Aaron Callan is a native of Limavady and a graduate of the University of Ulster and Queen’s University Belfast. He is a Ulster Unionist, Orangeman and occasional blogger.
The 16th April 1914, a fine sunny spring day, would be a date many Unionist in Limavady would remember for years to come. According to local reports thousands of people lined the streets of Limavady. Many of the people in their Sunday best and waving the Union flag which was on display on nearly every house and available spot within Limavady. They were awaiting the visit of their hero, someone who was a modern day version of King William III to them. Sir Edward Carson was a Dublin lawyer and MP, who with little knowledge or experience of Ulster, accepted the leadership of Ulster Unionism in 1911. This visit had been the end result of a campaign which started with the signing of the Ulster Covenant in September 1912.
Commentary about the day from the contemporary press state:
‘The streets of Limavady were ablaze with colour and those in charge of the decorations are to be complemented upon the thoroughness with which they carried out their work. Every street had one or more arches containing either a greeting to the great Ulster Leader or an expression of their feelings on the subject which transcends all others in the political arena at the present moment. In some of the streets it seemed as if there was not a house, be it big or small, from which a loyal emblem was not displayed.’
Arches displayed messages such as “We Choose Death Before Dishonour”, “We Prepare For Defence But Not Defiance”, “Welcome Sir Edward Carson Our Leader; True Friend Of Liberty; Faithful Servant of the Empire And King”.
In 1912, Limavady, like any many other towns across Ulster, celebrated ‘Ulster Day’ with great energy and enthusiasm. Throughout the local area, 4385 men and women signed the Covenant and Declaration with signings in Dungiven, Ballykelly, Bellarena and Boveva in various locations including Orange Halls, Church and Civic Buildings. With around 3000 attending a united humiliation and prayer service in the Market Yard in the centre of town led by Rev. Canon R.G.S. King, Rev. William Browne and Rev. Samuel Houston. Local Businesses closed for the day from 1pm to 4pm to accommodate the signing of the Covenant and the Services. The Bishop of Derry and Raphoe George Chadwick subsequently wrote in the Londonderry Sentinel the following about ‘Ulster Day’:
“I never in my life saw anything like Ulster Day. The churches were filled; and when emptied the multitude did not even cheer: there was only one grim and fixed determination on a thousand faces, to live as freemen or to die. They simply signed.”
Many Church of Ireland Ministers were key supporters for the Ulster Resistance providing local leadership and also facilities for the volunteers to drill and train in. Limavady was no different with Rev. Canon R.G.S. King, who was Rector of Christ Church Limavady, getting involved in the U.V.F. and was one of the thousands who signed the Covenant on ‘Ulster Day’. He wrote a propaganda booklet entitled ‘Ulster’s Protest’, in which he outlined Ulster Loyalists’s objections to Home Rule. In his concluding remarks, he implored his readers ‘to be true to us’:
‘We have mingled our blood with yours in the battlefields of our glorious Empire… What verdict will history pass upon you if you try to consign the Loyalists of Ireland to the power of the bitterest foes of the Empire, to a prospect which they hate worse than death?… We expect of you… that you should unite your forces with those who are determined to prevent the establishment at the very heart of the Empire, of a great hostile power, fostering unreasoning hate, malicious prejudice, discord and division, criminal and cruel agitators?.’
Work for the visit of Carson commenced in earnest in the months leading up to April. A committee was formed of the leading Unionists in the town who were key in the ‘Ulster Day’ organisation and the forming of the local U.V.F. (Ulster Volunteer Force). Many of the names are well known and some not so well known. They included the Deputy Lieutenant of Country Londonderry Rt. Hon. Maurice Marcus McCausland, Edward M.F.-G. Boyle, F.S.N. Macrory, James W. Drennan, Dr James Claude B. Proctor, William Alexander Ingram and Fredrick CB Trench to name a few. Some of whom would be dead by 1917 in the wake of the First World War.
Sir Edward travelled from Garvagh where he had reviewed the South Derry U.V.F. Regiment in a morning inspection to Limavady. He was escorted by thirty two dispatch riders drawn from Coleraine, Limavady, Londonderry and Ballymoney. Along the route groups of people gathered to cheer him and special trains were laid on to bring thousands of volunteers and spectators to the town. The press stated, “the visit of a prince could not have been characterised with greater wave of enthusiasm.”
