Captain William Partridge ICA, ITGWU, Labour Party and Town Councillor.
One of the lesser known or spoke of veterans of the early socialist movement is William Partridge.
Partridge was born in Sligo 1874, the son of an Englishman, a train driver Benjamin Partridge, and Irish mother, Ellen Hall, first living at West Gardens moving to 6 Chapel Street. His older brother, Felix Partridge, was a noted playwright, and the family moved after a short time to Ballaghaderreen, County Roscommon also in the West of Ireland.
At the age of 17 Partridge was apprenticed as a mechanical fitter with the Midland and Great Western Railway in Sligo. At the age of 22 he was transferred to Dublin, the railways workshops at Broadstone, Inchicore and it was here he became involved in the trade union movement. He joined the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (ASE) and was active in the strikes of 1887 and 1902 making Partridge one of the pioneers of the developing trade union movement in Ireland. He also worked tirelessly for improved housing, education and civic amenities for the working-class of Inchicore.
Partridge was, like Richard O’Carroll elected to Dublin City Council where he served as a Sinn Fein councillor but his employer forced him to resign his seat in 1906. This was the year Richard O’Carroll fell out with the Sinn Fein leader, Arthur Griffith, and it must be wondered whether that Gentleman’s inability to defend one of his own councillors from employer aggression may have played a part in this falling out and parting of the ways? The Sinn Fein leader of the day was very much pro-employer and had little time for trade unions or union activists. Despite this naked aggression forcing him to resign his seat, although being elected by the populace [then as now this democracy we are supposed to believe in was paper thin], Partridge received little or no support from his party chief.
He continued to organise in the trade union. In 1912 he was dismissed from his employment for highlighting discrimination in the appointment of supervisors at the Inchicore works, perhaps today what would be termed “nepotism,” the practice of those with power or influence favouring relatives or friends for higher positions within a company or organisation. Could this have been what Partridge was uncovering leading to his dismissal? Could Partridge have been the “turbulent Priest” management wished to be free of?
William Partridge worked with Big Jim Larkin, becoming an organiser in the Irish Transport and General Workers Union (ITGWU) which Larkin had formed in 1909 having being dismissed from the National Union of Dock Labourers (NUDL). Partridge was instrumental in setting up ITGWU branches outside the Dublin area, and was again elected to Dublin City Council in 1913 this time as a Labour Party councillor. He had been instrumental in the formation of the Irish Labour Party in 1912 along with Larkin and James Connolly and this was perhaps a more appropriate home than was Griffith's Sinn Fein for William Partridge.
William Partridge worked with Big Jim Larkin, becoming an organiser in the Irish Transport and General Workers Union (ITGWU) which Larkin had formed in 1909 having being dismissed from the National Union of Dock Labourers (NUDL). Partridge was instrumental in setting up ITGWU branches outside the Dublin area, and was again elected to Dublin City Council in 1913 this time as a Labour Party councillor. He had been instrumental in the formation of the Irish Labour Party in 1912 along with Larkin and James Connolly and this was perhaps a more appropriate home than was Griffith's Sinn Fein for William Partridge.
Along with Larkin and Connolly, Partridge was heavily involved in the 1913/14 Dublin Lockout, the mammoth struggle by the working-class of Dublin against the tyrannical employer, William Martin Murphy and his cronies in the Employers Federation. Like Jim Larkin he toured Britain seeking support for the locked out and striking workers of the Irish capital and he addressed the British Trades Union Congress (TUC). Many British unions contributed greatly towards the Dublin workers hardship fund none more than the Miners Federation of Great Britain (MFGB) the forerunner of the NUM [seventy years later this support was returned by the workers of Dublin, indeed Ireland as a whole, during the year-long British Coal Miner’s Strike of 1984/85]. Partridge addressed numerous unions and the Railway workers took strike action in support as Dockers blacked goods destined for Dublin port. Like Jim Larkin, the efforts of William Partridge during the lockout were tireless.
