Thank you very much for posting the Freeman's Journal article, the short history of Catholic burials in Ireland versus Continental European countries was quite interesting. I am sure you would agree that the newspaper reporter's statement, "As gradually the Church of Ireland begins to recover from the oppression and persecution of centuries", should have read "the Catholic Church in Ireland". The issue being discussed at the Limerick Board of Guardians was the burial of deceased paupers at the Limerick workhouse, but also makes clear that the poor outside the workhouse would also not receive the final prayers of a priest at their burial. Lord Emly's statements in the latest article, "while in every other Catholic country in the world the priest accompanies the body to the grave, this is not done in Ireland" as well as "in Ireland services at the grave are not in the rule", has led me to question my earlier conclusion that a Catholic priest would have attended the burial of James McNamara of Derrymore Carmody of Tulla Parish in 1876.
My prior comment about the comparability of Limerick Parish to Tulla Parish, failed to reflect that the Limerick Board of Guardians represented Limerick Union which would include both County Limerick as well as several adjacent parishes in County Clare.
Lord Emly at a Limerick Board of Guardians in September 1877 asked for the latest status on their April 1877 resolution that the Roman Catholic chaplain would attend the burial service for paupers of the workhouse. Once again, we learn that it was not just paupers, but the majority of ratepayers in the Limerick Union, who would certainly not be considered poor, had no Catholic priest at their interment:
The chaplain of the Limerick workhouse, the Rev. Daniel O'Kennedy, the parish priest of St. Munchin's in Limerick City, would obviously read the newspaper coverage and consider the criticism and language directed at him by the board of guardians to be most inappropriate. He was not shy in letting the board know this:THE BURIAL OF THE DEAD
LIMERICK, THURSDAY,—At the meeting of the Board of Guardians yesterday the chairman (Lord Emly) asked whether the resolution which the guardians made some time since, that the Roman Catholic clergyman should read the burial service at the interment of the paupers who die in the house had been carried out. The Clerk replied that about two months ago the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy wrote to say that he would endeavor to carry out the view of the board, but that he would expect suitable remuneration for the extra duties imposed. He (the clerk) within the past week again communicated with the rev. gentleman, who referred him to his former letter. Chairman—Are the burial services yet read? Master—They are not, my Lord. Chairman—How can that fact be reconciled with the promise conveyed in the letter of the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy? Mr. Costelloe said that eight out of every ten of the ratepayers were interred without any religious services being performed, and he [Mr. Costelloe] did not think it was necessary to do that for the paupers, which the ratepayers did not require to be done for themselves. The Chairman asked was there one amongst them who did not feel repugnance—he could almost use a stronger word—horror, at the idea of sending corpses to be interred without religious services of any kind being performed at their graves? Dr. Kane thought it would be sufficient for the clergyman to perform a religious service in the Church when patients die, and not require him to go to the graveyard. The Chairman said that was one of the two courses which it had been decided at a recent Synod could be adopted. A resolution embodying Dr. Kane's suggestion was then agreed to.
Cork Constitution, Monday, 24 September 1877
A quick interjection: the above letter by the Rev. Daniel O'Kennedy might seem quite tame, but would create a firestorm at the Limerick board of guardian meeting when it was read. I reckon the "polite adjectives" were actually the nouns "repugnance" and "horror" used by Lord Emly, but the members of the board never came to a conclusion as to what and who Father O'Kennedy was referring to. From his comments, Mr. Cronin likely shared my opinion but did not want to stir the pot at the meeting. Father O'Kennedy's letter was one paragraph; when the aldermen state "last paragraph", and "paragraph before that", I believe they mean "last sentence" etc.THE LIMERICK BOARD OF GUARDIANS AND THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPLAIN.
The Hon. G.N. Fitzgibbons presided at the weekly meeting of the Board of Guardians on Wednesday last.
The following letter was read :—
St. Munchin's,
Sept. 25th, 1877
To C.M. Wilson, Esq.
