Chapter II: Part 2

Do some of the people really understand the meaning of patriotism?
Many seem to imagine it means blind obedience to any administration
which may be insidiously laboring to destroy our institutions. But I
have an abiding faith in the people of this country when they fully
appreciate a threatened danger. I believe with Burke “that the
people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.”

Are some of us laboring under the delusion that we are called upon
to govern the world, that we are to set forth with a few small
Bibles and a large supply of arms to force what we call our
civilization on an unwilling people in another hemisphere, while
thoughtful men are staggered at the problems of government
confronting us on the North American continent?

Shall we not profit by the lessons of history and recall what this
day means? It was the beginning of a movement against an empire
which aspired to govern the world. Yet those men on Lexington common
initiated a revolution which wrested from the diadem of Great
Britain the fairest jewel in her crown. May we not indulge to-day
somewhat in retrospection and examine the causes which led to our
revolt?

The British parliament had passed the stamp act, the tea tax and the
Boston port bill, yet those did not cause war; the real cause of the
battle of Lexington was the reconstruction act of 1774. Prior to
this act the councilors had been chosen by the people through their
representatives. By the new law the king was to appoint them, to
hold office during his pleasure. The superior judges were to hold at
the will of the king and to be dependent on his will for the amount
and payment of their salaries; the inferior judges were to be
removable by the royal governor at his discretion, he himself
holding at the king’s will.

The deepest reaching provision of the acts was aimed at the
town-meetings. They were prohibited, except the annual meeting to
elect officers, but no other meetings could be held without the
written permission of the royal governor. These acts of parliament
sought to change self-government into government by the king, and to
substitute for home rule, absolute rule at Westminster and St.
James’s palace.

Then came the military act, and in February, 1775, parliament
declared Massachusetts in rebellion. The instructions of Lord
Dartmouth, the secretary of state for the colonies, to General Gage,
the royal governor, ran like this: “Sovereignty of the king over the
colonies requires a full and absolute submission.” What a striking
similarity that has to some recent dispatches we have heard since we
acquired distant possessions.

General Gage’s call for 20,000 men, the assembling of 5,000 troops
at Boston, and the authority given to General Gage to fire on the
people, made war inevitable. We see again how history repeats
itself.

The people in spite of royal mandates continued to hold their own
town-meetings, organized county meetings, and made a provincial
congress. The convention at Middlesex “Resolved, if in support of
our rights we are called to encounter death we are yet undaunted,
sensible that he can never die too soon who lays down his life in
support of the laws and liberties of his country.” Lexington wrote
to Boston, “We trust in God that should the state of affairs require
it, we shall be ready to sacrifice our estates and everything dear
in life, yea, and life itself, in support of the common cause.”

Nobly did the men of Lexington fulfil that pledge. Shall we in our
day forget what these men did and dared? Are we so saturated with
the spirit of commercialism, are we so wedded to the worship of the
golden calf, that justice and humanity have no place in our modern
code?

Let us remember we shall be tried at the bar of history as have been
other nations; as our opportunities have been greater, so are our
responsibilities. We cannot escape our liabilities; it is for us to
so act in the present that this experiment of a free government,
founded upon manhood suffrage, shall not fail.

LETTERS AND PATRIOTIC SENTIMENTS.

Letters of regret at inability to be present were received from
ex-Gov. John Lee Carroll of Maryland, president of the Sons of the
Revolution; Governor Roosevelt of New York, President Eliot of
Harvard, President Hadley of Yale, Senator Hoar of Massachusetts,
Senators Hale and Frye of Maine, Senator Mason of Illinois, David
Starr Jordon, president of Leland Stanford University; E. Benjamin
Andrews, superintendent of public schools, Chicago; Congressman
Sulzer of New York, Rector Conaty of the Catholic University,
President Harper of the University of Chicago, Rev. James H.
O’Donnell, Watertown, Conn.; Hon. Thomas J. Lynch, Augusta, Me.;
Hon. James S. Coleman, New York city; Col. John P. Donahoe,
Wilmington, Del.; Mayor Driscoll of New Haven, Conn.; Col. James
Quinlan, New York city; John J. Davis, Greenville, Pa.; James
Connolly, Coronado, Cal.; Col. James Moran, Providence, R. I., and
from several others.

Ex-Gov. Carroll of Maryland wrote: “If we contrast the pitiful
resources of those early days with the present happiness, wealth and
prosperity of our united country, we can realize the courage of
those daring men who openly proclaimed that our only purpose was to
obtain our freedom ‘peaceably if we could, forcibly if we must.’”

E. Benj. Andrews of Chicago declared: “I assure you that nothing but
my distance from you prevents my attendance. I should be pleased to
attend, not only to hear the distinguished gentlemen who will be
present, but also to testify anew the reverence which all true
patriots must feel for the brave men who immortalized themselves by
standing for liberty on Lexington green, 125 years ago.”

Senator Hoar wrote: “It will not be in my power to attend the
celebration of the 19th of April in Boston by the American-Irish
Historical Society. But I am sure that the celebration will be in
the spirit which animated the men who fought and the men who died on
the 19th of April, 1775. You will, I am sure, reinforce the lesson
that no human power can turn wrong into right, injustice into
justice, or lawfully crush out the love of liberty native in every
human soul and the right to independence that belongs to every
people.”

Gov. Roosevelt said in his letter: “I wish I could be present with
you at the celebration of the battle of Lexington. It is peculiarly
appropriate for men of Irish stock to take part in this celebration,
for they have always done even more than their proper share of
valiant fighting for the republic.”

Congressman Sulzer wrote: “I regret exceedingly my inability to
accept owing to imperative official duties here which demand my
presence in Washington. If ever there was a time in the history of
the republic when we should celebrate the battle of Lexington it is
this year, and I trust your celebration will be a great success in
every way.”