Partridge attacked the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic church for their attacks on the ITGWU and Jim Larkin in particular. He attacked the hypocrisy of the clergy who sided with the bosses over the locked out and striking workers. The church condemned the trade unions and the ITGWU, who came in for special condemnation from the pulpit, while at the same time these heavenly souls were doing nothing themselves to combat the causes of poverty in the city. Why should they? The Catholic Church benefitted from the poverty and ignorance of the dispossessed masses, and, like the employers, were extremely wealthy. The Catholic church was a huge tool in the employer’s armoury during the lockout, playing on people’s superstitions and fear of the Priesthood. It would be unfair perhaps to castigate all priests for this hypocritical crime, there were those who sympathised with the working-class but in many instances they too were afraid of the hierarchy and, therefore, perhaps future promotion within the church. Those few priests who were privately sympathetic to the workers tended to confine their attacks not against the employers but the poverty which existed, and not the causes of such poverty.
At a public meeting in Tralee, 1915, which was called in protest at the dismissal of Michael J. O’Connor from his employment with a firm of solicitors for taking part in an anti-war demonstration, he was in attendance. Partridge addressed the protest with an opening speech:
Partridge attacked the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic church for their attacks on the ITGWU and Jim Larkin in particular. He attacked the hypocrisy of the clergy who sided with the bosses over the locked out and striking workers. The church condemned the trade unions and the ITGWU, who came in for special condemnation from the pulpit, while at the same time these heavenly souls were doing nothing themselves to combat the causes of poverty in the city. Why should they? The Catholic Church benefitted from the poverty and ignorance of the dispossessed masses, and, like the employers, were extremely wealthy. The Catholic church was a huge tool in the employer’s armoury during the lockout, playing on people’s superstitions and fear of the Priesthood. It would be unfair perhaps to castigate all priests for this hypocritical crime, there were those who sympathised with the working-class but in many instances they too were afraid of the hierarchy and, therefore, perhaps future promotion within the church. Those few priests who were privately sympathetic to the workers tended to confine their attacks not against the employers but the poverty which existed, and not the causes of such poverty.
At a public meeting in Tralee, 1915, which was called in protest at the dismissal of Michael J. O’Connor from his employment with a firm of solicitors for taking part in an anti-war demonstration, he was in attendance. Partridge addressed the protest with an opening speech:
As the chairman very properly remarked, when an employer engaged a man’s services the money he was paid was for them (sic), and by no means to purchase his principles, the convictions or opinions of his employees, and any attempt on the part of any employer to control the opinions of the men he employed was a condition of slavery!’
Put simply, a person is employed to sell their labour power and services to an employer for a monetary wage. This employment did/does not give the employers, even in times of war, the right to dictate how an employee thinks or what opinions he should hold even if those views differ from those of the employing class. Just because the employers supported the slaughter which was going on in Europe does not automatically follow the employees share these opinions.
At a public demonstration James Connolly condemned the horrors of the war raging in Europe as millions of working-class people whom had never met went out to blow each other to bits on behalf of their ruling classes. The platform was shared by leading members of the Trades Union Congress, including the dismissed man, Michael J. O’Connor. As a result of O’Connor’s sacking, Connolly sent William Partridge to Tralee to give assistance in opposing the dismissal and with permission to offer O’Connor a job with the ITGWU as an organiser. Then as now it is these less publicised tasks within the trade unions which allow them to function.
During a study in 1903 prepared for Dublin Corporation it was established that sixty percent of Dublin families, averaging four to five persons per family lived in one or two rooms. Dublin had a population of 292,000 in 1901 with thirty six percent living in one room. These people were living in abject poverty, even by the low standards of the day with many having to use the same room for living in as their privy causing many problems with people’s health. William Partridge was the secretary to this committee which prepared the study highlighting these problems for the Dublin Corporation. These conditions were in sharp contrast to those enjoyed by the idle class, people like William Martin Murphy described as an “Ogre” by Jim Larkin during the 1913/14 Dublin Lockout.