Dear Sir,—In reply to your communication of the 23rd instant, containing resolution of the board, bc., you will kindly inform the board that I will be prepared to perform the "funeral services" as stated in resolution as soon as certain conditions are complied with. It will be necessary to have the corpses closely coffined before removal to the chapel. The reasonable remuneration given to the chaplain for the extra duties imposed, and all necessary requisites procured. If the board will inform me that the aforesaid conditions are to be carried out, I will then (D.V.) [Latin "deo volente" for "God willing"] undertake the extra duties. I would also respectfully suggest to certain guardians that in future they would be more cautious in the use of their "polite adjectives."
Sincerely yours, &c, &c,
DANIEL O'KENNEDY, P.P.
The very vocal Mr. Gaffney must be the "Unionist Alderman and flour merchant Thomas Gaffney, J.P." whose son was Thomas St. John Gaffney. The "Old Limerick Journal" in its 2013 winter edition includes the article "Thomas St. John Gaffney, United States Consul General in Germany 1905 - 1915" by Des Ryan. Gaffney's activities in Germany along with Roger Casement and the Irish Brigade during WWI are most interesting (and the journal's on-line availability begs the question why prior issues of County Clare history journals are also not equally accessible).Mr. Gaffney—Well, the guardians are not to be threatened in this way by the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy and I for one——
Mr. Cregan—I rise to order. There is no threat in the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy's letter.
Mr. Gaffney—(warmly) I think there is, and that his language is most impertinent. And while I stand here, as a guardian it is language I shall not patiently submit to. I am here as the representative of the ratepayers, and I will speak out my mind, and while I am not offensive to the Chairman or the members of the board, I think I am in perfect order (hear, hear); so no officer of the board can tell me I am not.
The Chairman—At present there is nothing exactly before the chair.
Mr. Cronin—There is not, sir, and I don't see why Mr. Gaffney should take to himself everything said in the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy's letter.
Mr. Cregan—He should certainly not usurp the functions of the entire board, for unless the cap fits him he should not wear it. I don't think he used any of the adjectives which the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy mentions. I for one, did not hear Mr. Gaffney make use of a single disrespectful word toward the Rev. gentleman.
The Chairman—I really think, speaking for myself, that Father O'Kennedy ought to be requested to withdraw the last paragraph.
Mr. Gaffney—Certainly, sir, and he should also be requested to withdraw the other paragraph in which he says there will be no prayers without his being paid for them, (Oh, oh).
Mr. Ryan—Shame, shame.
The Chairman—You must recollect, Mr. Gaffney, that the labourer is worthy of his hire.
Mr. Cronin—That was a very improper observation for Mr. Gaffney to make, because if he wishes to impose extra duties on Father O'Kennedy I cannot see what possible objection he can have to pay him.
The Chairman—What I must suggest would be to return the letter to Father O'Kennedy and ask him quietly to withdraw the last paragraph.
Mr. Gaffney—Yes and, I move, that he be also requested to withdraw the other paragraph in which he says there are to be no prayers without his being paid for them.
Mr. Phillips—I think it would be better for this board not to touch the money part of the question to-day, and after all the best course might be to defer the consideration of the letter to the next meeting.
Mr. M'Craith—I propose we adopt the Chairman's suggestion.
Mr. Phillips—But then what about the increase of salary?
Mr. Barry said that the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy was a clergyman well known and greatly respected in the city, and to return his letter, as suggested by the Chairman, would be passing a censure on the reverend gentleman which he did not at all deserve. There was nothing in Father O'Kennedy's communication to the board that would call for the guardians adopting such a course.
The Chairman—My idea was not to return the letter officially but to ask somebody to let Father O'Kennedy look at it again, and suggest whether it would not be wise for him, as a clergyman, to withdraw the last paragraph. I must say that, considering the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy's position with regard to this board, I do not think he ought to have used such language, (Hear, hear).