The purpose of the visit was to review the North Derry U.V.F. Regiment which took place at Drenagh the family home of the McCausland family just on the outskirts of Limavady. In addition to this, a new U.V.F. Drill Hall, which was situated on the present day site of Limavady Baptist Church, was to be opened. The men of Limavady and surrounding Roe Valley area were eager to show their loyalty and by 1914 the Second Battalion of the North Derry Regiment, from the Roe Valley, had 900 volunteers under the command of thirty officers.
In total, the county strength was 5360 men, headed up by M.M. McCausland and included a number of notable people again Dr J.C.B. Proctor (County Organiser), F.C.B Trench, F.S.N Macrory, E.M.F.-G. Boyle, J.W. Drennan and W.A. Ingram to name a few. The Northern Constitution reported that in June 1913 guns were smuggled into the town by a lawyer, this was most likely Proctor or Ingram. It is estimated that the guns brought in County Londonderry totalled 3183.
The local paper the Northern Constitution reported that “The forthcoming visit of Sir Edward Carson to Limavady has aroused the greatest enthusiasm, not only throughout the ranks of the North Londonderry Regiment of the U.V.F., but amongst Unionist generally in the Roe Valley”
Dr H.S. Morrison, a prominent South Derry Unionist, in his book Modern Ulster gives us a first hand account of the 16th April 1914 as he accompanied Carson to Limavady;
“At the field for the review in Limavady, we, that is the party of Sir Edward Carson, were received by Sir James Craig MP, H.T. Barrie MP, and John Gordon MP, and the inspection was carried out in customary fashion. Quite 4000 Volunteers from Derry City and North Derry were on parade, and Major Cunningham, at this time commander of the South Derry Regiment, said to me:
“I would not ask to lead a finer body of men on any battlefield.”
The Decorations in Limavady were on a generous scale and here as in Garvagh and all along the route Union Jacks were everywhere in evidence.
The Drill Hall of Limavady, with which Mr McCausland is so honourably associated, has done much to secure and retain the pre-eminence of the loyal and historic little town on the Roe in this matter of the Ulster Volunteers.”
The volunteers Carson reviewed included, a motorcycle detachment, the Limavady Lady Nurses and Ballyquin Cavalry, who were a small group of mounted volunteers trained by the brother of Rev. Canon Benson. The brother had came home from Canada for a holiday and decided to use his military experience to help his fellow Ulstermen.
The party which accompanied Carson was a ‘who’s who’ of unionism during that period. Sir James Craig, like Carson, was making his first visit to Limavady. Also in attendance were Lieutenant General Sir George Richardson, Colonel G. Hackett-Pain and Sir Hervey and Lady Bruce at the review at Drenagh. After the review, Carson and his companions retired to Greystone Hall the home of Major. F.C.B. Trench one of the Company Commanders for tea. There was a 170 guests invited to attend the tea with Carson and his party.
After the review at Drenagh there was a general rush towards the new Drill Hall, the interior of which was adorned with flags and streamers with the words ‘Limavady: Heartiest Greetings To Sir Edward Carson’ on display above the platform. On his arrival, Sir Edward was introduced at the hall to the trustees by the MP of North Londonderry Hugh T. Barrie. Before the hall was opened the Chairman Rt. Hon. M. M. McCausland presented him with a key amidst prolonged applause. H.T. Barrie MP chaired the meeting once inside and presided as Sir Edward was presented with two illuminated addresses of welcome – one from the townspeople and the other from the local Orangemen.
The address from the people of Limavady, signed by Dr J.C.B. Proctor LL.D, B.L., and the Rev. John Heney, Rev. Canon R.G.S. King and G.W. Lawson was read by Robert Douglas, was the following:
Sir – the people of Limavady, in the name of loyalty, in the name of liberty and in the name of patriotism, welcome you to their town, and thank you most heartily from coming among them. In days of old our forefathers, many of them from this town, daring all things by divine help and with heroic endurance, victoriously defended the cause of civil and religious liberty then, no less than now, assailed by constituted authority. To their noble spirit and faithfulness unto death we owe in no small measure the Constitution under which we live, and under which it is our firm resolve to remain.