At a public demonstration James Connolly condemned the horrors of the war raging in Europe as millions of working-class people whom had never met went out to blow each other to bits on behalf of their ruling classes. The platform was shared by leading members of the Trades Union Congress, including the dismissed man, Michael J. O’Connor. As a result of O’Connor’s sacking, Connolly sent William Partridge to Tralee to give assistance in opposing the dismissal and with permission to offer O’Connor a job with the ITGWU as an organiser. Then as now it is these less publicised tasks within the trade unions which allow them to function.
During a study in 1903 prepared for Dublin Corporation it was established that sixty percent of Dublin families, averaging four to five persons per family lived in one or two rooms. Dublin had a population of 292,000 in 1901 with thirty six percent living in one room. These people were living in abject poverty, even by the low standards of the day with many having to use the same room for living in as their privy causing many problems with people’s health. William Partridge was the secretary to this committee which prepared the study highlighting these problems for the Dublin Corporation. These conditions were in sharp contrast to those enjoyed by the idle class, people like William Martin Murphy described as an “Ogre” by Jim Larkin during the 1913/14 Dublin Lockout.
Just as housing and homelessness are a problem today in Dublin, indeed Ireland as a whole, it appears to be an ongoing problem within the capitalist system dedicated to private property and not something which appeared overnight. Back in the early twentieth century diseases related to poor living conditions, sanitation and sleeping arrangements, was a major cause of mortality among the working-class. These were exposed by William Partridge and his committee.
William Partridge was a Captain in the workers armed wing, the Irish Citizen Army, described as perhaps the first red army in Western Europe of the twentieth century. From the organisation’s formation in November 1913 at the rooms of the Reverend R.M. Gwynn at 40 Trinity College Dublin he worked closely with James Connolly [though Connolly was not on the first Army Council] particularly when Connolly succeeded Larkin [after his departure for the USA] as General Secretary of the ITGWU and Commandant of the army in late 1914.
William Partridge was a Captain in the workers armed wing, the Irish Citizen Army, described as perhaps the first red army in Western Europe of the twentieth century. From the organisation’s formation in November 1913 at the rooms of the Reverend R.M. Gwynn at 40 Trinity College Dublin he worked closely with James Connolly [though Connolly was not on the first Army Council] particularly when Connolly succeeded Larkin [after his departure for the USA] as General Secretary of the ITGWU and Commandant of the army in late 1914.
Partridge was a member of the ICA first Army Council along with Jim Larkin, Constance Markievicz, P.T. Daly, Thomas Foran, Sean O’Casey and Francis Sheehy Skeffington, a pacifist but all the same a brilliant socialist. He was close to James Connolly during the preparations for the Easter Rising 1916 as the two worked tirelessly to prepare the army of the working-class for insurrection. Prior to the Rising Partridge was dispatched by Connolly to Fenit, County Kerry, to supervise and organise union labour for the offloading of arms being brought in on board the Aud to be landed off the Kerry coast. Unfortunately, due to bouts of bad luck and, to be honest poor preparation [the ship had no radio for example] the skipper of the Aud Captain Karl Spindler, had to scupper the ship and its cargo of around 20,000 rifles to prevent the weapons falling into the hands of the Royal Navy. The loss of these weapons was a huge loss to the Irish insurrectionists in the Easter Rising.
On his return to Dublin Partridge was the officer of the guard at Liberty Hall while the Proclamation of 1916 was printed. The printers and Compositors involved in the printing work were Michael Molloy, Christopher Joseph Brady and Liam O’Brien and the reason for the armed ICA guard was nothing to do with the men escaping, all were union men and generally sympathetic to the cause. It was there to protect the men should the British raid Liberty Hall it could be claimed the tradesmen were doing the work under duress! Anybody who has read the constitution of the ICA will see the similarities between that constitution and the 1916 proclamation, perhaps emphasising Connolly’s input.
