen, a son of Thomas Frewen, M.P., lived at Brede, Sussex, and Innishannon, co. Cork. In the 1870’s he ranched in Wyoming and lost heavily. His marriage to Glare Jerome brought him money but he was always close to bankruptcy. He was at one time adviser to the Nizam of Hyderabad on economic matters, and had various business interests in North and South America, Africa, and elsewhere, none of which were very successful. He was a bimetallist, and through this interest had many friends in America, including W. J. Bryan, and Senators Hoar, Jones, and Lodge. There is a new biography, though containing little on federalism. See Leslie, Anita, Mr Frewen of England, a Victorian adventurer (London, 1966).Google Scholar

2 To compare the two movements see Lyons, F.S.L., ‘The Irish unionist party and the devolution crisis of 1904–5’, in Irish Historical Studies, 6. 122 (Mar. 1948).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Frewen to Churchill, 31 Mar. 1910 (Papers of Moreton Frewen, in Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. (hereafter cited as Frewen), box 30).

4 Leslie, op. cit. p. 286.

5 Gollin, Alfred M., The Observer and J L. Garvin (London, 1960).Google Scholar Healy’s Letters and leaders of my day, and Michael MacDonagh’s Life of William O’Brien, ignore the federal story presented here.

6 New York Times, 24 Apr. 1910.

7 Grey to a friend in England, May 1910 (Frewen, box 30).

8 Frewen to Dunraven, 28 Dec. 1921 (Frewen, box 56). In March 1910 Kahn sent Frewen a cheque for $2,500. I suspect that half of this was attributed to Chisholm in 1921. Kahn to Frewen, 31 Mar. 1910 (Frewen, box 30).

9 Healy to Frewen, 12 June 1910 (Frewen, box 31).

10 Irish Times, 14 Oct. 1910.

11 Frewen to Asquith, 15 Nov 1910 (Frewen, box 32).

12 Frewen to Cockran, 18 Nov. 1910 (Papers of William Bourke Cockran, in New York Public Library (hereafter cited as Cockran), box 16.

13 Nancy Astor to Dunraven, 21 Nov. 1910, and to Frewen, 1 Dec. 1910 (Frewen, box 32). The Astors, who owned the Observer, were involved in the federal movement but only rarely wrote to Frewen.

14 Frewen to Cockran, 25 Nov. 1910 (Gockran, box 16); O’Brien to Frewen, 28 Dec. 1910 (Frewen, box 33).

15 Chisholm to Dunraven, 6 Feb. 1911 ; Frewen to Mrs Frewen, 23 Feb. 1911 (Frewen, box 33).

16 Frewen to Cockran, 26 May 1911 (Cockran, box 16); Frewen to Dunraven, 2 July 1911 (Frewen, box 34).

17 Grey to Frewen, 13 Sept. 1911 (Frewen, box 35).

18 Dunraven to Frewen, 9, 12 May 1911 (Frewen, box 34).

19 Dunraven to Grey, 27 Dec. 1910 (Frewen, box 33); Dunraven to Frewen, 25 Dec. 1911 (Frewen, box 35).

20 O’Brien to Dunraven, 5 June 1911 (Frewen, box 34).

21 O’Brien to Frewen, no date but filed in 1911 (Frewen, box 36).

22 Negotiations which involved Frewen, Long and Α. E. Godwin, acting for Long, in March and April 1912, are in Frewen, box 37.

23 Gollin, op. cit., pp. 249–50.

24 Hugh G. Chisholm, jnr., to Frewen, 25 May 1912 (Frewen, box 37).

25 Frewen to Cockran, 21 Oct. 1910 (Cockran, box 16).

26 O’Brien to Frewen, 25 May 1910 (Frewen, box 30).

* My italics.

27 Observer, 16 Oct. 1910.

28 Described in Frewen to Lansdowne, 30 Jan. 1913 (Frewen, box 35).

29 Cockran to Frewen, 21 Sept. 1899 (Frewen, box 17), and 28 Oct. 1910 (Frewen, box 32).

30 Frewen to Cockran, 23 May 1911 (Cockran, box 16).

31 Frewen to Cockran, 1 Sept. 1912 (Cockran, box 16).

32 A draft of the letter dated 19 May 1914, is in Cockran, box 16. Some of those who saw it commented in Frewen, box 42.

38 O’Brien to Frewen, 15 May 1910 (Frewen, box 30).

34 Redmond to the New York Press Club, 3 Oct. 1910, in Ian Malcolm, M.P., ‘Home rule all round’ in Nineteenth Century, 68. 791–9 (Nov. 1910).Google Scholar

35 Freeman’s Journal, 5 Oct. 1910, cited in Philip, G. Cambray, Irish affairs and the home rule question (London, 2nd ed., 1911), p. 8.Google Scholar

36 Irish World, 4 Dec. 1909, cited in Malcolm, op. cit.

37 Before the United Irish League of America convention at Buffalo, New York, Oct. 1910, cited by Ian Malcolm, M.P., Parliamentary debates. 5th series, 21. 1076 (15 Feb. 1911).Google Scholar

38 O’Brien to Frewen, 4 Oct. 1910 (Frewen, box 32); Observer, 16 Oct. 1910.

39 Frewen to Redmond, 17 Nov. 1910 (Frewen, box 32). Dillon was not allowed to forget his support for a policy of violence in 1881.

