The Spirit of Ulster in the Cape of Good Hope: The South African Anti-Irish Home Rule Movement, 1910–1914

ABSTRACT

As the third Irish Home Rule crisis intensified, Ulster Unionists began searching for allies across the British Empire, including in South Africa. This article highlights the important role and influence of the South African anti-Home Rule movement from 1910 to 1914. It investigates a number of questions: Why did the Loyal Orange Institution publish sympathy resolutions? Who were the benefactors who donated funds to the Ulster Defence Fund or enlisted in a South African Ulster volunteer contingent? Most importantly, how widespread or organised were these Ulster sympathisers? This article uses extensive British, Irish, and South African newspaper archives, including the Belfast Weekly News that provides unique information on the Grand Orange Lodge of British South Africa and rare photography.

KEYWORDS:

• Ireland
• Diaspora
• Unionism
• Ulster
• Empire
• Orangeism

Funding and volunteers

The earliest record of a South African donation to the Ulster Defence Fund (UDF) in Belfast was in July 1913, from LOL No. 21 (King William’s Town) with a donation of one shilling.³⁰ This was just a start. District Master of LOL No. 3 (Johannesburg), E. W. Cullen, wrote to the Belfast Weekly News that a shilling fund was being started in South Africa and that it would send all donations collected to the newspaper for them to be recognised.³¹ LOL No. 21 donated a shilling each month until April 1914, with two exceptions in December 1913 and February 1914. This was made up, however, as a two shillings donation was made in March 1914 and two donations were made in April 1914. In total, 10 shillings were donated to the UDF.³² Other South African Orange lodges made their own donations to the UDF through the Belfast Weekly News from February to May 1914. These include LOL No. 3 donating £2 2s 6d, LOL No. 14 (Germiston) giving £1 15s 9d, and LOL No. 17 (Norwood) contributing £5. LOL No. 21 was inspired by these larger sums and decided to end the monthly shilling fund and made one final donation of £1 1s. The local black chapter became involved as well. The Kaffrarian R.B.P. No. 84 (East London) held a meeting on 20 May 1914 with Sir Kt. W. McCreight presiding and Sir Kt. Jackson as the vice chair. There was a lively discussion on the issue of Irish Home Rule, and the chapter resolved to contribute £5 to the UDF. The only regret of most members present at the meeting was they did have the privilege to assist with unloading arms for the UVF from the Mountjoy, a ship that was involved in the Larne gun-running and brought 25,000 rifles to the UVF. This showed evidence that some South Africans wanted to provide material aid to Ulster Unionists during this period.³³

Outside of the Orange Institution, other South Africans also made contributions to the UDF. In November 1913, the Belfast Weekly News that four individuals who identified themselves only with their initials – J. C., C. A. T., T. R., and E. R. T. – each gave a shilling to the UDF; they wanted only their families and friends to recognise their contributions.³⁴ A donation of 10 shillings in July 1914 was from W. J. McCahon in Johannesburg.³⁵ Some of these individual donations surprised and intrigued certain people, including the Ulster Unionist leadership. One report of such a donation is a letter written by the honorary secretary and treasurer of the UDF, Robert Morris Liddell, to the Belfast Weekly News editor in September 1913:

Dear Sir,

I have today received the sum of £1 as a donation to the above fund from Mr. John Harty, N. Cera, No. 11 P.O., East London District, Cape Province, South Africa. Mr. Harty writes that he is a South African farmer, and is 84 years old. He has never been in Great Britain, but has been a reader of the ‘Belfast Weekly News’ for 30 years.

– Yours faithfully,

R. M. Liddell

Honorary Secretary and Treasurer³⁶

In May 1914, the Transvaal Ulster Fund (TUF) was set up by men and women originally from Ulster who now resided in Johannesburg.³⁷ Its formation was announced via a telegram sent to Sir Edward Carson on 8 May:

Sir Edward Carson, Westminster, London.

