Navigating nationalism and neutrality: Irish-American opinion and the 1916 Rising

Editor's Note: The following piece has been shared with IrishCentral from the American Irish Historical Society's (AIHS) Treasures of Time, stories from the collections and archives of the American Irish Historical Society in New York City.

This article is a shortened version of a longer paper that can be found in our journal of undergraduate research, An Cartlann Gael-Mheiriceánach. This paper was created by an AIHS intern during a semester-long research project.

From April 24-29th in 1916, the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) led the Easter Rising in Dublin. A force of 1,200 men took control of Dublin city center and declared Ireland to be an independent nation. They read out the Proclamation of the Irish Republic, setting out their vision and ideals for an independent Ireland.

Fighting lasted five days before the leaders surrendered. 485 people were killed, with many of these being civilians. All leaders were imprisoned in Kilmainham Gaol, and most were summarily executed.

In the months during and following, Americans were well aware of the Rising, primarily through the printed reporting in newspapers like The Advocate, which was used as a primary source in this paper. Many were outraged at the cruel treatment of the rising leaders, and a new, younger leadership used them as martyrs for the cause and were able to mobilize a nationwide war of independence in 1919. This would not have been possible without the reporting of the Rising’s events, news traveling around the world and even making the cover of The New York Times for two weeks straight.

In April 1916, the United States of America (USA) still maintained a neutral status in World War I, not entering the War until April 6, 1917. At this point, the American public largely favored neutrality. Therefore, reports of German involvement in the Easter Rising exacerbated fears about the US’s neutral status. This was especially worrisome to those in New York City due to its large immigrant communities and the fact that many Irish Nationalist groups and publications such as the Ancient Order of Hibernians were headquartered in New York. Groups such as Clan na Gael, having been explicitly linked with a German plot, worried many in New York holding less radical Nationalist views. Many Irish Nationalist groups in New York had longstanding links with the Dublin-based leaders and now had to be careful about appearing pro-German.

Roger Casement (L) and John Devoy (R) met with diplomats in Germany to attempt to secure arms for an Irish rebellion. (Image: Joseph McGarrity Collection. Digital Library@Villanova University.)

Initial coverage begins in The Advocate on 29 April and from the outset reflects state-oriented anxiety. The headline of an article on this first day of reporting reads: “U.S to probe abettors here of Irish Revolt”

This article explains that there were suspicions of Irish Nationalists in New York having participated in the organizing of the Rising. Phrases like “information pointing to the probable complicity of Irish Americans in the Dublin rebellion was transmitted from various agents particularly in New York” suggest fears of subversive transnational networks, and the reference to investigations “particularly in New York” positions the city as a hub of revolutionary coordination.

New York was a hub of anxiety relating to immigrant political activity due to the escalating World War. There were fears of foreign loyalties threatening American neutrality and by extension security. New York was a city with a large population of first and second generation immigrants which authorities and many members of the general public feared would bring the European conflict too close to America. German- Americans were the largest ethnic group in the city and were subject to severe detestation and any political organizing was viewed as a threat by groups like the Mayor’s Committee on National Defense. Many Jewish and German immigrants on the Lower East Side were active in anti-war and socialist groups which were held with suspicion by the government. Similar xenophobic anxieties led to a push for stricter immigration policies and the creation of literacy tests and immigration restrictions in the 1917 Immigration Act.

The Americanese wall - as Congressman Burnett would build it / Evans. "Watchful waiting" ; A case where it is one of "My policies" / J. Held. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.print

In this same newspaper, most of the reporting is derived from comments being made in the British House of Commons. Another article claims the rebellion had spread to many parts of Ireland. This was reported based upon comments made by British officials in the House of Commons. One is headlined “All Ireland now under Martial Law” and reports that there were “indications of a spread of movement to other parts of Ireland especially in the West and South."

It would soon be discovered that fighting was largely contained to Dublin with the exception of small areas in which additional fighting occurred. These statements present a somewhat sensationalized version of the Rising which may have contributed to the initial significant anti-Rising sentiment in New York. These articles also state that troops in Ireland have been and are being strongly reinforced. The arrival of Reinforcements and instatement of martial law in Ireland are emphasized, presenting a legitimate state response to disorder.