From Congressman Capron of Rhode Island: “I am inclined to refer to
the patriots who fought in the great struggle which initiated the
war for independence and human liberty with the deepest devotion
akin to reverence. The event itself should be held in grateful
remembrance.... Let every American if he would find the spirit which
animated the men of Lexington look down into his own being and
analyze the feelings lying there, and if he be a true American he
will find love of God, love of country, love of home, love of
liberty, love of law and love of man, all and each of which are the
essential components of that which we call patriotism. My colleague,
Mr. Bull, who was also the recipient of your invitation, desires me
to express his thanks therefor and to say that he heartily joins in
the sentiments herein expressed.”

PRESIDENT HALL OF CLARK UNIVERSITY.

President G. Stanley Hall of Clark University, Worcester, Mass., upon being introduced, stated that among his ancestors was a Mary Hennessy of Limerick, Ireland. He then went on to say that:

The three characteristics of the Irish race, which are most to be
commended when rightly directed, are, first, their heartiness,
geniality, enjoyment of life, a nameless quality made of the best
elements of the German gemuth and the French esprit. This is the
temperament of genius, it is the conserved youth which makes the
Irishman an adolescent at whatever age, and is strongly contrasted
with the sternness and reserve of the Puritan. This temperament,
too, is connected with the fecundity of the race, also in contrast
with the Puritan New Englanders, who even in Boston may ere long
have to hail the Irish race with _morituri salutamus_ with a new
meaning in it.

Second, the Irishman, like other men, is not always a man of peace.
His blood is warmer on occasion and his interpretation of the
strenuous life, which makes men loved for the enemies they make, is
another quality which, when rightly trained and directed, is one of
the greatest powers for good in the world. To be angry aright is
almost one of the definitions of education.

Third, the Irishman has a veritable genius for politics, which had
no scope in the earlier formative days of Irish history, but which
finds its legitimate sphere in this republican land. He is also a
patriot, a superb soldier. Politics culminates in statesmanship, and
I cannot forbear here a word which I believe will appeal to every
heart which keeps a warm corner for Burke, Emmet or O’Connell.

My conception of statesmanship is higher than that of politics. The
first of all conditions of success in its purer realm is utter
disinterestedness. Within the last few days, this country has
witnessed the rare spectacle of a senator,[1] unusually devoted to
the party at whose birth he assisted, and to a president whom he has
long loved, placing his convictions, matured by long experience and
ripe knowledge, above both. To no temperament could the personal
sacrifices have been greater than for him to give us this modern
version of Aristotle’s “_Plato amicus sed major amicus veritas_.”

Bound by family lineage, many and long friendships, historical and
literary associations, with England, his devotion to our national
muse of liberty which inspired the constitution and the declaration
of independence impelled him to openly declare sympathy toward the
struggling patriots in the Transvaal, as in his long life he has had
occasion to do for Poland, Hungary, Greece, Cuba and Ireland.

Gentlemen, there is a higher plane than that of the traditions,
current methods and policies of organizing colonial dependencies. It
is to believe that every growing race and ethnic stock has higher
possibilities in it; to hold that the diverse ways of civilization
are not all exhausted yet, and that instead of forcing other races
to take up the white man’s, or the Englishman’s burden, our policy
should be to keep off, where practicable, alien interference,
including our own, and to develop a new policy of protection and
thus to foster new and independent centers of social and political
development.

To my mind the tragedy of history is the perversion, repression or
destruction of budding nationalities of species, and perhaps genera,
different from our own, and the threatened uniformitization of the
entire world by civilization as we define and understand it. This is
the method of what, I think, we may call the higher anthropology. It
would be, I think, the statesmanship of the superman, who may
sometime exist, and who would be a citizen of all times and a
spectator of all events. To steer the ship of state in this
direction is to keep it true to the pole of human destiny. It is the
work of the heavenborn pilot, who keeps his tiller true, and not of
the star gazer.

These moments are big with destiny. Statesmanship is approaching the
time when it must take a cosmic view of human life as a whole, and I
have heard no note that rings so clear and pure to my ear with such
a true flavor of conviction as the plea for a larger ken by the
political nestor of this state and nation, who has grown not rich
but poor from a quarter century’s service for his state; who makes
no bid for the support of other parties, while speaking as many of
his colleagues in both parties privately declare they would do if
they spoke for themselves rather than for their constituency; a man
competent to-day to fill any one of three if not four
professorships; whose years admonish us that any such utterance may
be his last, and whom, as in the case of no other public man, his
political enemies vie with his friends to honor.

President Hall was followed by President Capen of Tufts College who also delivered an entertaining address.

The historical paper of the evening was by Thomas F. O’Malley, of Somerville, Mass., whose subject was “Hugh Cargill,” a patriot who took part in the events of April 19, 1775. The paper displayed close research.

There were also addresses during the evening by John E. Milholland, Joseph Smith and E. O’Meagher Condon.

GEN. RICHARD MONTGOMERY.

Born near Raphoe, Donegal County, Ireland, 1736; became a
distinguished American soldier; was appointed a brigadier-general by
the Continental Congress: acting commander-in-chief of the Northern
Department; invaded Canada; captured St. John, took Montreal, and
laid siege to Quebec; was promoted to the rank of major-general;
killed, on Dec. 31, 1775, while attempting to carry Quebec by storm.
Hon. John D. Crimmins, President-General of the American-Irish
Historical Society, has the last letter that Montgomery is known to
have written. It is a demand on the British commander of Quebec to
surrender.
]

BATTLE OF BUNKER HILL.

THE ANNIVERSARY IS DULY OBSERVED BY THE SOCIETY—A WREATH PLACED.

On June 18, 1900, the Society celebrated the anniversary of the battle of Bunker Hill, the following being a copy of the notice sent out in connection therewith:

AMERICAN-IRISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

(Founded, 1897. First President-General, Rear Admiral R. W. Meade,
U. S. N.)