Newly-formed Ulster Committee, Johannesburg, passed unanimous resolution whole-heartedly support you in the gallant struggle to maintain the Union. May complete success crown your noble and unflinching efforts. Now organising funds.

Dr. Wilson, secretary; Holdcroft and Cuthbert, treasurers.³⁸

Just three weeks later, on 28 May 1914, the TUF sent their first letter to Liddell:

Garlick & Holdcroft

Wholesale Merchants

Johannesburg

28 May 1914

Dear Sir,

I enclose you draft on Standard Bank, London, for £100 (one hundred pounds) from ‘a few Ulstermen in Johannesburg’. We expect to raise some more, and as it comes along I will remit it to you. With very best wishes for your ultimate success.

Yours faithfully,

J. Holdcroft³⁹

In June 1914 they sent Sir Edward Carson a telegram informing him they had donated £100 to the Ulster Unionist Council on 28 May and another £100 on 13 June.⁴⁰ The latter came following a TUF meeting on 10 June at the YMCA in Johannesburg, with over 60 members being present and chaired by John Holdcroft. The TUF had support from the local Protestant clergy, as Rev. T. R. Ballantine was one of the speakers, showing that some Protestant clergy in South Africa played a role in the local anti-Home Rule movement. The reverend claimed that he, like the other attendees, was proud of the men of Ulster. And he, as the other attendees, was determined to stand by them in this crisis as they were their kith and kin. For a long time past those that did not know the spirit of Ulstermen thought they were engaged in a great game of bluff, Rev. Ballantine argued, but at last, and not a moment too soon, the civilised world came to know that the men of the North would stand or fall by the solemn Covenant they had taken. He admitted that they were far away from their Ulster places of origin, but their hearts still beat for their old land, as absence had made their hearts fonder. Now that their families and friends had their ‘backs to the wall’ in defence of their Unionist beliefs, it was their duty to let the men of Ulster know that the latter had their full sympathy. Rev. Ballantine informed those present that £100 had already been sent and that he hoped they would raise the same amount at that meeting, which they evidently did.⁴¹

At the following meeting on 24 June at the same location, again chaired by Holdcroft, it was reported that the meeting was the largest gathering thus far, including prominent figures within the Orange Order attending. Rev. Ballantine was the first speaker and dwelt on the question of Ulster. Though the Home Rule Bill had just passed its third reading in the House of Commons, the situation of the Ulster Unionists remained unaltered. They waited with considerable anxiety as the debate continued in amending the bill, and he expressed that he had faith it would lead to a real message of peace to create a compromise. However, if Ulster was to be brought into accepting Home Rule, their support would need to be won. Rev. Ballantine claimed that approval would not occur while ‘calling her people names and mocking the Ulster volunteers’; they should be proud not just of their Irish descent, but also of their Ulster roots. Rev. Ballantine then urged all attendees to help the men and women of Ulster, claiming that all they, the attendees, had and were, they owed to the province. He was followed by Hugh McAlister, immediate past the GOLBSA Grand Master. McAlister informed the attendees about the work the Orange Order had done in the past and was continuing to do, and why it was necessary to continue this work. He contrasted the establishment of the Union of South Africa with the attempt by Home Rule to break the union between Great Britain and Ireland. McAlister believed that, if necessary, Ulster Unionists would prove their unwavering loyalty to both the monarch and their place within the UK, just as their ancestors had done on many other battlefields in the past. Holdcroft then announced that £50 had been donated by the local Orange lodges and, following further subscriptions since the previous meeting, they were able to raise £100.⁴² The third £100 instalment from the TUF reached Ulster by mid-July, sent by John Holdcroft, and all donations were reported in the Belfast News-Letter and the Belfast Weekly News.⁴³