Mr. Cronin—In answer to that, Mr. Chairman, I have a perfect recollection of some expressions being used by certain guardians at the last meeting, which I considered very offensive to Father O'Kennedy.
The Chairman—Well I did not hear a single guardian use any offensive expression towards Father O'Kennedy.
Mr. Cronin—What I state is the fact, and Father O'Kennedy has been provoked to use this language. Under the circumstances the phrase which is complained of must be taken to be very mild.
Mr. Cregan—I should be very sorry to differ with you Mr. Chairman, but I must say that I agree with what has fallen from Mr. Barry. If guardians have use of expressions hurtful to the feelings of Mr. O'Kennedy, he certainly takes a mild way in reply. Her merely asks us to qualify our adjectives.
Mr. Cronin—Father O'Kennedy has been sneered at here.
The Chairman—I never heard it.
Mr. Gaffney—I am one of the most outspoken guardians at this board and will not stand this. I did not hear a single offensive word used in reference to Father O'Kennedy, and now I will not stand here and allow him to dictate either to the board or to myself.
Mr. McGrath—Will you allow him to explain?
Mr. Gaffney—Decidedly, but if we are to be dictated to by our own officers, the guardians may as well not be here at all. If Father O'Kennedy finds at the end of the year that he has done more work than bargained for, why let him say so, and then we can take his case into account. At present it is not prudent for him to be talking about money in this way.
Mr. Cronin—I don't know that. There can be no doubt that you wish to impose fresh duties on him.
The Chairman—For my part I would have preferred to see Father O'Kennedy take up the duties as directed by the board, and then leave it to the guardians to say what remuneration they would give him. However, the question now is whether we shall adjourn the matter to the next meeting or otherwise.
Mr. Phillips said notice should be given to all the guardians with respect to Father O'Kennedy's letter and therefore he thought the subject should be adjourned to the next meeting of the board. He would hand in a notice of motion to that effect.
Mr. Hosford remarked that the application of Father O'Kennedy would come on the ratepayers by surprise, the Roman Catholic chaplain being in receipt of a salary of £150 a year, and the additional duties which he has now called upon to perform, such as, according to the ruling of the Chairman, Lord Emly, he should have discharged since his appointment, (Hear, hear). He had the greatest possible respect for the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy, but at the same time, he should say that, he thought the present salary was sufficient, it having been lately increased, and the Rev. Mr. O'Kennedy then expressing himself satisfied with the salary he was in receipt of from the board.
Mr. Phillips handed in a notice of motion to have the matter considered on that day week, and Mr. Cregan also gave notice of motion, that on that day fortnight he would move to have Father O'Kennedy's application taken into consideration, and that his salary be increased by a sum commensurate with the additional services which he was called upon to discharge.—Lim Chron.
Clare Freeman and Ennis Gazette, Saturday, 6 October 1877
http://www.limerickcity.ie/media/olj%20 ... %20038.pdf
What is interesting and somewhat comical of the newspaper reporting of the Limerick Board of Guardian's meeting was the discussion on whether or not to communicate the board's displeasure to Father O'Kennedy and "quietly ask" him to withdraw a few sentences. Quietly? This was reported in the newspapers for all to read, and that would obviously include Father O'Kennedy himself.
In his controversial letter to the board, Father O'Kennedy's insistence that it would be "necessary to have the corpses closely coffined before removal to the chapel" may have been a greater cost impediment than his request for additional salary. I reckon the coffins for workhouse burials, when used at all, would not have been of the finest craftsmanship. The specific request by the Rev. O'Kennedy that corpses be "closely coffined", may have been due to having been a priest during the Great Famine; he was born around 1808. I suspect that when the Rev. Daniel O'Kennedy died the following year in September 1878, he had still not step foot in the Limerick workhouse cemetery to attend the burial of a single pauper.
