Part 11

Were it not for the fear of making this essay too long, I might show how fifteen to twenty names of Illinois counties have Irish associations; what prominent parts Irishmen and the sons of Irishmen of Illinois took in the War of 1812, the Black Hawk War, the Mexican War, and the War of the Rebellion; how they filled gubernatorial chairs, prominent positions in state and nation, as the representatives of the people; how they have been foremost in the professions of law, medicine, and divinity. On the muster roll of famous men they have three Logans, the two Reynolds, Carlin, Kinney, Ford, Kane, Shields, Ewing, McLaughlin, Mulligan, Medill, Ryan, and many others too numerous to mention. Not as public and professional men alone has the Irish contingent been valuable to the state of Illinois, but also as tillers of the soil, as miners and manufacturers; for in the infantile condition of our commonwealth the men of hardest muscle and most exacting toil were our Irish immigrants. They did the excavating on our canals, and the grading on our first railroads, and wherever hard work was to be performed, there you were sure to find Paddy with his spade and pipe. May I not claim that that herculean form representing “the Digger,” in the statue of Mulligan, standing at the entrance of the Drainage Canal, near Chicago, answers for the Irish canaler of former as well as of later days?

Nearly fifty years ago Thomas D’Arcy McGee, an Irish-American poet, and at the time of his death a leading statesman of Canada, of wide fame and renowned memory, wrote of the Irish prairie farmer in Illinois as follows:

“’Tis ten long years since Eileen bawn Adventured with her Irish boy Across the seas and settled on A prairie farm in Illinois.

“Sweet waves the sea of summer flowers Around our wayside cot so coy, Where Eileen sings away the hours That light my task in Illinois.

CHORUS—

“The Irish homes of Illinois, The happy homes of Illinois, No landlord there Can cause despair, Nor blight our fields in Illinois!”

THE IRISH VANGUARD OF RHODE ISLAND.

BY THOMAS HAMILTON MURRAY, BOSTON, MASS.

Irish settlers are found in Rhode Island at a very early period. They were contemporaneous with Roger Williams, John Clark, William Coddington, and other leading men and proved sturdy, energetic members of the community.

Some of these Irish pioneers doubtless came to Rhode Island as soldiers in the Indian wars, and when the latter were over “remained and went not away.” Others, in all probability, came as settlers from St. Kitts, Jamaica, Montserrat, and Barbadoes. During Cromwell’s atrocious regime in Ireland thousands of Irish were transported not only to the continent of North America but also to the West Indies. Other thousands followed them, forced from home by the iniquitous English policy of extermination.

It is not at all unlikely that Rhode Island received many of these hardy refugees and became to them a land of asylum and a permanent home. Nor can it reasonably be doubted that Connecticut, Plymouth and “the Bay” likewise contributed Irish settlers to Rhode Island at early periods and in goodly numbers. In “Winthrop’s Journal,” under date of 1635, is an entry indicating that even as early as that a considerable immigration from Ireland to New England was under way. Thus readeth the entry:

“Another providence was in the voyage of Mr. Winthrop, the younger, and Mr. Wilson, into England, who, returning in the winter time, in a small and weak ship, bound for Barnstaple, were driven by foul weather upon the coast of Ireland, not known by any in the ship, and were brought, through many desperate dangers, into Galloway[5] [Galway] where they parted, Mr. Winthrop taking his journey over land to Dublin, and Mr. Wilson by sea. His ship was forced back by tempest to Kinsale. Mr. Wilson being in Ireland, gave much satisfaction to the Christians there about New England. Mr. Winthrop went to Dublin, and from thence to Antrim in the North and came to the house of Sir John Clotworthy, the evening before the day when divers godly persons were appointed to meet at his house, to confer about their voyage to New England, by whom they were thoroughly informed of all things and received great encouragement to proceed on their intended course.”

Sometimes immigrants from Ireland were welcomed to New England and at other times the contrary was the case.

Under date of September 25, 1634, the Massachusetts records have this entry: “It is ordered that the Scottishe and Irishe gentlemen wch intends to come hither shall have liberty to sitt down in any place Vpp Merimacke Ryver, not possessed by any.” In the Massachusetts records under date of 1640, is another interesting entry, to wit: “It is ordered that the goods of the persons come from Ireland shallbee free from this rate [tax].” And a marginal heading reads: “Irish goods now land free from ye rat[e].”