Over time the TUF became bolder and it published adverts for its meetings in Johannesburg-based newspapers such as the Transvaal Leader, the Rand Daily Mail, and the Star.⁴⁴ All were published on the day of the meeting, such as 10 June, 24 June, 8 July, and 29 July 1914.⁴⁵ The number of adverts published in multiple newspapers reveals the large financial backing for the TUF and potential support from these newspapers; thus the Transvaal Leader noted that it contributed to the TUF donation of 10 June 1914.⁴⁶ In addition, there were internal developments. The TUF meeting of 8 July 1914, at which the TUF tried to organise another bank draft, the Orange Institution was well represented, thus showing that the GOLBSA became increasingly involved in the organisation. But more importantly, there were a number of female attendees as well. In a general discussion the TUF decided to establish a Ladies Committee, which would implement a scheme for selling 5000 badges to raise funds and identify South African Ulster sympathisers.⁴⁷ From 24 June onwards, TUF newspaper adverts added the line ‘Ladies Welcome’, suggesting it wanted to widen its support base.⁴⁸ Related to this, in the preceding February the GOLBSA published an advert for an ‘Institution of Female Lodges in the Union of South Africa’ and for any women interested to join to contact the Grand Secretary.⁴⁹ By July, it was reported that a number of Orangewomen were in attendance at the Twelfth celebration in Johannesburg, though they were not mentioned in a resolution telegrammed to Belfast: ‘South African Orangemen are with you today in spirit. Congratulations on splendid fight. No surrender. – Grand Lodge British South Africa.’⁵⁰ It is possible some of these Orangewomen became members of the TUF’s Ladies’ Committee, owing to their sympathies for Ulster Protestants. The TUF’s final meeting took place on 29 July 1914, but no record remains of what was discussed.⁵¹

In addition to offering financial support, South Africans planned to send volunteers to help the UVF. There was an expectation, even in early 1912, that South Africa would send volunteers to help Unionists in Ulster. This was seen amongst Ulster Unionists during a large anti-Home Rule rally in Balmoral, South Belfast, on 9 April 1912. The North Belfast Member of Parliament, Robert Thompson, spoke at one of the four platforms at the rally. He made an estimate of the strength of the Unionist movement in Ireland, discussing the members of the Orange Order, the male and female Unionist clubs, and then discussed the help they could expect from overseas. He claimed that Canada had promised a large measure of support, that Australia would send a contingent, and that they would receive ‘a few from South Africa’.⁵²

There are reports that plans were made for raising a South African UVF contingent following the establishment of the TUF committee, with the 24 June TUF advert inviting ‘all interested in giving practical support to Ulster’.⁵³ Unlike volunteers from Canada or Australia, South African volunteers would potentially have been more likely to have had combat experience, including in guerrilla warfare, gained during the Second Boer War which had ended in 1902.⁵⁴ It is unknown how large this South African detachment was, but news of its formation was utilised for propaganda purposes by Ulster Unionists in both Ireland and the Empire. For example, a letter to the editor of the Thames Star in New Zealand in June 1914 encouraged local men to enrol their service to help the UVF. The author included the following passage to show that any volunteers would be part of a worldwide call to arms to protect the interests of the Protestant faith and the rights of Ulster’s loyalists:

Trusting the men of this district will show that they are loyal and true Britons as we have done and are doing from the Bluff to North Cape, from Sydney to Perth, from San Francisco to New York, from East to West.⁵⁵

There were reports of British army officers throughout the British Empire, including in South Africa, handing in their notice or considering desertion in protest to any orders to move against Ulster Unionists. One of these officers would, twenty years later, become the third prime minister of Northern Ireland, Sir Captain Basil Brooke, who at the time was serving with the 10th Hussars. He considered desertion to return to his native county of Fermanagh to help lead the local Ulster Volunteers, as he felt a deep loyalty to his home and people.⁵⁶