The Rev. Daniel O'Kennedy, age about 70 years, died in Burren townland, in the district of Ballynacally, in Killadysert, County Clare at the home of his brother, Denis O'Kennedy, on 13 September 1878. He was buried in the "family burying place, at Anhid, near Croom" in County Limerick (Freeman's Journal, 17 September 1878). His nephew was the Rev. Denis O'Kennedy (1857 - 1943) who went on an Australian mission and became parish priest in Cowra in New South Wales.At the meeting of the Limerick Board of Guardians yesterday, the Right Hon. Lord Emly, chairman, presiding, it was unanimously resolved to adjourn the consideration of the business to Wednesday next, as a mark of respect to the memory of the late Rev. Daniel O'Kennedy, P.P., Catholic chaplain to the [work] house and in sympathy with the inspector, Mr. Richard Bourke, D.L., for the loss he has sustained by the recent death of his wife.
Freeman's Journal, Thursday, 19 September 1878
https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/ ... 193604.pdf
Was curious when Lord Emly succeeded in passing through Parliament the bill that eliminated the need for a Catholic priest to obtain permission from the Protestant minister to conduct a burial service at certain cemeteries. But other than Lord Emly's comment in 1877 that it had been "some years hence", could not find any information. Even if the bill had been passed, in say 1860, it is not clear if the new legislation already reflected reality in most parishes. There is no mention of this achievement in his wikipedia biography or various obituaries in the Irish press. The First Baron Emly died on 20 April 1894 and was buried in Kilkeedy Cemetery in Clarina, County Limerick. A plaque on the Monsell family burial vault has the correct birth, 21 September 1812, but the engraved death year as 20 April 1890 is incorrect by four years.With unfeigned regret (says the Limerick correspondent of the Freeman) the great majority of the citizens heard to-day (September 13th) of the death of the Rev. Daniel O'Kennedy, the gifted and large-hearted parish priest of St. Munchin's, the melancholy event having taken place last night, at Kildysart, county Clare, whither the reverend gentleman had repaired a short time since to recruit his health. Since his advent to the charge of St. Munchin's, in this city, there has been no more popular clergyman with the general public, while by those who enjoyed the privilege of his acquaintance he was held in the highest possible esteem. There was no more distinguished Irish scholar than the deceased priest. The deceased had attained his seventieth year, the greater part of his life having been spent as a clergyman in several parishes of the county.
Dublin Weekly Nation, Saturday, 21 September 1878
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/414 ... am-monsell
I am no longer so certain whether or not a Catholic priest would have been invited to attend the funeral in 1876 of James McNamara of Derrymore East / Carmody. James McNamara (1816 - 1876) appears on Griffith Valuation in Plot 14a in Derrymore East and as such I believe would be considered a "rate payer". At the Limerick Union Board of Guardian meeting in 1877, alderman Costelloe estimated that "eight out of every ten of the ratepayers were interred without any religious services being performed". If this ratio was accurate and also applied to Tulla Union, then the odds were unlikely.
Going back again to the discussion of whether or not women attended funerals (the Quinlivan thread), I realize now of the importance of, first, having a common definition of "funeral", and, secondly, the funeral for what class of person in Ireland. If the deceased's funeral received a lengthy obituary in the Irish press with a long listing of Catholic priests in attendance, then clearly this person was from the upper echelon of Irish society and it would appear that women were not welcome at these funerals. But weren't these funeral customs in the latter half of the 19th century, mimicking British customs? The evidence for women not attending funerals included examples from British novels. It is not very clear to me whether Irish women would have attended a funeral under truly Irish customs? At the 1876 funeral of James McNamara of Derrymore East, if, for one reason or another, the McNamara family decided not to invite a Tulla Catholic priest to the funeral, would his widow, Mary Fitzgerald McNamara, or any of his five daughters have attended the funeral at the cemetery? Would inviting and paying a fee to a Catholic priest to attend a funeral service, actually limit what might be considered traditional Irish burial customs?