CELEBRATION OF THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE BATTLE OF BUNKER HILL.

BROTHERS: You are hereby notified that the anniversary of the battle
of Bunker Hill will be observed by our Society on Monday, June 18,
1900 (the anniversary itself falling on Sunday, June 17).

Our programme will include the placing of a wreath on the memorial
tablets in Winthrop Square, Charlestown, at noon, an address by Mr.
Thomas F. O’Malley, of Somerville, Mass., a visit to and ascension
of the battle monument, and in the evening a dinner at 8 o’clock at
the United States Hotel, city proper.

Members and guests wishing to participate in the exercises at the
tablets will assemble there at the hour mentioned.

The after-dinner exercises at the United States Hotel in the evening
will include an historical address by Hon. John C. Linehan, state
insurance commissioner of New Hampshire, on: “The Irish in the
Patriot ranks at the Battle of Bunker Hill.”

There will also be addresses by members of the Society from
Worcester, Springfield, Providence, Hartford, New York and other
cities. Dinner tickets will be three dollars each, and are now
ready. Please notify the secretary as soon as possible if you intend
to be present at the dinner.

Fraternally,
THOMAS J. GARGAN,
_President-General_.

THOMAS HAMILTON MURRAY,
_Secretary-General_ (77 Main Street, Woonsocket, R. I.)
June 1, 1900.

In accordance with the foregoing notice, a number of members of the Society assembled at the memorial tablets, in Charlestown, at noon, and witnessed the placing of a laurel wreath to the memory of the patriots of June 17.

Upon the wreath being placed in position, a card bearing the following inscription was attached thereto:

+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| THIS WREATH |
| |
| IS HERE PLACED BY THE |
| |
| AMERICAN-IRISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY |
| |
| AS A TRIBUTE TO THE PATRIOTS |
| |
| Who, on this Hill, |
| |
| JUNE 17, 1775, |
| |
| Nobly gave battle, in the cause of liberty, to the forces of the |
| British King. |
| ------------- |
| Dulce et Decorum est Pro Patria Mori. |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+

Thomas F. O’Malley then addressed the gathering substantially as follows:

To-day we meet in pious and patriotic commemoration of a great deed,
performed here 125 years ago. To-day we stand in the midst of a
great nation which is proud, strong and free. All is joy around us.
But let us turn back a century and a quarter in the book of time.
What a scene was enacted here! The hill crowned with a hastily
constructed redoubt and held by an undisciplined and untrained
yeomanry—farmers, with their fowling pieces and but little
ammunition.

A brilliantly appointed army advancing to the attack and storming
the works, supported by coöperating ships and batteries; the blaze
of the burning town, coursing whole streets or curling up the spires
of public edifices; the air above filled with clouds of dense black
smoke, and the surrounding hills, fields, roofs and steeples
occupied by crowds of spectators. What strange sounds came to the
ear—the shouts of the contending armies, the crash of falling
buildings, the roar of ship guns and mortars and the rattle of
musketry.

On one side we find the high courage of men staking their lives and
reputations on the uncertain issue of a civil war; and on the other,
the reflection that defeat meant the final loss to Britain of her
American empire.

You know the story of that battle—how the flower of England’s army
were repeatedly repulsed; how in the moment of desperation the
regulars laid aside their knapsacks, moved forward, relying on the
bayonet and their artillery to carry the day. The American fire
slackened, the ammunition was expended, there were no bayonets, and
the oncoming regulars were met with clubbed muskets and stones. The
fortunes of the day were reversed, and, technically speaking, it was
a British victory.

After speaking of the men of Irish blood who fought in the patriot ranks that day, Mr. O’Malley continued:

The Americans are estimated to have lost in killed 140, and in
wounded 271; loss by capture 30. In all, 441. The English loss was
226 killed, 828 wounded. Total—1,054.

In comparison with other battles, so far as numbers go, Bunker Hill
was but a skirmish. But in results it was of the utmost importance.
Before the engagement there was some hope, perhaps some chance, for
a peaceful settlement of existing difficulties; but after that
memorable day, all were for war and independence. Bunker Hill was
the beginning of the end of British domination on the Western
continent.

Mr. O’Malley was frequently applauded and upon the conclusion of his address was warmly congratulated. The banquet at the United States Hotel in the evening was a most enjoyable affair.

President-General Gargan occupied the chair. Among those present were Hon. John C. Linehan, treasurer-general of the Society, Concord, N. H.; Secretary-General T. H. Murray, Woonsocket, R. I.; William Doogue, city forester of Boston; Thomas F. O’Malley, the orator at the memorial tablets; Joseph Smith, Lowell, Mass.; James Jeffrey Roche, Boston; William P. Connery, Lynn, Mass.; M. E. Hennessy, Boston; Capt. Samuel McKeever, U. S. A. (retired), Somerville, Mass.; E. O’Meagher Condon, New York city; John T. F. MacDonnell, Holyoke, Mass., and others.

President-General Gargan said in his after-dinner address:

One hundred and twenty-five years have passed since the memorable
battle of Bunker Hill, commemorated by yonder tall gray shaft at
Charlestown, familiar to us all from early boyhood. We knew the
story of that fight before we knew the multiplication table.
Nominally a British victory, yet a victory purchased at such fearful
cost to the victors as to inspire the colonists to believe that
ultimately the triumph would be theirs.

We all know the story from the American standpoint; few read the
British accounts of that battle. I was interested to read, a few
days ago, some of the English accounts; one of them concludes in
these words:

“The action has shown the bravery of the king’s troops, who, under
every disadvantage, gained a complete victory over three times their
number strongly posted and covered by breastworks, but they fought
for their king, their law and constitution.”

That sounds like the account some of the emasculated Americans in
our day would give of the fight. But Gage wrote to Lord Dartmouth,
then minister for the colonies:

“The number of killed and wounded is greater than we could afford to
lose. The trials we have had show that the rebels are not the
despicable rabble too many may have supposed them to be.”