Challenges and comparisons within the British Empire

In comparison to other organised efforts overseas to aid the anti-Home Rule movement in Ireland, South Africa’s was one of the weakest. For example, fundraising for Ulster Unionists in Australia was at a completely different scale, with reports coming from different states. The Ulster Defence Fund of Victoria based in Melbourne, for example, had by 27 November 1913 raised £600 in three separate £200 bank drafts to Sir Edward Carson.⁵⁷ In New South Wales, the Loyal Orange Institution had raised up to £400 in two instalments by 5 July 1913, and another £500 during the Twelfth in 1914.⁵⁸ In fact, the largest donation to the UDF was £25,000 by an anonymous Australian donor.⁵⁹

What factors affected South African efforts to help Ulster Unionists? The first was local demographics. Unlike in the dominions of Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, in South Africa the indigenous population remained the overwhelming majority.⁶⁰ In the first census for the Union of South Africa in 1911, white settlers numbered 1,276,242 (21.4 per cent) out of a total population of 5,973,394.⁶¹ White South Africans were in control of the land but were culturally divided between English speakers and Afrikaners, descendants of Dutch settlers.⁶² This divide was still raw as the Second Boer War had only been concluded in 1902.⁶³ The Union of South Africa had just been established in 1910 and was still trying to establish a united South African identity. To further exacerbate matters, Afrikaners constituted 54 per cent of white South Africans at the time the Union was formed, as Newell M. Stultz estimates. This had a severe impact on South African politics as the Pro-British Unionist political party that developed was unable to gain power without some level of support from the Afrikaner community. In time, two ideologies began to emerge in South African politics. The first was Afrikaner nationalism, aiming to preserve Afrikaner culture and to further economic needs. The other was conciliatory, to bring harmony between the different political interests among the largely white electorate.⁶⁴ The only issues that united the two sides was the fear of a rebellion from the indigenous population and the desire to see South Africa develop economically.⁶⁵

Amongst the English speakers, first generation Irish settlers in South Africa numbered 13,778 by 1911, down from 17,899 in 1904 — 6531 in the Transvaal, 5260 in the Cape, 1775 in Natal, and 976 in the Orange Free State. They thus made up about 3.7 per cent of the white population, a figure that, as Donal McCraken points out, helps us understand how meagre the Irish community was in South Africa. During the same period, the Irish community made up 25.7 per cent of the Australian population and 18.7 per cent of that in New Zealand.⁶⁶ Local Irish associations were established in South Africa in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, such as in East London, Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, and Johannesburg. These associations tended to be non-political and non-sectarian in character, welcoming all faiths and backgrounds and emphasising ‘Irish birth, parentage or heritage’.⁶⁷ Their objectives were to support the Irish community and promote Irish identity and culture. However, despite the Irish being a small minority in the country, serious sectarian tensions arose within it during the Third Home Rule crisis as the Irish community split into opposing opinions. Regional differences emerged; for example, in Cape Town the United Irish League had a foothold yet in Natal the Irish community tended to be loyal to the British Empire and critical of the objectives of Irish nationalism.⁶⁸