This contributed to the circulation of exaggerated and often hostile interpretations of the rebellion during its early stages. The following edition published on May 6 continues a largely hostile framing of the rising. The first headline reads “Wreaking Vengeance on Irish Rebels”. It explains that leaders are facing death by court martial and long-term imprisonment. It also mentions that “The British Authorities in Ireland are inclined to show scant mercy to those who sacrificed all in a vain attempt to set up a Republic in Ireland”. The leaders continue to be associated to foreign support in Germany and most adherents being previously known to police. This article condemns Irish Americans who are not in support of neutrality stating this to be disloyal to the United States. These articles reflect a tension which existed between Irish identity and American loyalty wherein supporting Irish independence may cause one to be viewed as Un-American. 

Freedom to Ireland. New York : Published by Currier & Ives, c1866.LC-DIG-pga-04831 (digital file from original item) LC-USZ62-67888 (b&w film copy neg.) Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA.

The next edition of The Advocate, published on 13 May 1916, marks a significant turning point in the newspaper’s coverage of the Easter Rising and reveals growing divisions within the Irish-American community in New York. A prominent first page article, titled “John McCormack to sing for benefit of Dublin sufferers” details a fundraising event organised in New York to provide financial assistance to those imprisoned and affected by the violence in Dublin. The appearance of such benefit campaigns demonstrates that sympathy for the rebels and civilians in Ireland was rapidly increasing among sections of Irish-America. Unlike earlier reports which had focused heavily on questions of neutrality, legality, and German involvement, coverage now became increasingly centered on the human cost of British reprisals and the suffering of those in Ireland. It is evident from this edition that news of the executions and military reprisals carried out by British authorities had reached New York and was beginning to transform public opinion. Reports from Irish-American organisations adopted highly emotive language in their condemnations of British actions. The Gaelic Society declared its “abhorrence of the recent murders of Irish Patriots by the British Government” whilst other groups refer to their actions as “butcheries." The Advocate further reports that parliamentary questioning in Britain revealed that a “reign of terror” had ensued in Dublin following the surrender of the Rising leaders. Such language represents a dramatic shift from the cautious and often hostile tone present in the newspaper”s earlier reporting. The rebels were no longer primarily portrayed as irresponsible insurgents whose actions threatened American neutrality but increasingly as victims of British oppression.

By the end of May 1916, this transformation in tone had become even more pronounced. Reports in The Advocate detailed the executions of the British leaders and described British actions as “cold blooded killings” and discuss widespread “military excesses.” The newspaper increasingly frames the British response as disproportionate and cruel, encouraging readers to sympathise with those who had participated in the rebellion. Consequently, the image of the rebels underwent a substantial redefinition within Irish-American discourse. Men who had previously been described as “vain insurgents” were now portrayed as “martyrs and patriots” who had sacrificed their lives for Irish freedom. Emotive and romanticised language replaced earlier scepticism and caution, with the leaders frequently characterised as “poets and dreamers.” This shift demonstrates how British reprisals acted as a catalyst in reshaping Irish-American opinion, transforming the Rising from what many initially viewed as a failed and reckless rebellion into a heroic Nationalist sacrifice. 

A striking feature of The Advocate’s reporting throughout this period is the central role given to Irish-American diaspora organisations. The prominence of these groups within the newspaper reflects both their influence within the Irish-American community and their importance in shaping public opinion in New York. Organisations such as the Ancient Order of Hibernians, the Gaelic League, and various county associations regularly published resolutions, organised meetings, and promoted fundraising campaigns for those affected by the Rising. Through these activities, the newspaper functioned not merely as a source of information, but also as a platform through which Irish-American political identity was publicly negotiated and expressed.

Newspapers presenting Irish-American opinion in the early 20th century acted as forums in which competing understandings of Irish identity, political loyalty, and revolutionary action were debated within the diaspora. This newspaper reveals the complexity of Irish-American responses to the Rising and highlights the tensions many Irish-Americans experienced while attempting to reconcile support for Irish independence with loyalty to the United States. Ultimately, the transformation in coverage during April and May 1916 illustrates how rapidly political violence, state repression, and media representation could reshape diaspora opinion and contribute to the creation of the enduring martyrdom narrative surrounding the Easter Rising.

Laoise Kiernan McDaid holds a BA in History, Politics and Sociology and an MA in Public Policy. Her research focuses on political identity, media, and policymaking, with particular interest in Irish nationalism, diaspora politics, and how public discourse shapes responses to conflict.

This column is adapted from the blog of the American Irish Historical Society (AIHS). Read the full stories at AIHSNY.org/blog.

Founded in 1897 and located on Museum Mile in New York City, the American Irish Historical Society (AIHS) preserves and promotes the history and cultural legacy of the Irish in America through its archives, art collections, and public programs. Learn more at AIHSNY.org.