William Partridge fought for the national liberation/independence of Ireland and the emancipation of the working class, to which he saw no difference. The two causes were interlinked, Ireland could not be truly free unless the working-class were liberated from the chains which bind them. Perhaps in more recent times Seamus Costello viewed the situation through similar lenses. Costello was the founder of the Irish Republican Socialist Party and Irish National Liberation Army and, like William Partridge, viewed the two struggles as one of the same.
Captain William Partridge fought under the overall command of the ICAs second in command, Michael Mallin. He was stationed at the College of surgeons while Mallin himself was at St. Stephens Green with Constance Markievicz, Christopher Poole and other officers and men. Like Joseph Mary Plunket William Partridge was not a well man even before the Rising, and when the fighting was over and the surrender accepted, he was taken to England and imprisoned in Dartmoor and Lewes Prisons. While he was incarcerated his health deteriorated badly, so badly the British authorities had to release him on the grounds of ill health in 1917.
On his return to Dublin Partridge was the officer of the guard at Liberty Hall while the Proclamation of 1916 was printed. The printers and Compositors involved in the printing work were Michael Molloy, Christopher Joseph Brady and Liam O’Brien and the reason for the armed ICA guard was nothing to do with the men escaping, all were union men and generally sympathetic to the cause. It was there to protect the men should the British raid Liberty Hall it could be claimed the tradesmen were doing the work under duress! Anybody who has read the constitution of the ICA will see the similarities between that constitution and the 1916 proclamation, perhaps emphasising Connolly’s input.
William Partridge fought for the national liberation/independence of Ireland and the emancipation of the working class, to which he saw no difference. The two causes were interlinked, Ireland could not be truly free unless the working-class were liberated from the chains which bind them. Perhaps in more recent times Seamus Costello viewed the situation through similar lenses. Costello was the founder of the Irish Republican Socialist Party and Irish National Liberation Army and, like William Partridge, viewed the two struggles as one of the same.
Captain William Partridge fought under the overall command of the ICAs second in command, Michael Mallin. He was stationed at the College of surgeons while Mallin himself was at St. Stephens Green with Constance Markievicz, Christopher Poole and other officers and men. Like Joseph Mary Plunket William Partridge was not a well man even before the Rising, and when the fighting was over and the surrender accepted, he was taken to England and imprisoned in Dartmoor and Lewes Prisons. While he was incarcerated his health deteriorated badly, so badly the British authorities had to release him on the grounds of ill health in 1917.
On his release William retired to stay with his family in County Roscommon to hopefully recover from his illness. Unfortunately, he died within three months of his release. At his grave fellow ICA officer, Constance Markievicz, wearing his, Partridges, Citizen Army uniform, delivered the oration in Ballaghaderreen, County Roscommon. She described him as “the purest souled and noblest patriot Ireland ever had.” She then fired a salute over his grave with her own pistol. William Partridge died on 26th July 1917.
 |
Caoimhin O’Muraile is a Dublin based Marxist and author. |
"The Sinn Fein leader of the day was very much pro-employer and had little time for trade unions or union activists."
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much this dynamic influenced my Da who was a Roscommon man.
The old man was a died in the wool Trade unionist who could link most if not all of our trials and tribulations to the class struggle.
By a fluke of chance this member of the diaspora when arriving in the occupied 6 counties in the mid-eighties was attracted to the IRSP, despite the feud and chaos, because of their class consciousness.
I know there will be more experienced commentators than me in this space but my class conscious father was very sceptical of nationalism, Da believed it had no place in the class struggle.
Love your work Macka.
Kevin,
DeleteIt is a piece by Caoimhin O’Muraile - he has a series of pieces on the topic.
I agree with your Da Kevin, national liberation without class liberation offers little if anything. Without class liberation we only replace one gang of thieves with another. Let's remember Willian Matin Murphy was a nationalist but during the 1913 Dublin Lockout used every means at his disposal to crush organised labour.
ReplyDeleteThe same reasons that attracted your Da to the IRSP did me.