In 1912, the British and Irish press published reports on the opinions held in the dominions of Australia, Canada, and South Africa towards the Third Irish Home Rule Bill that showed national and regional differences. Owing to the large Afrikaner population and their anti-British attitude in the Orange Free State, The Friend (Bloemfontein) supported the bill, stating it was the overwhelming hope of South Africa for Ireland to achieve self-governance. The majority of Natal’s newspapers, in contrast, condemned the bill. The Natal Mercury (Durban) declared that the safeguards were wholly theoretical, while the Natal Advertiser (Durban) felt the scheme was hopeless as it would allow the Irish to have a voice in Westminster yet leave Westminster without a voice in Ireland. The Natal Witness (Pietermaritzburg) thought Home Rule would eventually lead to discontent in Ireland through taxation from a Dublin-based Home Rule parliament. The only exception was the Times of Natal (Pietermaritzburg) that felt the bill had many fantastic clauses yet felt the British prime minister’s measure was more business-like than practical. Opinion was more divided in the Transvaal and the Cape. In Johannesburg, both the Rand Daily Mail and the Transvaal Leader supported the bill, while the Star called it ‘a heap of clotted nonsense’. In Cape Town, the Cape Times thought Irish Home Rule would disintegrate the UK and the Cape Argus argued that it would cause friction between Dublin and London, particularly in terms of the bill’s financial provisions. The Argus recommended it would be better for Ireland to wait for the granting of the general devolution in the Empire. The South African Daily News supported the bill but felt the safeguards for Ulster were excessive and would insult the Irish. However, all the newspapers criticised British government claims that Irish Home Rule would be like South Africa’s system of governance as overwhelmingly simplistic and misleading.⁶⁹ There were other newspapers that the British and Irish press failed to cover, including the Eastern Province Herald (Port Elizabeth) that supported the Home Rule Bill and the Mafeking Mail and Protectorate Guardian (Mafikeng) that was critical of the bill’s composition.⁷⁰ Another point of interest is the opinions of newspapers representing other communities in South Africa. The Indian Opinion (Durban) felt the bill would lead to war, as Ulster Protestants were a determined minority, ‘free speech not hesitating to resort to unashamed militancy’.⁷¹ The Imvo Zabantsundu (King William’s Town) believed the bill was political suicide for the British Government: ‘No wonder we read the debate has lacked excitement and sensation of those which would lead to the breaking up of the of the liberal party, banishing into the wilderness of Opposition for two decades.’⁷² This state of affairs in South African demographics and politics had an effect on the Orange Institution in the dominion, as the GOLBSA was still weak and only in the process of establishing itself.⁷³ For example, if we were to compare its strength to other international Orange institutions, the largest was the Grand Orange Lodge of British America with over 2000 lodges and over 100,000 members.⁷⁴ The Loyal Orange Institution of Western Australia had 80 lodges in 1912 with approximately 2000 members.⁷⁵ In 1909, the Grand Orange Lodge of New Zealand had 100 lodges and 3000 members.⁷⁶ In 1912 the GOLBSA had just 27 lodges: 7 in Johannesburg, 3 in East London, 2 in Pretoria, and 1 each in Durban, Denver, Roodeport, Volkrust, Boksburg, Germiston, Benoni, Witbank, Norwood, King William’s Town, Woodstock, Cape Town, Wesley, Barberton, and Mowbray. When this is broken down by province, Natal had 1 lodge, the Cape 8, and the Transvaal 18. When analysing these figures, it is not surprising that the majority of fundraising for Ulster Unionists occurred in the Transvaal.⁷⁷ Donald M. MacRaild estimates the Order had somewhere between 500 to 1000 members, but certainly not more.⁷⁸ The only lodges that had similar figures during this period was the Loyal Orange Institution of Tasmania, which reported having 606 members, while the city of Vancouver reported having 22 lodges.⁷⁹

This had an effect on GOLBSA’s political influence. In Canada, for example, the Order’s high membership and network led to nearly all mayors of Toronto up to 1972 being members of the Order. In Ontario, Orangemen made up one-third of the Legislative Assembly in the 1920s and nearly 50 per cent in the General Assembly of Newfoundland. Both Canada and Newfoundland had four prime ministers who were Orangemen.⁸⁰ In South Africa in comparison, Grand Master Hugh McAlister was elected to the Germiston Town Council in 1911. This was the first time a member of the Orange Order had been elected as a town councillor in Transvaal.⁸¹ It is because of this weak membership base and network, and lack of pro-British politicians, that South Africans never tried to submit an anti-Home Rule petition as had happened in Australia and Canada.⁸² No mass anti-Home Rule meetings took place in South Africa either, as had occurred in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada.⁸³ Publishing resolutions to express moral support for Ulster Unionists was the politically loudest that the GOLBSA could be with its limited political influence.

