Richard Mulcahy

jonniebgood1

Richard Mulcahy was one of the most prominent people in Ireland for much of the 20th century. His roles were prominent in the war of independence, civil war, early saorstait govenments and he also fought in the 1916 rising at Ashbourne. To form a coalition government in 1948 he had to step aside to get support from former IRA men, this is attributed to his role in the civil war. This prevented him from rounding off his career as Taoiseach which it would seem he deserved given his role in the battle for independence.

Mulcahy & Collins at Arthur Griffiths funeral

What are peoples views on him now? Was he harshly treated in 1948?
Does he deserve to be held in the same terms as the likes of Pearse, Collins, DeValera in terms of important figures who define Irish freedom? To my mind he is not as recognised or revered as these figures.

johnny_doyle

very brief mentions of Mulcahy in the podcasts from 2 ladies :

http://www.wexford.ie/wex/Departments/Library/OralHistoryPodcasts/OConnorMargaretMaggie/


http://www.wexford.ie/wex/Departments/Library/OralHistoryPodcasts/OBrienMaureen/

CDfm

Interesting thread.

I can't see how Mulcahy's Civil War record was an issue at the time given DeValera and Fianna Fail had taken on the IRA in WWII even executing Charlie Kerins its Chief of Staff .

It used be said that McBride of Clann na Poblachta objected to Mulcahy but I can't really see it and I wonder what the relationship was between the two men.

McBride had been Anti-Treaty and in the Four Courts and was a prisoner in Mountjoy during the reprisal executions following Collins death.

McBride had an odd upbringing as the son of Maude Gonne and Major John MacBride

He had an extraordinary accent given his french upbringing and could not pronounce his "r's".

Here is a well written piece on McBride .

The Extraordinary Life and Times of Sean McBride: Part 1

Friday, 31 December 1982 00:00 Michael Farrell






Sean MacBride is the last veteran of the War of Independence and the Civil War to still play a major part in Irish and international politics. He has had an extraordinary career. His father was executed when he was 12, his mother arrested in front of him when he was 14. He joined the IRA at the age of 15 and accompanied Michael Collins to London for the Treaty negotiations when he was 17. Since then he has been an underground guerrilla leader, founder of a new political party which put de Valera out of office after 16 years, Minister for External Affairs, Ireland's most distinguished lawyer, founder of Amnesty International, UN Commissioner for Namibia, and winner of the Nobel and Lenin peace prizes. And he is still deeply involved in international work for human rights and nuclear disarmament.
To write this profile for Magill as Sean MacBride approaches his 79th birthday, Michael Farrell interviewed him at length at odd intervals between trips to London, Geneva, New York, Moscow, Stockholm and India, as well as a host of meetings and conferences all over Ireland. .................


Soon after the death of Leo Fitzgerald, Collins sent for MacBride and despatched him and some members of his ASU to the Wicklow/Wexford/Carlow area to ginger up the local IRA units which had been "fairly ineffective. The 17 year old MacBride threw himself into the task with energy and enthusiasm and launched attacks on the RIC barracks in Avoca and Rathdrum. By the time the Truce came in July 1921, they were making the area uncomfortable for the crown forces. They were doing so well that MacBride was enraged by the Truce and went to see Collins to hand in his resignation. Collins mollified him by assuring him that the struggle was by no means over and that he intended to use the Truce to re-organise and re-arm the IRA. He had MacBride appointed adjutant of a training camp at Glenasmole in Co. Wicklow and again sent him to the continent to buy arms........................................


The young MacBride was beginning to be drawn into the circle of Collins' trusted lieutenants and when the Irish delegation went to London for the Treaty negotiations in October 1921 he was brought along as part of a group of key Dublin IRA men who acted as bodyguards and, in his case, as a courier between London and Dublin. He learned a lot in London. For a start Collins stayed with the IRA group in Cadogan Square instead of with the other negotiators in Hans Place and MacBride discovered that there was a great deal of distrust between the military men and the other negotiators, whom they referred to disparagingly as the 'politicians'. Collins shared in and encouraged this attitude, making no secret of his own contempt for most of his fellow plenipotentiaries. There was a certain class difference involved as well, since most of the military men came from working-class or very much lower middle-class backgrounds.


..............


When the Treaty was signed MacBride opposed it, because of the oath, the connection with the Empire, and partition. He said as much to Collins who replied that he wasn't surprised but said he thought it was the best they could get at the time and indicated that he had no intention of being rigidly bound by it. In fact he had been making plans for further clandestine arms shipments from Germany, and he instructed MacBride to continue with these arrangements.


http://politico.ie/component/content/article/3238.html

McBride had also been involved in socialist politics as leader of Saor Eire, and was a barrister who tried death penalty cases. He had been imprisoned/interned by both Cosgrave and DeValera too.

The kingmaker would seem to be William Norton Leader of the Labour Party who became Tainiste.

Any government relying on McBride and Noel Browne was going to be interesting.

What was the personal relationship between McBride and Mulcahy ?