Burgoyne and Clinton, who saw the battle from Copp’s Hill, have also
written their impressions of the battle in 1775. There were two
English accounts, historical in their nature. One of these, it is
thought, was written by Edmund Burke, and was published in the
Annual Register of that year.

To all Americans, Bunker Hill was a battle cry and an inspiration
during the seven long years of war necessary to obtain our
independence. To-day its memories should rekindle our patriotism and
prompt us to recall the story of the men who there died that a new
republic might be born. We know that they believed in God and had
high ideals.

The historical paper of the evening was by Hon. John C. Linehan and was of a high order of merit.

Brief addresses were made by Capt. Samuel McKeever, U. S. A., and by several other gentlemen present, and the company adjourned, well pleased with the celebration of the day and evening.

THE BATTLE OF RHODE ISLAND.

ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION OF THE EVENT BY THE SOCIETY, AUG. 29, 1900.

A celebration of the anniversary of the battle of Rhode Island took place at Newport, R. I., Aug. 29, in accordance with the following notice, sent to each member:

RHODE ISLAND CHAPTER, AMERICAN-IRISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

CELEBRATION OF THE ANNIVERSARY OF THE BATTLE OF RHODE ISLAND.

DEAR SIR: The Rhode Island members of the American-Irish Historical
Society will observe the anniversary of the battle of Rhode Island
on Wednesday, Aug. 29, 1900.

The celebration will take place at Newport, R. I., and every member
of our Society throughout the country is cordially invited to be
present and participate with us in the exercises of the occasion.

Headquarters for the day and evening will be established at the
Aquidneck House, where a reception committee will be in attendance.
Invitations to be present have been extended the governor of Rhode
Island, the state record commissioner, and the presidents of the
Rhode Island and Newport Historical societies.

During the day many points of historical interest will be visited.
Dinner will be served at 8 p. m. at the Aquidneck. After dinner,
patriotic addresses and other appropriate features will take place.

The battle of Rhode Island, as is well-known, was fought Aug. 29,
1778, the American forces being commanded by Gen. John Sullivan. In
this battle Sullivan repulsed the British and maintained the field.
The anniversary is, therefore, one of note and will, we hope, be
observed by a very large attendance. Please notify the secretary if
you intend to be present.

Fraternally,
PATRICK J. BOYLE (mayor of Newport),
_State Vice-President for Rhode Island_.

THOMAS HAMILTON MURRAY
(Editor _The Evening Call_, Woonsocket, R. I.),
_Secretary_.
Aug. 1, 1900.

In response to the foregoing, a number of the members from out of the state visited Newport and were received by the local members of the Society. Mayor Boyle presided at the banquet in the evening. He made an address, as did also Mayor Driscoll of New Haven, Conn.; Hon. James F. Brennan of Peterborough, N. H.; T. F. O’Malley of Somerville, Mass., and one or two other gentlemen. A patriotic poem was recited by John J. Rooney of New York city.

Thomas Hamilton Murray, secretary-general of the Society, announced that since the annual meeting the following members of the organization had died: Hon. Andrew J. White, New York city; Hon. William F. Reddy, Richmond, Va.; Rev. Michael Gilligan, Medford, Mass.; Michael Cavanagh, Washington, D. C.; Eugene T. McCarthy, Lynn, Mass.; Dr. William H. O’Hearn, Lawrence, Mass.; Daniel B. Kelley, Haverhill, Mass.; William H. Quinn, Hallowell, Me., and Hon. John J. Hayes, Boston, Mass. Appropriate tributes were paid the memory of the foregoing and minutes adopted expressive of esteem and regret.

The accession of the following new members was announced: Michael F. Cox, M. D., M. R. I. A., of the senate of the Royal University of Ireland; Hon. James D. Phelan, mayor of San Francisco; Francis Q. O’Neill, president of the Hibernian Bank, Charleston, S. C.; M. le Comte Margerin de Cremont, Paris, France; Rev. James C. Walsh, Providence, R. I.; Joseph Madden, Keene, N. H.; P. F. Leonard, Cambridge, Mass.; Thomas O’Hagan, Toronto, Can.; William T. Cox, Elizabeth, N. J.; Christopher S. Ryan, Lexington, Mass.; Capt. James F. Redding, Charleston, S. C.; Hugh Ferguson, Charleston, S. C.; Dr. P. F. Gavin, Boston, Mass.; Rev. John A. Sheridan, Jamaica Plain, Mass.; William J. Storen, Charleston, S. C., and P. F. Magrath, Binghamton, N. Y.

It was announced that, in addition to the foregoing, the Knights of St. Patrick, an influential organization of San Francisco, had joined the Society in a body and had forwarded their life membership fee. Congratulations were also announced from the Association Artistique et Litteraire de Saint-Patrice, of Paris, and a communication was received from the committee of the Pan Celtic Congress.

The announcement was made, and applauded, that Hon. Edward A. Moseley, recently president-general of the Society, had been elected to membership in the Society of the Cincinnati, and that Rev. Joshua P. Bodfish, of our organization, had been chosen a director of the Bunker Hill Monument Association.

A communication was read from T. M. Bryan of Montesano, Wash., giving a sketch of his great-grandfather, John Bryan, an Irishman who came to this country and served in the patriot ranks during the War of the Revolution. He is mentioned in the Pennsylvania archives and is believed to have been at Valley Forge during the terrible winter of 1777‒8.

A letter was also received from Rev. Fred B. Cole, chancellor of the Protestant Episcopal diocese of Rhode Island, in which he very kindly offered his services as guide in a contemplated pilgrimage of the Society to the grave of “Old Parson” MacSparran. Rev. Dr. MacSparran was an Irishman born toward the close of the seventeenth century, and who for nearly forty years, was pastor of St. Paul’s church in Narragansett, R. I. A vote of thanks was tendered Rev. Mr. Cole.