In the records of Massachusetts, 1652, we find that one David Sellick having craved pardon “for his offence in bringing some of the Irish men on shoare, hath his fine remitted, so as the first optunite be taken to send them out of this jurisdiction.” But where could they be sent? Only to some place where they would be likely to get a better reception. In this connection, Rhode Island, the refuge of so many oppressed by “the Bay,” would naturally suggest itself, at least to a portion of the Irish immigrants thus proceeded against. The writer inclines to the belief that numbers of these Irish, being refused permission to reside elsewhere in New England, finally located in Rhode Island.

THE EARLY LARKINS OF RHODE ISLAND.

The historic Irish name of Larkin[6] is found in Rhode Island as early as 1655. So far as known, Edward Larkin was the first of the name to locate in the colony.[7] In the year mentioned, he was of Newport, R. I. In 1661, he had a quarter share of land in what is now Westerly, R. I. In 1663, he was commissioner from Newport in the “General Court of Commissioners” held at Providence that year. He was an inhabitant of Westerly as early as 1669. In 1671, he and John Mackoone were “called on to see how they stand as to their fidelity to his Majestie and this Colony.” Perhaps these two Irishmen had not hesitated on occasion to forcibly express their opinion regarding English tyranny in Ireland.

Edward Larkin had five children, Mehitable, Hannah, Edward, Roger, and John. The family prospered and in time became very influential throughout the colony. Mehitable, who was probably named after her mother or some of the latter’s relatives, married and had five children. Hannah died without issue, Edward, Jr., married twice and had eleven children, Roger married twice and had four children, John had one child. Roger’s estate inventoried £742, 1s., 9d. It included “2 linen wheels.” In 1755, his widow became an inhabitant of Richmond, R. I. Edward Larkin, Jr., and wife of Westerly sold 100 acres of land to Samuel Lewis in 1701.

In 1705–’07–’15, Edward Larkin, Jr., was a deputy to the General Assembly. His will was proved in 1741. It gives “To wife £100, all household goods and improvements of homestead and profits of saw mill, for life, to bring up the young children, and then the said homestead to go to son Stephen, but the goods and £100 to be free and clear to wife. To son Stephen, the homestead at death of his mother. To son Nicholas, £100 and 50 acres, at death of wife, and saw and grist mill. To son Daniel, a farm at age. To daughter, Elizabeth Babcock, 10 acres where she lives with house and orchard for life, and then to one of her sons as she sees fit. To daughter Penelope, £30. To daughters Tabitha and Lydia, each £50 at eighteen. To son Nicholas, 10 acres of salt marsh. To son Joseph, 50 acres adjoining land formerly given him. To grandson Joseph, my son Edward’s son, 5s., his father having had. To sons John and Samuel, 5s., they having had. To sons, John and Samuel, rest of estate.” The inventory showed, among other things, books, three beds, pewter, loom, linen wheel, woolen wheel, card, seven cows, two pairs of oxen, horse, 37 sheep, etc.

The will of Mary Larkin, widow of Edward, Jr., was proved in 1743. It gives “To son Nicholas, £50, and bonds against him if he is not able to pay them. To son David, great bible, and the mortgage to be cleared off his land, and a house built 16 feet square if he lives to be 21 years of age. To daughter Tabitha, a horse. To daughter Lydia, a little bible and £100. To daughters Tabitha and Lydia, all wearing apparel and a double portion of what is left over the debts. To three sons, the rest equally.”

Descendants of Edward Larkin, the original immigrant, are still found in the state. Many of them take a notable pride in their Irish ancestry. Since the first Edward’s time, other Irish Larkins have come to Rhode Island and have done their share toward the upbuilding of the state.

WILLIAM HEFERNAN, AN EARLY RHODE ISLANDER.

William Hefernan, or Heffernan, was another early Rhode Island settler of whose Irish origin there can be no doubt. He is first heard from at Newport, but in 1671 was an inhabitant of Pettaquamscutt. In May of the latter year “His Majestie’s Court of Justices” met at Pettaquamscutt and “ordered that a warrant bee issued out to William Hefernan, to warne in the inhabitants of this Plantation to attend tomorrow morning, at six of the clock, at the house of Mr. Jireh Bull.”