If we were to estimate the strength of a potential South African UVF contingent, primarily by using the GOLBSA membership numbers as a reflection of the strongest pro-Imperial and Unionist Irish-based organisation in South Africa, it would probably have been no bigger than 100 men and recruited largely from the Transvaal. This would have made it the weakest UVF detachment promised from overseas. There are no reports of a South African detachment drilling, acquiring arms, or trying to charter a vessel to sail to Ulster. It is likely that their efforts were hampered because of a lack of funds and because the volunteers came from all across South Africa. Besides providing volunteers with combat experience, the contingent would have been primarily used for propaganda purposes.

Another issue that hindered the South African fundraising efforts was the economic conditions of the white settlers. According to William G. Martin, South Africa had only a small proportion of high-wage white workers and industries in comparison to the dominions of Australia, Canada, and New Zealand.⁸⁴ Stuart Jones and André Muller explain that at the time manufacturing had barely begun in South African and was focused on supporting mining, which was dominating the local economy, and agriculture.⁸⁵ Indeed, some of South Africa’s anti-Home Rulers who sent Sir Edward Carson a supportive telegram were Irish workers at Premier Mine.⁸⁶ The state of the local economy was sometimes reflected in how the British and Irish press reported news from South Africa. The headline from the Northern Whig on the establishment of a UVF contingent in South Africa was ‘The Colonies and the Union,’ showing how some still saw South Africa more as a colony than a dominion within the British Empire.⁸⁷ In fact, during this period the British and Irish press often compared Ulster with South Africa. When white miners went on strike in South Africa in 1913 and 1914, fighting for the right to be members of trade union, the head of the South African Labour Party, Frederic Creswell, was arrested for supporting the miners and the government declared martial law. During the same time, Sir Edward Carson was building the UVF in Ulster to resist the British Government enforcing Home Rule in the province, yet no action was taken against him or his followers; instead he was congratulated for his actions. The Drogheda Independent explained these double standards of law and order within the British Empire as follows:

Law and order, it will be seen is a convenient and flexible thing. If workmen strike in South Africa, then it presents a pistol at their heads in the sacred name of Parliament and the State; if a small and fanatical faction conspire in Ulster under the auspices of the Unionist Party and distinguished Privy Councillors, to defy Parliament, then law and order immediately changes sides and goes over to the rebels.⁸⁸

Conclusion

From 1910 to 1914, South Africans tried to help Ulster Unionists, either because they originated from Ulster and/or they feared the impact of Irish Home Rule on Irish Protestants and the British Empire. However, they were unable to give the same level of support to the anti-Home Rule movement as was seen in the dominions of Canada or Australia, or even in the United States. There were multiple reasons for this. One was that the Irish community in South Africa was small, so that the GOLBSA had only few lodges across the dominion and little political influence. Another was that colonists in South Africa tended to be in a weaker financial situation than their counterparts in Canada or Australia. The biggest factor that hampered South African efforts was the racially divided society and the demographic and political issues this led to. However, despite these obstacles, South Africans raised more than £300 for the UDF.⁸⁹ The first steps were also taken to raise a South African UVF contingent. Even if this was not fully realised, the news of South Africans planning to do so was great propaganda for Ulster Unionists for it showed that men from the distant frontiers of the British Empire were willing to fight for their cause. Considering the obstacles they had to face, South Africans made a tremendous effort to aid the anti-Home Rule movement. The biggest help they gave Ulster Unionists was their presence, which aided the anti-Home Rule propaganda in Ireland and Great Britain to pressure the British government. In a way this was more helpful than the funds the South Africans were able to collect. Indeed, in May 1914 the TUF Honorary Secretary received a letter from Sir Edward Carson in which the author recognised and thanked the supporters for their efforts:

5 Eaton Place, S.W.

May 12, 1914

Dear Sir,

I am very much obliged by your cable of May 9, and am very pleased to hear an Ulster Committee has been formed in Johannesburg. I thank you for sending me the encouraging resolution, and am grateful for the active work which is being done in support of the Union. I am much encouraged by the messages of sympathy and support which I daily receive from friends of the cause in every part of His Majesty’s Dominions.