Congratulations were extended the Rev. Austin Dowling, a member of the Society, on the completion of his history of the Roman Catholic diocese of Providence, R. I., the same containing much valuable material in the Society’s line of work.

During the evening, letters regretting their inability to be present were announced from Governor Gregory of Rhode Island, President Faunce of Brown University, R. H. Tilley, state record commissioner of Rhode Island; Hon. John C. Linehan, Concord, N. H.; Joseph Smith, Lowell, Mass.; Col. D. S. Lamson, Weston, Mass.; James L. O’Neill, Elizabeth, N. J.; Rev. Owen Kiernan, Fall River, Mass., and from other gentlemen.

The following letter, which had just been received by Secretary T. H. Murray, aroused special interest when read to the assembled company:

MY DEAR MR. MURRAY:

Mr. R. H. Tilley has advised me to write you, as a valuable man to
interest in a project which should be of interest to every loyal
Rhode Islander.

The old historic fort on Butts Hill in Portsmouth is being surveyed
with the idea of selling in small lots, and thus totally
obliterating the fort where General Sullivan and his troops fought
so well and so bravely. Does it not seem as if this spot should be
preserved if possible? I believe a bill was introduced into the
legislature some time ago, making this fort a state park, but
nothing has since been heard of it, so far as I can find out.

Miss Swinburne, regent of William Ellery Chapter, D. A. R., and I
are very desirous of rousing among the patriotic societies a
sufficient interest to save this well-preserved relic of
Revolutionary days. It seems a peculiarly fitting season to begin
the agitation, and I hope that some of the speakers on Wednesday,
both at the celebration by your own Historical Society and also at
the meeting of the Sons of the Revolution on the same day, may feel
inclined to call attention to this subject.

I talked with Mr. Tilley[2] yesterday and found him as kindly
disposed to help as I could desire, and he has promised to add his
word in support of my request whenever he may chance to see you. I
can answer for my own Gaspee Chapter, D. A. R., if our assistance is
needed, but with such influence as you could wield, coöperating with
the S. A. R and S. R. of the state, I feel very hopeful of success
in our patriotic project.

I do not feel as if I had at all adequately presented my case, but
it is very hard to condense all that might be said on such a subject
into the limits of a reasonable note. I hope you will recognize my
endeavor to save your valuable time, and read into my words an
enthusiastic interest which I have not expressed.

Very sincerely yours,
MARGARET B. F. LIPPITT,[3]
_Regent, Gaspee Chapter, D. A. R._

NEWPORT, R. I., August twenty-sixth.

The following letter on the same topic as the foregoing was received by Mayor Boyle of Newport, state vice-president of our Society for Rhode Island:

DEAR SIR:

At the meeting of the Irish patriotic society to be held on August
twenty-ninth, to celebrate the battle of Rhode Island, would it be
possible to bring up the subject of the old fortifications on Butts
Hill and call attention to the danger which threatens them, namely,
their destruction?

Few such spots remain on this island, and is it not the duty as well
as privilege of all loyal patriots to help preserve such spots where
our forefathers so hardly fought and whose names we honor and
revere?

I hope this may receive your support and that you will consider it
of sufficient importance to bring before your society.

Yours very truly,
SUSAN P. SWINBURNE,
_Regent, William Ellery Chapter, D. A. R._

August twenty-eight,
245 Broadway, Newport, R. I.

Butts Hill, to which Mrs. Lippitt and Miss Swinburne refer, is in Portsmouth, R. I. The fortifications alluded to were constructed by Gen. John Sullivan in 1778, in connection with the siege of Newport and the subsequent battle on Rhode Island.

The meeting expressed itself as heartily in favor of the project mentioned in the two letters and referred the subject-matter to the executive council of the Society.

On the same evening that this celebration of the battle anniversary was being held by our members at the Aquidneck, another celebration of the anniversary was taking place at the Newport Casino, under the auspices of the Newport Sons of the Revolution.

During the evening, greetings were sent by the Sons assembled at the Casino to our members at the Aquidneck. Messrs. Sanborn and Garrettson of Newport, and Lieutenant Commander Murdock, U. S. N., were delegated to proceed to the Aquidneck and present our members a handsome floral tribute. The presentation speech was made by Mr. Garrettson, and the tribute was accepted, on behalf of our Society, by Mayor Boyle. Later, several of our members accepted an invitation from the Sons to be their guests, and proceeded to the Casino, where they were warmly greeted and hospitably entertained.

John P. Sanborn of the Sons, who was then presiding, paid a glowing tribute to Gen. John Sullivan and to the Irish element, generally, in American history. While at the Casino, several of our members were called on for remarks and responded. Thus Mayor Boyle made a brief address, as did Mayor Driscoll of New Haven, Conn. John J. Rooney of New York recited a patriotic poem, and Hon. James F. Brennan of Peterborough, N. H., spoke eloquently of the services of General Sullivan.

PAPERS OF THE YEAR.

READ BY MEMBERS AT MEETINGS OF THE SOCIETY, OR CONTRIBUTED FOR
PUBLICATION IN THIS VOLUME.

REV. JAMES MAC SPARRAN, IRISHMAN, SCHOLAR, PREACHER AND PHILOSOPHER,
1680‒1757.

BY THOMAS HAMILTON MURRAY.[4]

Rev. James MacSparran was one of the great men given by Ireland to Rhode Island in the early half of the eighteenth century. For nearly forty years he was rector of St. Paul’s church,[5] in Narragansett, R. I., and forms one of the grand figures in Rhode Island history.

He was born in or near Dungiven, Londonderry, Ireland, about the year 1680. He received the degree of M. A. from Glasgow University in 1709, and that of D. D., from Oxford in 1731. He belonged to a Presbyterian family. His first visit within the present territory of Rhode Island was made about 1718.