Notwithstanding the early hour and short notice, the people assembled. “Mr. William Hefernan was chosen and engaged to the office and place of a Conservator of the Peace in jointe commission with Mr. Samuel Wilson and Mr. Jireh Bull.” In 1674, Hefernan is found with his three sons residing in Wickford, R. I. Later he appears to have taken up his residence in Newport, for on August 25, 1676, he was present as a witness at a court martial there on Indians charged with being implicated in King Philip’s designs. A William Hefernan, Jr., was admitted a freeman of the colony by the general assembly in 1724, and another of the name in 1746. The name[8] is variously spelled Hefernan and Heffernan. Now and then it appears as Hefferman and Heffermon, which forms are evidently derivative. John Heffernan of Newport was admitted a freeman in 1759. Descendants of William Hefernan, once numerous throughout Rhode Island, are now believed to be extinct.

MICHAEL KELLY, OF THE ISLAND OF CONANICUT.

The island of Conanicut is situated in Narragansett bay. It has a total length of about nine miles and a width of from one to two miles. It is just within the bay from the Atlantic ocean.

Beaver Tail light on its extreme southern point overlooks the sea, and that portion of the island’s coast frequently resounds with the thunder of the breakers. Indeed, most of the island’s shore is exposed more or less to the billows driven in by old ocean.

The island derives its name from Canonicus, an Indian sachem who formerly resided there. It is, of course, a part of the state of Rhode Island and is comprised in the town of Jamestown. The latter was incorporated in 1678 and named in honor of King James II, then heir to the throne which he ascended two years later. Conanicut is about midway in the bay between Newport, Middletown, and Portsmouth on the east, and North Kingstown and the old District of Narragansett on the west. The first purchase of land on the island by whites was made of the Indians in 1657 by Benedict Arnold and William Coddington.

Michael Kelly[9] figures as a freeman in 1667. His wife’s name was Isabel. In 1669, he had become prominent on the island. Michael has been especially fortunate in that, so far as known, no one has ever had the temerity to label him “English” or “Scotch.” In 1669, he and two others were commissioned by the “Councill” to prepare the inhabitants against possible surprises or attacks by the Indians. The order for this action bears date of August 26, and reads thus:

“Whereas, there are severall out plantations in this Colony, which are not included in any towneship, and they being as lyable or rather more lyable to danger and invasion than where there is more strengh; and the Councill seeing it incumbent on them to provide for their safety, doe heerby order that the Conservators of the Peace at Pettaquomscut, Narragansett or Acquidneesitt or Block Island, and such persons as the Councill shall appoint on the Island Quononicutt, [Conanicut], doe assemble the inhabitants of each of those places and consider among themselves what may bee most suitable for their defence and preservation against any mission or insurrection of the Indians, and forthwith to put it in execution; and that a copie of this order bee sent to the first Conservator of the Peace in each respective place, and the persons appointed for Quononicutt.”

Two days later the following entry appears in the records:

“The persons appointed to execute the Councill’s order of the 26th inst., for the Island of Quononicut, are John Homes, John Remington and Michaell Kelly.”

The fact that Kelly was one of those selected indicates that he must have been a man of considerable influence at the time. In the will of ex-Governor Brenton, probated in 1674, mention is made of “Michael Kaly,” who was no doubt the same individual here described. The following extracts are taken from the will:

“To daughter Sarah Brenton, a farm in Conanicut, in possession of Michael Kaly with house, etc.... To Michael Kaly, 100 acres on Merrimack.... To Michael Kaly, ⅔ and to his wife, ⅓ of £15 due from land granted him at Pattacomscott.”

In 1680, Kelly was taxed £5, 18s. 7½d. He died in that year. It is not known that he left any descendants.

THOMAS CASEY, A PIONEER OF NEWPORT, R. I.

Thomas Casey, a Rhode Island settler, was born about 1636, and died in 1719. That Ireland was his native land is generally conceded. A suggestion has been set up in some quarters, however, that he was of English parentage.