EDIT - What makes you think Mulcahy deserved to be Taoiseach as he was a senator when he became FG leader ? Also. Labour wanted a chance in Government having lost out several times before .

jonniebgood1

CDfm wrote: »

EDIT - What makes you think Mulcahy deserved to be Taoiseach as he was a senator when he became FG leader ? Also. Labour wanted a chance in Government having lost out several times before .

My understanding (open to correction) is that as the leader of the biggest party in Dail Eireann, and the largest party of a coalition that Mulcahy would be expected to be Taoiseach. Was he not TD after 1948 election for Tipp south http://www.ricorso.net/rx/az-data/authors/m/Mulcahy_R/life.htm ? Mulcahy saw his main aim as putting Dev out of government so to achieve this he stepped aside. I have'nt read of reasons for this being necessary other than differences with McBride that dated to the civil war (Richard Mulcahy and the Founding of the Irish Free State, p243. Maryann Gialanella Valiulis). http://books.google.ie/books?id=YGizfkDzVXEC&pg=PA243&dq=mulcahy+taoiseach&hl=en&ei=VUMpTtSfNcWxhQfWm_3LCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=epilogue&f=false

CDfm

Dick Mulcahy was hated for ordering executions and reprisals. The figure stands at 73. These executions substantially weakened the Anti-Treaty gene pool.

DeValera's approach was more astute towards the IRA - part concillatory and rehabilitation and part hangman.

There was a time in 1927 when a Labour Leader Thomas Johnson almost became Taoiseach with FF support and everyone was accusing each other of being slightly consitutional. Norton suceeded him as Leader in 1932.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68737187&postcount=53

The basis that Mulcahy stepped aside in favour of John A Costello -it was just to keep DeV & FF out.

What was his role in pulling the other parties into coallition ?

jonniebgood1

CDfm wrote: »

Dick Mulcahy was hated for ordering executions and reprisals. The figure stands at 73. These executions substantially weakened the Anti-Treaty gene pool.

DeValera's approach was more astute towards the IRA - part concillatory and rehabilitation and part hangman.

.......................

What was his role in pulling the other parties into coallition ?

De Valeras approach may have been more concillatory but it was also later and the threat they posed was less than in 1923.

How did the executions ordered by Mulcahy effect the anti-treaty side? Did it erode support or did he get rid of the leaders?

CDfm

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

De Valeras approach may have been more concillatory but it was also later and the threat they posed was less than in 1923.

How was the threat less ?

Involvement in WWII and occupation by the British or indeed the German's was fairly high stakes

How did the executions ordered by Mulcahy effect the anti-treaty side? Did it erode support or did he get rid of the leaders?

Michael Collins had no problem ordering executions and following his death the expectation may have been that the Government side would be indecisive and Mulcahy took the initiative.

The anti-treaty side was caught unaware's.

I think of it like the final scene in the Unforgiven with Clint Eastwood.

The other thing that it had going for it was that the pro-treaty side was that it was the ultimate test for Irish democracy.

The people had spoken and the government asserted its authority and the vote really meant something. That was its real significance. It took undemocratic forms of government off the table and gave it a moral authority too.

EDIT

I think people underestimate the strenght the idea of democracy had for these men. In West Cork when my grandfather was growing up some people lived in mud huts . They heard first hand accounts of the famine.

This was the folklore they were aware of

http://carriganimawhiteboys.com/whiteboysinmuskerry.html

That's why I imagine Richard Mulcahy prevailed as it was not an abstract concept for pro-treaty supporters and subsequenty.DeValera's supporters.

In the 1932 elections the same people tackled voter intimidation at polling stations. There were quite a few Mulcahy's knocking around.

In WWII when DeValera tackled the same issues he hired Tom Barry as an intelligence officer and if you read Terry DeValera's memoir you can get a feel for the period in that the family were armed.

I also think that the anti-treaty side overestimated their popular support and their support among those that supported the "guerilla" army of independence.Subsequent attempts to reinvent themselves politically as marxists etc did not cut it .

walrusgumble

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Richard Mulcahy was one of the most prominent people in Ireland for much of the 20th century. His roles were prominent in the war of independence, civil war, early saorstait govenments and he also fought in the 1916 rising at Ashbourne. To form a coalition government in 1948 he had to step aside to get support from former IRA men, this is attributed to his role in the civil war. This prevented him from rounding off his career as Taoiseach which it would seem he deserved given his role in the battle for independence.

Mulcahy & Collins at Arthur Griffiths funeral

What are peoples views on him now? Was he harshly treated in 1948?
Does he deserve to be held in the same terms as the likes of Pearse, Collins, DeValera in terms of important figures who define Irish freedom? To my mind he is not as recognised or revered as these figures.

His actions as head of the Free State Army in Civil War (Even though O'Duffy and co were there), as you know put an end to any ambitions. Its clear that he was not a careerist.

Why the get involved in O'Duffy's Blueshirts though?

CDfm

Why the get involved in O'Duffy's Blueshirts though?

And the Blueshirts morphed into Young Fine Gael.

The same with WT Cosgrave though and the only reason I can think of us that DeV had his IRA affiliation and the concept of Political and Paramilitary wings was current and the protection of members and voters.

It is a very valid question.