He came from Boston to Bristol, then a part of Massachusetts, and stopped during his visit at the house of a relative, the Widow Pompelion, who resided at the corner of Hope and State streets. Possessing credentials as a licentiate, he preached in Bristol and was favorably received. Munro thus narrates[6] the incident:

“The pulpit was vacant, and the young Irishman was invited to preach in the meeting house on the Sunday after he reached Bristol. Mr. M^cSparran possessed, in an unusual degree, the remarkable eloquence with which so many of the children of Ireland have been endowed, and his wonderful oratory made such a deep impression upon the minds of his hearers that at a church meeting held on the 16th of December, 1718, he was invited to settle in the town as its pastor. On the 22d of December the town concurred in the church’s choice, 73 votes being cast for Mr. M^cSparran and but three against him.”

It was voted that his salary be £100 per year, and £100 was appropriated toward the expense of his settlement. Thus far matters had gone along smoothly. Trouble now arose, however. A date had been fixed for his ordination, but the ministers who were expected to officiate refused to do so.

MacSparran[7] being desirous of a settlement, offered to submit to lay ordination. In the meantime, Rev. Dr. Mather of Massachusetts had instituted charges against him. One of these was “Unguarded conversation.” The matter came before a town-meeting in May, 1719, and MacSparran was exonerated. Angered by their defeat, his opponents then questioned the genuineness of his credentials. In order to give him an opportunity to establish his standing, the town:

“Voted, That leave be granted to Mr. James MacSparran, our present minister, to take a voyage to Ireland, in order to procure a confirmation of his credentials, the truth of which being by some questioned; and that he return to us again some time in June next ensuing and proceed in the work of the ministry with us, if he procure the confirmation of the aforesaid credentials.”

MacSparran departed, but never returned to that church or denomination. The harsh and illiberal treatment he had received from Mather and other zealots displeased him, and soon after he entered the Church of England, in which he remained until his death.

MacSparran came to these parts again in 1721, this time as a Church of England missionary. He began his ministerial labors at St. Paul’s church in Narragansett (Kingstown, R. I.), and had charge of that colonial parish until his death in 1757. The settlers in that neighborhood had been visited by two ministers previous to Dr. MacSparran’s coming, but, as he declares, “they lacked resolution to grapple with the difficulties of the mission above a year apiece.”

MacSparran married Miss Hannah Gardiner, daughter of William Gardiner, on May 22, 1722. The ceremony was performed in St. Paul’s church, Narragansett, by Rev. Samuel Honeyman, who had gone from Newport for the purpose. Dr. MacSparran was proud to be known as an Irishman. He could write and speak the Irish language, and always had a great affection for his native land. He was a kindly, noble-hearted man, and could, when occasion required, eloquently defend his Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen.

His very interesting work, “America Dissected,” was published at Dublin in 1753. It gives us a good idea of the extent of Irish immigration and of other matters in the colonies at that time. The work comprises letters addressed by Dr. MacSparran from Narragansett “in the colony of Rhode Island” to friends in Ireland. Here are extracts from one written by him to Col. Henry Cary, under date of August, 1752:

“There has lately been made, upon and behind the mountains of Virginia, a new Irish settlement, by a transmigration of sundry of those that, within these thirty years past, went from the north of Ireland to Pennsylvania. As the soil in that new Irish settlement is natural and friendly to grass, they will for many years to come raise great quantities of neat cattle.”

Writing of Maryland he says: “As the late Lord Baltimore was the first Protestant peer of the Calvert family, his predecessors (as it was natural they should) first peopled this province with a colony of Irish Catholics.... There are some Quakers here, in consequence of its bordering on Pennsylvania, and some Irish Presbyterians, owing to the swarms that, for many years past, have winged their way westward out of the great Hibernian hive.”

Again referring to Pennsylvania, Dr. MacSparran writes: “The Irish are numerous in this province, who, besides their interspersions among the English and others, have peopled a whole county by themselves, called the county of _Donnegal_, with many other new out-towns and districts. In one of these frontiers, on the forks of Delaware, I assisted my brother (who left Ireland against my advice) in purchasing a large tract of land, which by his wife’s demise, above a year ago, descends to his children. The exportations from this province are principally wheaten flour, which they send abroad in great quantities; and by the accessions and industry of the Irish and Germans, they threaten, in a few years, to lessen the American demands for Irish and other European linens.”

Alluding to New Hampshire he continues: “In this province lies that town called London-Derry, all Irish, and famed for industry and riches.”

Then, leaving New Hampshire, he continues: “Next you enter Main,[8] which in its civilized government, is annexed to the Massachusetts, as Sagadahock also is; and both rather by use than right. In these two eastern provinces many Irish are settled, and many have been ruined by the French Indians and drove from their homes. It is pretty true to observe of the Irish,[9] that those who come here with any wealth, are the worse for their removal; though, doubtless, the next generation will not suffer so much as their fathers; but those who, when they came, had nothing to lose, have throve greatly by their labour.”

Dr. MacSparran’s reference to Rhode Island is of particular interest. He writes of it as follows: “... the little colony of Rhode Island, etc., where Providence has fixed me, and where I have resided in quality of missionary thirty-one years last April.... This little district extends itself no more than forty miles in length, and thirty in breadth, or it may be forty [for I write to you, sir, from memory]. It contains 1,024,000 acres, and is peopled with about 30,000 inhabitants, young and old, white and black.... In 1700, after Quakerism and other heresies had, in their turn, ruled and tinged all the inhabitants for the space of forty-six years, the Church of England, that had been lost here through the neglect of the crown, entered, as it were, unobserved and unseen, and yet not without some success.