To support this idea, a “tradition” is produced. Yet Casey as a family name is Irish of the Irish. For centuries it has been prominent in the east and south of Ireland. It derives from O’Cathasaigh which has been anglicized O’Casey, Cahasy, Casey, Casie, and Case. Those intent on making out an English, rather than an Irish, parentage for Thomas Casey, the immigrant, declare that “By tradition, he was a son of one of the English planting families in Ulster county, Ireland. His father and mother and all his family were destroyed in the Irish massacre [1641], he, a child, being saved by his uncle and carried to his relatives in Gloucestershire. It is further asserted that he sailed for America from Plymouth, England.”

The “tradition” here noted is radically defective. In the first place, there is no Ulster county in Ireland. Perhaps the province of Ulster was what the writer was aiming at. In the second place, the “Irish massacre” mentioned never happened. For a long period, writers in the English interest asserted that on October 23, 1641, the Irish Catholics rose and slaughtered in cold blood thousands of English and other Protestants then in the country. But the charge is now rejected as untrue by impartial historians. W. J. O’Neill Daunt brands the story of such a massacre as “a thorough and most impudent falsehood,” and as being another of those “stupendous calumnies” circulated by the enemies of the Irish people. Other authoritative writers similarly testify.

“It has been represented,” says Prendergast, a Protestant,[10] “that there was a general massacre [by the Irish], surpassing the horrors of the Sicilian Vespers, the Parisian Nuptials, and Matins of the Valtelline, but nothing is more false.”

Consequently, as there was no massacre by the Irish Catholics, then as charged, Thomas Casey’s “father and mother and all his family” could not have perished in it. In February, 1642, however, a dreadful massacre was ordered—not by the Irish Catholics, but by the English lords justices. The mandate was issued to Lord Ormund, the lords justices signing the fearful instructions, being Dillon, Rotheram, Loftus, Willoughby, Temple, and Meredith.

The mandate for the massacre as issued to Ormund was, “That his lordship do endeavor with his majesty’s forces to wound, kill, slay, and destroy, by all the ways and means he may, all the said rebels, their adherents, and relievers; and burn, waste, spoil, consume, destroy, and demolish all the places, towns, and houses, where the said rebels are, or have been, relieved or harbored, and all the hay and corn there; and kill and destroy all the men there inhabiting capable to bear arms.”

The orders were only too well obeyed. Men, women and children perished alike. The English soldiery made no distinction between age or sex. In their savage fury they committed massacre after massacre. The English garrison of Carrickfergus alone murdered 3,000 men, women and children in that neighborhood. Lord Broghill perpetrated like cruelties in Cork and Waterford. In County Wicklow Sir Charles Coote was guilty of a massacre so horrible that after it, to use his own language, “not a child, were it but a hand high, was left alive.”

It is probable that the family of Thomas Casey, the Rhode Island settler, were Irish Catholics, and if they perished in a massacre it is quite possible it was in the one thus inaugurated by the English. It is quite likely that the author of the “tradition” and “Ulster county” got matters somewhat mixed. Hosts of Irish Catholics fled the country at the period mentioned, and if Thomas Casey’s uncle did so, taking the child with him, it would be entirely in accord with the facts and conditions here described. The statement that Thomas eventually sailed from Plymouth, England, if he did so sail, has no particular significance and proves nothing.

Thomas Casey is first heard of in Rhode Island at Newport. His wife’s name was Sarah. They had, so far as known, three children, Thomas, Adam and Samuel. In 1692, the father and his son, Thomas, witnessed a deed given by James Sweet of East Greenwich, R. I., to Thomas Weaver of Newport. Adam Casey, another son, was a lieutenant in 1742, and in 1750 purchased 50 acres in Scituate, R. I. In 1760, Adam and his son, Edward Casey, sold 100 acres to Nathan Brown of Swanzey, Mass., and removed to Coventry, R. I. Adam Casey’s will was proved in 1765.

Samuel, the third son of Thomas Casey, the immigrant, lived at different times in Newport, Kings Town and Exeter, R. I. He held various town offices. At his death, his personal estate inventoried £2,803 18s. 6d. He had six children; his brother, Thomas, four; and Adam, five. Several members of this noted family have been distinguished in American civil and military life. The family is still represented in Rhode Island.

