O’Connell’s antislavery stance served as a loyalty signal to the British Whig establishment

Evidence

Whatever O’Connell’s personal and political contradictions may have been, his antislavery position formed part of the Whig compact, as did his renunciation of insurrectionary methods. It must be remembered that the British government after 1833 was opposed to slavery. This position brought it into conflict with the U.S., around its claimed right to search U.S. ships suspected of carrying slaves, and over Texas. O’Connell had opposed U.S. annexation of Texas in 1837 and had supported Britain’s right of search when it raised the specter of war between the two countries. In 1838 he had called for the antislavery movement to focus its attention on America. Now, in thundering his opposition to slavery, O’Connell was in fact reassuring the British government of his loyalty just as he was preparing to undertake a massive campaign to put pressure on it. — Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White, 107

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the chapter-10 logic of how factional and class alliances conditioned Irish-American leaders’ abolitionism — O’Connell’s British Whig compact is the transatlantic twin of the later U.S. party politics which the Irish-American leaders would make. — connects to: Southern Irish repeal associations chose slavery over loyalty to O’Connell and abolition — Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White, 108; American and Irish repudiation of O’Connell coincided with abandoning antislavery — Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White, 124; Boston Irish publicly repudiated O’Connell’s antislavery stand to embrace slavery’s defenders — Noel Ignatiev, How the Irish Became White, 120 (+1 more)

Broader Connections