Madam, - In the 1916 Rebellion Handbook, first published in that year by the Weekly Irish Times, there is a self-revealing observation on the Irish Citizen Army from "The Steward of Christendom" himself, DMP Superintendent Dunne.
He complains that "it is a serious state of affairs to have the city endangered by a gang of roughs with rifles and bayonets, at large at that time of night with a female like the Countess Markievicz in charge".
Constance Markievicz's reputation has indeed been bedevilled by a combination of misogyny and contempt for her association with the working class that this union set out to organise, and whom Superintendent Dunne chose to christen "the disorderly class".
All the more reason, then, to expect professional rigour to be applied when UCC's Emeritus Professor of History, John A. Murphy, intervenes (October 22nd) in what he calls the "argument in your columns" concerning Markievicz's role in 1916.
Surprisingly, however, he has nothing to say on the actual issue in dispute: that either Markievicz had shot Constable Lahiff at Stephen's Green, as maintained by Kevin Myers (October 14th), or that she could not possibly have done so, being at that time at the City Hall, as evidenced by Claire McGrath Guerin (October 19th).
Prof Murphy has instead chosen to open up a new line of attack, by endorsing, without any qualification, the character assassination of Markievicz offered in his memoirs by the death penalty prosecutor of the 1916 leaders, W.E. Wylie.
It is a pity that Prof Murphy has not kept abreast of more recent scholarship in this area, most notably Brian Barton's From Behind a Closed Door: Secret Court Martial Records of the 1916 Easter Rising (2002).
Writing of Markievicz, whose record had been kept a close secret by the British government for 85 years before they finally agreed to its release in 2001, Barton observes:
"In fact the official record of Markievicz's trial shows that she acted bravely and with characteristic defiance throughout. . .
"When speaking in her own defence, she retracted nothing, stating simply: 'I went out to fight for Ireland's freedom and it doesn't matter what happens to me. I did what I thought was right and I stand by it' . . ."
Barton further comments: "Wylie's wilful and scurrilous distortion of her response at her trial is difficult to interpret.
"It may reflect a personal sense of irritation at her self-assurance and boldness, which he may have considered an insult to the court. Perhaps it reflected deep-rooted sexual prejudice and rank misogyny on his part.
"More likely, his fictitious account sprang, above all, from a feeling that the Countess had by her actions betrayed both her religion and her class (she had been presented at court to Queen Victoria in her jubilee year, 1887).
"Such considerations certainly influenced the Trinity College Provost's daughter Miss Mahaffy's assessment of her . . . (as) 'the one woman amongst them of high birth and therefore the most depraved ... She took to politics and left our class'. . ."
She did indeed. Appointed Minister of Labour in 1919 in the democratically elected Government of the Irish Republic, Markievicz had previously been Vice-President of the Irish Women Workers' Union.
She was also made an honorary member of the ITGWU, in tribute to her outstanding work during the 1913 Lockout in organising with Delia Larkin the provision, here at Liberty Hall, of 3,000 meals a day to our suffering members and their families.
And for that commitment the name of Constance Markievicz will always be an honoured one in the annals of the Irish trade union movement. - Yours, etc.,
MANUS O'RIORDAN, Head of Research, SIPTU, Liberty Hall, Dublin 1.