Today, in times scarcely less threatening, we thank God in you. He has given us a leader whom we can follow with confidence and with enthusiasm. Your great self sacrifice, your splendid courage, your unfaltering determination, your inspiring faith, and your unsparing devotion to your country have endeared you to us all, and we assure you of our fervent loyalty to your leadership and of our warm affection for your person and pray that the blessing of God may rest upon you and on all your labourers.
When Carson was called to speak he was in a sombre mood:
I recognise my responsibility; Heaven knows I am always thinking about it. From morn till night, I think of the grave tragedies that may lie before us. It doesn’t make me shrink one iota as regards myself; no man in my position can help but think of others who have to fight out this battle. I contemplate what may happen, it is natural to feel – even the bravest heart – I shall not say with fear, but with a sense of responsibility that is almost appalling.
But I know this, I am dealing in all parts with brave men who have made up their minds and if we have to go into a fight – which God forbid – we will do so knowing that for the last thirty years, for no fault on our part which can alleged against us, we have been a threatened and an outraged people and we will also be conscious in our minds that every warning which it was possible to give the government from the very first day on which this wicked conspiracy was put forward against us – every opportunity was taken warning them that under no circumstances would we submit to be thrust out of the government under which we were born by the most unscrupulous government that I have ever known or read of (a voice “a band of assassins”). It is idle to imagine that we can so regulate matters that we can allay the fears and apprehensions of our fellow citizens.
Carson concluded his speech by declaring how proud he was of all the volunteers: “I would rather be the humblest volunteer in the ranks than the present Prime Minister of England”. His concluding remarks were;
…and now go on and work and drill and make yourself effective. I and my colleagues will do our best in the political arena. If it comes to the worst we will come to you, and will not hesitate to ask you to act. If we have to act it will not be our fault; but it we do may God bless us in our cause.
After Carson spoke there was brief addresses from Sir James Craig MP, Lt. Gen. Sir Richardson and John Gordon MP for South Derry. The party then returned to Drenagh with the protection of a motorcycle escort and the house guarded by a local unit of forty hand picked men patrolling the grounds. One of the rooms in Drenagh, even to this day, is called the Carson room in honour of one of its greatest visitors.
The following morning Carson was then escorted to the train station were, even though the train was leaving at 8.10 am, there was a large number of unionists to give him a rousing send off. The party was provided with a special saloon with a breakfast car attached. Before the train left the station dozens of women present sought to shake hands with their hero with one crying out, “God Bless you Sir Edward: Long may you reign over us”.
It is clear from the contemporary photographs and newspaper reports that this spring Thursday was one of the most important days in the history of the town with thousands of people welcoming their hero. It is also quite clear that for the volunteers, this was a serious day and not simply a dress rehearsal for “the 12th”.
12 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
Wildgoose
January 27, 2013 at 12:55 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Don’t you think that Carson’s comment, quoted in the article above, is rather telling? Let me repeat it:
Please note the use of a dismissive reference to “the present Prime Minister of England” rather than to the more accurate “our current Prime Minister” or “the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom”. How interesting that the dismissive tone was added by referring to England! But then, we are talking about the Ulster Covenant are we not, whose signaturies:
And what did these worthies do when the Home Rule Parliament at Stormont was created? You know, the one with the statue to Edward Carson outside it? That’s right – nothing. Because it wasn’t Home Rule they were objecting to, it was the idea that they wouldn’t automatically get their way if there was a Parliament based in Dublin for the whole of Ireland.
So let’s bring things forward to the current day. After Devolution, many here in England believe that if there are devolved Parliaments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland that are able to decide matters within their jurisdictions for themselves without outside interference, then the same should also apply to England.
“Oh no!” comes the cry. “Unacceptable!” and “A threat to the Union!”. Or in other words, just the same hypocrisy that was so clearly evident 100 years ago.
OU Editors
January 27, 2013 at 1:55 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
With respect, there was fierce and genuine opposition to devolution for the north. What changed that, post-partition, was Lloyd George and the Liberals’ obvious lack of support for Ulster remaining in the Union. The logic of the devolved parliament was that it rendered the mainland incapable of betraying Northern Ireland without the acquiescence of her Parliament.