“A little church was built in Newport, the metropolis of the colony, in 1702, and that in which I officiate in Narragansett, in 1707.... I entered on this mission in 1721, and found the people not a ... clean sheet of paper, upon which I might make any impressions I pleased; but a field full of briars and thorns, and noxious weeds, that were all to be eradicated, before I could implant in them the simplicity of truth. By my excursions and out labours, a church is built 25 miles to the westward of me, but not now under my care; another 16 miles to the northward of me, where I officiate once a month; and at a place six miles further off, on the Saturday before that monthly Sunday. I gathered a congregation at a place called New Bristol, where now officiates a missionary from the Society, and I was the first Episcopal minister that ever preached at Providence, where, for a long time, I used to go four times a year, but that church has now a fixed missionary of its own.”

In another place he tells us: “There are above three hundred vessels, such as sloops, schooners, brigantines, and ships, from sixty tons and upwards, that belong to this colony, and they are carriers for other colonies.”

The church of St. Paul was built in 1707. When Kingstown was divided, in 1722, into the towns of North and South Kingstown, the church became located about a mile over the line in the former place. In 1791 it was incorporated as St. Paul’s church in North Kingstown. In 1800 the building was removed to Wickford and the parish divided.

Dr. MacSparran was for nearly four decades closely identified with the highest social and intellectual life of the colony. His scholarly attainments made him the centre of a group[10] of cultivated minds. As pastor of St. Paul’s church, he ministered to many of the leading families in Rhode Island. He officiated at their weddings, administered baptism, preached the gospel according to his convictions, and when loved ones died uttered sweet words of condolence, sympathy and hope.

The church records contain such leading names as Updike, Arnold, Lippitt, Gardiner, Helme, Wilkinson, Potter, Robinson and a large number of others.

But “Parson” MacSparran, as he was lovingly called, was not alone the friend and associate of the well-to-do. His love for the poor and lowly was unbounded, and this sympathy found ample reciprocation in the hearts of the humble.

In order to understand the general character of Narragansett society at that period a few words may be necessary. Amos Perry[11] says: “The honor of being, par excellence, the Narragansett country is generally conceded to Charlestown and the original ‘Kings Towne,’ whose united area is 19.8 per cent. of that of the entire state.” To make it plainer, it should be said that the “Narragansett country” comprised that portion of the state of Rhode Island now known as Washington county. It was so called because it was the seat of the Narragansett Indians.[12] In 1654 it was named King’s Province, which in 1729 was changed to King’s county. In 1781 that monarchical designation was dropped and the name Washington substituted.

The county now comprises the towns of Charlestown, Exeter, Hopkinton, North Kingstown, South Kingstown, Richmond, and Westerly. The “Narragansett country” had long existed as an independent jurisdiction. Finally, the king in council promulgated his decision uniting the “King’s Province or Narragansett” to Rhode Island. For long years after, the name “Narragansett country” was still affectionately retained in the nomenclature of that district. In Dr. MacSparran’s time there were numbers of wealthy landholders in Narragansett. Many of these owned thousands of acres each and had great herds of cattle and flocks of sheep. Many, too, were slave owners and slave dealers. As late as 1804, Rhode Island had fifty-nine vessels engaged in the slave trade, notwithstanding an act was passed in 1787 forbidding the traffic.[13]

For a long period the slaves were practically barred out of the church. They were neither instructed, baptized, nor admitted to the communion. To bestow such favors upon them was considered inconsistent by their masters. But MacSparran, the great-hearted Irishman, combated this error. He emphatically protested against this unchristian exclusion of the slaves and ultimately prevailed in their behalf.

The Narragansett landholders and their families lived in princely style on their vast estates. They were a hospitable race, cordial in their welcomes, warm and lasting in their attachments. Fond of horse racing, they raised a breed known as “Narragansett Pacers,” which became famous throughout the country. Fox-hunting was also a favorite sport.

The glebe house occupied by Dr. MacSparran for over thirty years is yet standing. It overlooks the Pettaquamscutt river. This river is really a connected series of pretty lakes. Mr. Hazard once termed them the “Killarneys of New England.” Dr. MacSparran taught many pupils at his home, imparting a knowledge of the Greek and Latin classics and various other branches. Writing in 1752, he says: “Mr. Thomas Clap, president of Yale college, was my scholar when I came first to these parts, and on all occasions gratefully acknowledges his receiving the first rudiments of his learning from me, who, by the way, have not but a modicum to boast of myself.” Dr. MacSparran has left this significant entry: “In Bristol, New England, February 5th, 1722, were imprisoned in jail twelve men of the Church of England for refusing to pay for the support of the Presbyterian teacher, viz.: Mr. Nathaniel Cotton.” Others were imprisoned in 1724 for a like offense, and Dr. MacSparran says: “I have inserted this line in the church records, that the age to come may not forget the opposing spirit of New England Presbyterians.” The following extracts from the records of St. Paul’s church may prove of interest:

“July 11, 1721, four children were baptized at Providence, viz.: Mary Bernon, and Eva Bernon, Anna Donnison, and Elizabeth Donnison, by Rev. Mr. McSparran.

“November 8th, 1724. Captain Benoni Sweet was baptized at St. Paul’s, in Narragansett, by the Rev. Mr. McSparran.

“April 22d, 1730. In Westerly, Narragansett, Christopher Champlin and Hannah Hill, daughter of Captain John Hill, were joined together in holy matrimony by the Rev. Mr. McSparran, at the house of the said Captain John Hill.

“May 2d, 1730. Daniel Updike, Attorney-General of the Colony and Lieutenant-Colonel of the militia of the Islands, was baptized by immersion (in Petaquamscut river) by the Rev. Mr. McSparran, in presence of Mr. McSparran, Hannah McSparran, his wife, and Josiah Arnold, church warden, as witnesses.

“December 11th, 1735. Dr. Giles Goddard[14] of Groton, in Connecticut, was married to Miss Sarah Updike, at the house of her father, Captain Lodowick Updike, by Mr. McSparran.