JOHN DAILEY AND OTHER EARLY RHODE ISLANDERS.

John Dailey, in 1689, bought 90 acres of land in Providence, R. I., and the year following exchanged certain lands with Ann Pratt. Dailey is an anglicized form of O’Dalaighe.[11] In Irish history the O’Dalys figure as powerful chieftains. Some of the name were hereditary poets and antiquarians to the MacCarthys Mor. John Dailey here mentioned of Providence had four children, Joseph, Samuel, Elizabeth and one other, a daughter. In 1703, he deeded to Joseph for “divers good causes,” 40 acres. In 1718, Joseph sold 57½ acres to Peter Ballou with house, orchard, etc., for £336. Some years previously, Samuel had sold 40 acres to Zachariah Jones for £20. John Dailey, Sr., died about 1719.

John Macoone was another Irish settler of Rhode Island. In the records the name is variously written Macoone, Mackoone, McCoon, Mackown, etc. Late generations have sometimes abbreviated it to Coon or Cooney. It probably comes from the old Irish MacCoonan. John, the immigrant, was a resident of Westerly, R. I., as early as 1669. Ten years later he is recorded as taking the oath of allegience. In 1681, he officiated as a juryman. He had, at least, two children, Isabel and John. In some accounts he is said to have had two others, who went from Westerly about 1695 and settled at Oyster Bay, L. I. Isabel married Edward Bliven and had five children. Her death occurred in 1753. Her brother John received a grant of 100 acres in 1692 and 100 more in 1709. In 1724, he and his wife, Ann, deeded land to their sons, John and Daniel.

John Malavery[12] was a resident of Providence as early as 1687. He had 56 acres of land, and other property. In 1704, he had 12 acres laid out in exchange with the town. He died about 1712. His son John was executor. The inventory included 18 loads of hay, 14 barrels of cider, gun, sword, etc. John Malavery, Jr., of Providence died in 1718. In his will he desires his wife to provide things fit and comfortable for his mother in her old age, and authorizes his wife to raise £30, which shall be levied out of his estate. The rest of movable estate to wife and income of land and use of dwelling house for life, while his widow. To sons, John and Nathaniel, equally, but if they died before of age, then the land was to go to Michael Inman, David Phillips and Daniel Mathewson, “my three sisters’ three sons.” The inventory included “4 guns, 2 swords.” A John Malavery of the third generation married Susannah Arnold in 1736.

At a session of the general assembly at Providence, in 1685, Joseph Devett, also spelled Devitt in the records, was a member of a committee appointed to consider and report concerning a petition for settling a “Plantation in the Narragansett and Niantick countries.” The difference between the names Devitt and McDevitt is not great.

Owen Higgins was a resident of Newport, R. I., very early. His wife was born in 1640. In 1701, his son Richard is recorded as a freeman in Newport.

CHARLES MACCARTHY, A FOUNDER OF EAST GREENWICH, R. I.

Charles MacCarthy was a resident of Rhode Island in 1677. When he came to the colony is unknown. He resided on the island of St. Christopher, otherwise known as St. Kitts, before arriving in Rhode Island, a fact mentioned in his will. Some of the recording clerks of those days were not particularly brilliant in writing proper names, Irish or otherwise. They appear to have in a way adopted the phonetic idea of spelling, that is, according to sound. But it frequently happened that some names sounded differently to different clerks and thus, as in the case of Charles MacCarthy, we have a variety of spelling. At the same time it should be said, in justice to the clerks, that there were instances, no doubt, when they should not be held responsible for variations that appear. Orthography was not fixed then as now.

The Rhode Island pioneer of whom we are treating has had his name rendered as Macarte, Macarta, Macarty, Mackarte, and Mecarty. In his will it is “Macarte,” but whether that was the form authorized by him, or whether it was the work of the clerk who drew up the will, cannot now be determined. The same name applied to other early Rhode Island people is also recorded as Maccartee and McCartie. The style “Mac Carthy,” used, for the sake of uniformity, in the caption of this paper, and in the text, is that common to the MacCarthys Mor, the MacCarthys Reagh, the MacCarthys Glas, and other grand divisions of this great Irish clan.