Yours very truly,

Edward Carson

The Irish Home Rule crisis was only halted by the eruption of the First World War, which caught the attention of South Africans across the country. A planned TUF meeting for 13 August 1914 was postponed ‘until further notice’ due to the war, and the TUF dissolved soon afterwards.⁹⁰ Many South African Orangemen enlisted, and the Pretoria Diamond LOL had to close when a large number of its members enrolled in the armed forces. Some lodges saw a revival in the aftermath of the war, such as the Pretoria Diamond LOL in January 1920, thanks to support from their brethren in Johannesburg.⁹¹ However, the GOLBSA was weaker than before the war as many of its members were killed in action. By 1919, a decision was made to amalgamate LOLs 2, 3, 4, and 6 owing to the loss of members, in an effort to continue to support Orangeism in the region. Nevertheless, by the next year only LOLs 4 and 6 continued to function.⁹² Even with the impact of the war, they managed to retain a strong connection to events that were occurring in Ireland. In March 1922, the GOLBSA telegrammed the following message to Belfast:

The Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland have the whole-hearted support of the Orangemen and Orangewomen of this country in your gallant fight for the freedom of the Protestants of Ulster. We trust that God will give you strength to win through this campaign, fully realising that your noble efforts are not for the Protestants of Ireland alone, but for the loyal subjects throughout the British Empire.⁹³

GOLBSA’s connection to Ireland continued until the 1960s. In Natal, which had once been described as the ‘Ulster of South Africa’, the spirit of Ulster Unionists also persevered.⁹⁴ Natalians showed their discontent when Afrikaners assumed power after the National Party was victorious in the 1948 general election representing a Republican agenda.⁹⁵ On 19 April 1955, the Natal Anti-Republican League, inspired by the Ulster Covenant in 1912, held a mass rally and established its own covenant to oppose a republic.⁹⁶ To further demonstrate the League’s link to Ulster, the rally was held at, and the covenant was signed at, the Durban City Hall, whose architectural design was similar to Belfast City Hall. Some of the Natal covenant’s wording even demonstrated the Ulster spirit of defiance:

Being convinced in our consciences that a republic would be disastrous to the spiritual and material welfare of Natal as well as the whole of South Africa, subversive of our freedom, and destructive of our citizenship, we, whose names are underwritten, men and women of Natal, loyal subjects of Her Gracious Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, do hereby pledge ourselves in solemn covenant throughout this our time of threatened calamity to stand by one another in defending the Crown and in using all means that may be found possible and necessary to defeat the present intention to set up a republic in South Africa.

And in the event of a republic being forced upon us, save with the free will and consent of the people of Natal, expressed by means of a separate referendum, we further solemnly and mutually pledge ourself to refuse to recognise its authority. In sure confidence that God will defend the right we hereto subscribe our names. God save the Queen.⁹⁷

The covenant was a considerable success as it garnered 33,000 signatures in Natal and a further 28,000 in the Eastern Cape.⁹⁸ When a referendum was held on 5 October 1960 to whether to establish a South African republic, the majority of the South African electorate voted for the proposal, but by the small margin of 52.3 per cent (850,458 of 1,626,336 votes). Natal was the only province that rejected the proposal with 76.2 per cent (135,598 of 178,585 votes).⁹⁹ Despite these results, Natal never held a separate referendum or tried to secede from South Africa, as it had threatened to do. A few months later, on 31 May 1961, South Africa left the Commonwealth of Nations, thus severing the nation’s final connections to the UK and the former British Empire, including Northern Ireland.¹⁰⁰ When the Imperial Orange Council of the World met in 1964, they acknowledged that no Orange lodges in South Africa were active anymore.¹⁰¹

Notes

1 Home Rule in Ireland would have established a Dublin-based parliament with some local autonomy to govern certain local matters whilst remaining within the United Kingdom. This could be compared to the devolved governments that exist in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales that have local powers on healthcare, education, local government and raise certain taxes for example.