Carson’s ‘dismissive tone’ was towards the then present Liberal Prime Minister who did not support Ulster’s cause – the interchangeability of England, Britain and the United Kingdom was the case then, as now. His antipathy was not directed towards England. Indeed, he said:
“There is no one in the world who would be more pleased to see an absolute unity in Ireland than I would, and it could be purchased tomorrow, at what does not seem to me a very big price. If the South and West of Ireland came forward tomorrow to Ulster and said – “Look here, we have to run our old island, and we have to run her together, and we will give up all this everlasting teaching of hatred of England, and we will shake hands with you, and you and we together, within the Empire, doing our best for ourselves and the United Kingdom, and for all His Majesty’s Dominion will join together”, I will undertake that we would accept the handshake.”
Speech in Torquay, 30 January 1921.”
Again, England and UK used in place of each other, and the ‘teaching of hatred of England’ specifically denounced. Obviously if you are determined to infer in his words some cause for offence there shall be no stopping you, but you shall have no foundation in fact.
As for your final point, the fact is that devolution to England, an entity which would constitution the great majority of the United Kingdom, is a very different proposition to a devolved institution for the comparably small province of Northern Ireland or the other Home Nations. Obviously that does not preclude support for it, but to pretend that the only reason for supporting devolution without supporting an English parliament is anti-Englishness is to falsely pretend that honourable opposition to your own position is impossible.
Wildgoose
January 27, 2013 at 3:37 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
You state that “to pretend that the only reason for supporting devolution without supporting an English parliament is anti-Englishness is to falsely pretend that honourable opposition to your own position is impossible” which is a mis-representation.
I am more than prepared to acknowledge an opposition to English Devolution as honourable, providing that it is also accompanied by both an equal opposition (and equivalent campaign) in opposing Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Devolution.
That some forms of Devolution are considered acceptable (however grudgingly) but English Devolution is not, can only be based upon an objection to England (and her people) having equal rights to the non-English citizens of the United Kingdom. And thus we are back to the Ulster Covenant, only this time it is the English who are demanding
- only for the people of Ulster (amongst others) to object.
I think my claim of hypocrisy stands.
OU Editors
January 27, 2013 at 3:47 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Your claim of hypocrisy on whose part? Your original claim was that the Ulster unionists claimed to oppose devolution but did not oppose it in fact, when in truth their position shifted for reasons I have outlined. If you have some new charge of hypocrisy please outline it.
For someone not thinking in nationalist terms (which I concede is not likely to be involved in the CEP) then regionalised devolution makes sense. For all that Scotland, Wales and NI are ‘nations’, they are not wildly diverse in size, whereas an English Parliament would constitute most of the union. It is perfectly sensible on the basis of maintaining like size between the devolved areas, not to mention a desire to deliver genuinely local government rather than nationalistically ‘English’ government, to support regional assemblies of a similar size to the current devolved assemblies.
This isn’t necessarily the position of the editors here (neither of whom are pro-devolution), nor are you beholden to agree with it, but one does not need to hate England to support regional assemblies.
Paul Turner
January 27, 2013 at 4:35 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Surely the only people who should decide on the governance of England are the voters of England. After all, we have the same citizenship as the people of Scotland, Wales and NI. We pay the same taxes, plus more, effectively, as we have to pay top dollar fro social services that are avilable at the point of delivery for free or a far lower price in the other nations. We should be asked the same questions in democratic referenda as our neighbours. Democracy should be for all of us or none of us. I prefer the former option. If England is broken into regions that the English people patently don’t want, who is there to speak on behalf of the entire English nation, in the way that the First Ministers speak for their nations? If England is too big for a federal United Kingdom (it isn’t), then surely it’s too big for any form of United Kingdom. If the UK is to remain, it is in the British state’s interest to treat all the constituent nations equally.
When people say that England’s population (85% of the Kingdom’s population) is too big to justify an English parliament, lest the whole kingdom be threatened, they’re barking up the wrong tree, because the English people don’t want independence. Yet. No, it’s the British state’s continued presecution of us English, and the denial of our democratic rights that threaten the kingdom.
Wildgoose
January 27, 2013 at 4:40 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
I’m not accusing you of “hating England”, far from it. Furthermore, I (historically) supported the idea of regional devolution throughout the United Kingdom. After all, there are large differences between rural Welsh-speaking Wales and the industrial English-speaking valleys. Or between the Gallic Highlands and Islands, the Norse Orcadians and Shetland, and of course the traditional rivalries between Glasgow and Edinburgh.
But that’s not what happened is it? We got explicitly National Devolution to Nations.