“August 6, 1747. Dr. McSparran baptized Mrs. Elizabeth Wilkinson, wife of Capt. Philip Wilkinson,[15] by immersion in Petaquamscut pond. Witnesses, the Doctor, his wife, and Mrs. Coddington.

“Sept. 6th, Thursday, 1750. The bans of marriage being duly published at the church of St. Paul’s, in Narragansett, no objections being made, John Anthony, an Indian man, was married to Sarah George, an Indian woman, the widow and Dowager Queen of Geo. Augustus Ninegret, deceased, by Dr. McSparran.

“Nov. 18, 1750. Sunday, the banns being first duly asked, at St. Paul’s, Dr. McSparran married William Potter, youngest son of Col. John Potter, to Penelope Hazard, eldest daughter of Col. Thomas Hazard, both of South Kingstown, at Col. Thomas Hazard’s house.

“Nov. 7, 1752. Dr. McSparran, at the house of Colonel Thomas Hazard, on Boston Neck,[16] married George Hazard (son of George, the son of old Thomas Hazard) to Sarah Hazard, the third daughter of said Colonel Hazard.

“April 11th, 1756, being Palm Sunday, Doctor McSparran read prayers, preached, and baptized a child named Gilbert Stewart,[17] son of Gilbert Stewart, the snuff-grinder. Sureties, the Doctor, Mr. Benjamin Mumford, and Mrs. Hannah Mumford.”

In 1741‒2, MacSparran in a letter to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, writes that in the middle arm of the sea, which divides the island of Rhode Island from the Narragansett shore, lies an island called Conanicut, “about eight or nine miles long, and two wide, containing about four or five hundred inhabitants, who had never had Christianity preached to them in any shape than Quakerism,” until he addressed them upon express invitation. He was so pleased with his first visit to the island that he determined to repeat the visit monthly. In the course of his letters he expresses the wish that Ireland was at liberty to send the colonies her woolens instead of her linens, “which will soon cease to be in demand here.”

MacSparran was unalterably opposed, in season and out of season, to all efforts to form a legislative union between England and Ireland. He gives expression to his sentiments on this point, in a letter to Ireland,[18] wherein he declares:

“Our attention has for some time been taken up with the news of measures on foot to unite Ireland to England, as Scotland is. I pray God they may never take effect; for if they do, farewell liberty. You are greater slaves already than our negroes, and an union of that kind would make you more underlings than you are now. The accounts of the open irreligion of the greater island inclines me to imagine, that Ireland is on the brink of obtaining (as if these accounts are true, it deserves), its ancient name of Insula Sanctorum. But if ever you come into a closer connection with the more eastern island, corruption will increase.... I suppose those that are sent to rule with you, like those who sometimes are sent here, imagine fleecing to be a better business than feeding the flock. The revolution which happened before you and I were born, might be thought a wise and necessary measure, but we see it has been followed with some bad consequences. To get free from Popery, we have run into infidelity and scepticism.... Except the little revival religion had in Queen Ann’s reign, the church has gained no ground, but in America, since that period.”

Dr. MacSparran, in a letter addressed[19] to a friend in Ireland under date of 1752, again refers to Rhode Island, saying: “There are here, which is no good symptom, a vast many law suits, more in one year than the county of Derry has in twenty ... and Billy McEvers has been so long your father’s and your honor’s constable, that he would make a very good figure on the bench of our courts of sessions and of common pleas, and no contemptible one on those of our courts of assize and general gaol delivery.”

Writing to his friend William Stevenson, in Ireland, Aug. 21, 1752, MacSparran informs him that “My brother and his wife died a year ago last June.... I have to go for England for ten or twelve months, to go to the baths for better health; if I can bring matters to bear to get to England, my next push will be to be seated in Ireland.... I am in the hands of a good God, who has the hearts of men at command; and if he sees that I can serve the interests of Christ’s church, either in the use of the English or Irish language, which you know I can write and read, and upon occasion could preach in, He will raise me up friends, and restore me to my native land, or near it—if not, His will be done.”

Dr. MacSparran’s brother, whom he mentions, Archibald, sailed from Ireland for Rhode Island, but the ship made another port and he settled near New Castle on Delaware bay. He had seven children: Margaret, Eliza, Bridget, John, James, Archibald, and Joseph. Dr. MacSparran, as I have said, had no children. The Doctor and his wife went to England sometime before 1755. She died there in the latter year.

The Doctor returned to Rhode Island and made pastoral visits to Providence, Warwick and several other places. In 1757 he died.[20] The manner of his death was a little remarkable. It is thus described in papers in the possession of the Updike family:

“Dr. MacSparran caught his death at father’s. He went to prayer, and had read and was going to kneel, and being a fat, heavy man, and putting his hands on the table to ease himself down, the table split off and his weight came down and he hit the edge of his eyebrow against the sharp edge of the table leg and he bled profusely—but he would have nothing done till he had finished his prayer. They bound it up and he got home and never recovered.”

He was buried under the communion table of St. Paul’s. In 1781 his successor, Rev. Samuel Fayerweather, was laid beside him. It is believed that Dr. MacSparran had written a history of Narragansett, but the manuscript was not found after his death. It may have previously been sent to Ireland. He bequeathed his house and farm to church purposes and the property became a glebe for the rectors of St. Paul’s.

Sometime previous to his death he sent his diplomas as Master and Doctor to Rev. Paul Limrick, a cousin in Ireland, requesting the latter to have them registered in the parish registry of Dungiven. He asked to have this done “not through vanity, but being a pilgrim on earth and not knowing but my _carcase_ may fall in a strange land, it would be pleasing to me that my relations in time to come might be able to speak of me with authority.”

MEN OF IRISH BLOOD WHO HAVE ATTAINED DISTINCTION IN AMERICAN JOURNALISM.

BY MICHAEL EDMUND HENNESSY.[21]