40 Gollin, op. cit., pp. 209 ff.

41 Colvin, Ian, The Life of Lord Carson (London, 1934), 2. 48.Google Scholar

42 New York Times, 24 Apr. 1910; New York Sun, 1 Oct. 1910, See Frewen, box 32, for correspondence on these articles.

43 Frewen to Balfour, 21 Sept. 1910 (Frewen, box 32).

44 Colvin, op. cit., p. 49.

45 Balfour’s attitude is cited in Grey to Frewen, 2 Apr. 1910 (Frewen, box 30). Garvin also worked hard to convert Balfour (Gollin, op. cit., PP. 173, 213–18).

46 Letters from Chamberlain, Long, Law and others on this subject are in Frewen, boxes 32, 33, 35, 36.

47 Frewen to Long, 24 Aug. 1911 (Frewen, box 34).

48 Frewen to Dunraven, 2 July 1911 (Frewen, box 34). Milner was a very guarded federalist. He felt that majorities for local autonomy existed in Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and that federalism would channel this safely. But as an ‘imperial unionist’ he saw no necessary extension to the whole empire. Milner to Balfour, 17 Apr., 15 Nov. 1910 (Balfour Papers, B.M. Add. MS 49697, xv). Nevertheless, like many other federalists—Garvin, Long, Frewen etc.—Milner firmly supported Ulster in 1913 and 1914 (Colvin, op. cit., p. 241).

49 Note by Frewen, 15 Nov. 1910 (Frewen, box 32).

50 Frewen to Grey, undated but filed between Dec. 1910 and Mar. 1911 (Frewen, box 33).

51 Carson to Frewen, undated (Frewen, box 63).

52 Asquith stated his position on 11 Apr. 1912 and Carson replied the same day (Parliamentary debates, 5th series, xxxvi. 1399–1426, 1433.

53 Frewen to Middleton, 7 Jan. 1912 (Frewen, box 36).

54 Dunraven to Frewen, 20 Aug. 1911 (Frewen, box 36).

55 Dunraven to Frewen, 3 July 1911 (Frewen, box 35).

56 Frewen to Grey, 30 Mar. 1911 (Frewen, box 33). Despite an oft avowed dislike of parliament Frewen did solicit another seat as an O’Brienite in August and September, but without success.

57 Grey to Frewen, 21 Aug. 1911 (Frewen, box 34). Of course, the defeat of the attempt to reform the lords would have led to an unflinching attack on the budget.

58 Dunraven to Frewen, 28 Jan. 1913 (Frewen, box 39).

59 Frewen refused to sign a letter sponsored by Dunraven, MacDonnell, and Hutcheson Poe in September 1912 favouring a negotiated settlement, for fear that it would weaken the significance of Ulster’s protest. The correspondence is in Frewen, box 38.

60 Reprinted in the Cork Examiner, 8 Oct. 1912.

61 Frewen to Cockran, 10 Mar. 1914 (Cockran, box 16).

62 Healy to Frewen, 26 Sept. 1913 (Frewen, box 40).

63 King George V to Asquith, 11 Aug. 1913 (Asquith Papers, Bodleian Library, box 38). Birrell had alluded to a federal settlement in July, 1910 (Spectator, 30 July 1910). Law had refused to discuss it in public, though he did so privately with the king, Churchhill, Asquith and others from at least September 1913. But Ulster was an electoral asset he would not surrender. See Asquith Papers, boxes 38, 39.

64 Cabinet memorandum, ‘The Irish situation’, Sept. 1913, cited in Spender, J.A. and Asquith, Cyril, Life of Herbert Henry Asquith, Lord Oxford and Asquith (London, 1932), 2. 29 ff.Google Scholar

65 Memorandum on a meeting with Carson, 16 Dec. 1913 (Asquith Papers, box 39).

66 These and other replies, dated February and March 1914, are in Frewen, boxes 35, 42.

67 Colvin, op. cit., ii. 386.

68 Frewen to Cockran, 11 Nov. 1910 (Cockran, box 16).

69 Colvin, op. cit., ii. 355.

70 O’Brien letters on the new Irish National League of 1916 are in Frewen, box 46. On 19 May 1916 Milner donated £500 to O’Brien. See also O’Brien, William, The Irish revolution and how it came about (London, 1923).Google Scholar

71 Colvin, op. cit., iii. 326–8.

72 Long to Frewen and Frewen to Healy, 4 Oct. 1918 (Frewen, box 51).

73 Frewen, box 53.

74 Frewen to Dunraven, 26 June 1918 (Frewen, box 51).

75 Dunraven to Frewen, 28 June 1918 (Frewen, box 51) and 10 Sept., 7 Oct. 1920 (Frewen, box 54).

76 Long to Frewen, 17, 20 Nov. 1920 (Frewen, box 54).

77 Frewen to Anne Cockran, 14 Dec. 1919 (Frewen, box 53).

78 Frewen to Long, 9 May, 1920 (Frewen, box 53).