Fair enough then. What’s good for the Gander is good for the Wildgoose. And that means either Regional Devolution for all, or National Devolution for all. Making the English second-class citizens in their own country is simply not acceptable. You are obviously entitled to a different opinion, but if it doesn’t address the simple fact of equal citizenship for all then I am equally entitled to reject it out of hand.
OU Editors
January 27, 2013 at 8:55 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
We have different definitions of equal citizenship, I suppose. I, who will have no part of nationalism, believe that if devolution has a purpose it is to deliver locally responsive government. An English parliament would not do that at all – it would be precious little closer to most of England than the united Parliament, and would not deliver in any real sense ‘local’ administration. If a pan-English response to the West Lothian Question must be found, then ‘English votes for English laws’ is much more sensible and would have precisely the same effect, save to deny a few hundred new politicians new jobs.
Wildgoose
January 28, 2013 at 8:00 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
How convenient that you choose a definition for Devolution that suits your purposes. Fair enough though, let’s run with your suggestion. I agree that “English Votes for English Laws” is sensible and also that the general public would prefer not to have a few hundred extra politicians. But of course we still require an English Executive and a body whose remit is explicitly and clearly to look after the interests of England.
The solution is obvious. In your own words, Devolution has already delivered “locally responsible government” for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. All that is required is to remove the anomaly of Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs taking part in English Government.
So let’s remove them from the English Parliament in Westminster.
After all, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland already have Parliaments to look after their interests and also Secretaries of State in Cabinet as well. These latter could continue of course, acting as a liason between the Devolved Parliaments and the English Parliament – and let’s face it, there are enough carpet-baggers sitting as MPs for English constituencies (e.g. Malcolm Rifkind) that filling these roles with appropriate candidates is not likely to be difficult.
I believe we have found a solution. Congratulations!
OU Editors
January 28, 2013 at 9:07 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Well, no. First, I choose a ‘definition of devolution’ that I believe in, it is no more or less convenient than your own nationalist definition. Second, ‘English Votes for English Laws’ – or given the uneven levels of distribution, the less snappy ‘MPs can only vote on things that effect their constituency’ – would not remove MPs from the rest of the Union from the United Parliament. The English Grand Committee – for such it would be – would only administer devolved areas, inside the British Parliament.
Further, I count it a strength that the English are secure enough with Britishness to happily elect Welsh, Scots and Irish MPs. Would that the other Home Nations more closely followed our well-integrated example.
Paul Turner
January 28, 2013 at 10:15 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
There’s one major problem with “English votes for English laws”. All Westminster MPs are officially British members of a British parliament, with a British remit (even though many areas of legislation are now devolved) and, I believe, take a British oath when they become MPs. However, and it’s a very big “however”, all this Britishness doesn’t stop MPs from Scotland, Wales and NI from doing everything they can in the selfish interests of their own countries, and always at England’s expense. Of course, if MPs from England acted in their constituents’ interests, this might not happen, but many MPs from English seats have no connection with England, beyond having Wetminster seats here, and many are openly contemptuous of us (for example, Jack Straw’s inflammatory, xenophobic remarks several years ago about us being “aggressive and violent”, as if nobody else has those traits). Now, let’s imagne those MPs from England spend, say, three quarters of their time in the Commons on pan-UK business, and the other quarter on English-only business. Do you really think they’ll legislate in England’s interests? Even though they might be barred from the chamber, MPs from the other countries will be hanging around the building, and constsantly reminding their colleagues from England that anything beneficial to England might “jeopardise the entire kingdom”. The potential conflict of interest is clear, and it will always be England that suffers.
oneill
January 27, 2013 at 6:58 pm (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Carson was no supporter of devolution:
“I appeal to the [British] Government to keep Ulster in their united Parliament. I cannot understand why we should ask them to take a Parliament which they have never demanded, and which they do not want.”
Indeed after the Government of Ireland Act right up to his death he had severe misgivings about the comstitutional and practical implications of a separate “parliament” at Stormont.
Also Carson belonged very much to the Anglo-Irish class and an examination of his background and career would should that he was very far from being an England hater… perhaps a Lloyd-George hater would be more accurate and he wasn’t on his own in completely mistrusting the (Welsh) prime-minister of the day.
Wildgoose
January 28, 2013 at 8:04 am (UTC 0) Link to this comment
Just for the record, Lloyd George may have been a Welsh speaker and of Welsh descent, but he was actually born in Manchester, England.