2 A. O’Day, Irish Home Rule, 1867–1921 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1998), 240–241.

3 P. Riddell, Fire over Ulster (London: Hamilton, 1970), 12.

4 Public Record Office of Northern Ireland (hereafter PRONI), D1327/4/20, File containing lists of UVF Commanding Officers, 1914.

5 Belfast News-Letter (hereafter BNL), 3 February 1914.

6 D.P. McCraken, ‘The Irish in South Africa: The Police, A Case Study’, Familia: Ulster Genealogical Review, 2, 7 (1991), 40.

7 P.A. McCraken, ‘Shaping the Times: Irish Journalists’, in D.P. McCraken, ed., The Irish in Southern Africa, 1795–1910 (Durban: Ireland and Southern Africa Project, 1992), 140–144.

8 G.P. Taylor, ‘Cecil Rhodes and the Second Home Rule Bill’, Historical Journal, 14, 4 (1971), 771–781.

9 Belfast Weekly News (hereafter BWN), 9 October 1913.

10 D.P. McCraken, ‘Irish Settlement and Identity in South Africa before 1910’, Irish Historical Studies, 28, 110 (1992), 135.

11 T.K. Daniel, ‘Faith and Stepfatherland: Irish South African Networks in Cape Colony and Natal, 1871–1914, and the Home Rule Movement in Ireland’, South Africa–Irish Studies, 2 (1992), 73–90.

12 A.T.Q. Stewart, The Ulster Crisis: Resistance to Home Rule, 1912–1914 (Belfast: Blackstaff Press, 1997), 262.

13 J. Keith, An Irish Empire? Aspects of Ireland and the British Empire (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1996), 191–209.

14 R. McLaughlin, ‘Orange-Canadian Unionists and the Irish Home Rule Crisis, 1912–1914’, Ontario History, 98, 1 (2006), 1–133.

15 J. Brown, ‘Orangeism in South Africa’, South Africa–Irish Studies, 2 (1992), 110–119.

16 BWN, 28 March 1912.

17 Brown, ‘Orangeism in South Africa’, 110–119.

18 BWN, 25 January and 22 August 1912, and 19 March and 20 August 1914.

19 BWN, 14 October 1909.

20 BWN, 2 May and 15 August 1907.

21 BWN, 21 March, 4 April, and 23 May 1912.

22 BWN, 4 April 1912.

23 BWN, 31 October 1907; J.F. Harbinson, The Ulster Unionist Party, 1882–1973: Its Development and Organisation (Newtownards: Blackstaff Press, 1973), 15, 129–131.

24 Freeman’s Journal, 20 July 1912.

25 BWN, 20 February 1913.

26 Cape Times, 2 and 25 September 1913.

27 Cape Times, 30 September 1913.

28 BWN, 23 May and 18 July 1912.

29 PRONI, Ulster Solemn Leage and Covenant and Ulster Declaration, D1327/3, https://apps.proni.gov.uk/ulstercovenant/Search.aspx, accessed 22 September 2022.

30 BWN, 10 July 1913.

31 BWN, 19 February 1914.

32 BWN, 10 July, 7 August, 4 September, 9 October, and 6 November 1913, 22 January, 5 March, and 2 and 30 April 1914.

33 BWN, 19 February, 12 March, 28 May, 18 June, and 30 July 1914.

34 BWN, 6 November 1913.

35 BWN, 7 July 1914.

36 BWN, 18 September 1913.

37 Northern Whig, 19 June 1914.

38 Rand Daily Mail (hereafter RDM), 9 June 1914.

39 Belfast Telegraph, 18 June 1914.

40 Northern Whig, 19 June 1914.

41 Transvaal Leader, 11 June 1914.

42 Transvaal Leader, 25 June 1914.

43 BNL, 16 July 1914; BWN, 23 July 1914.

44 Transvaal Leader, 10 June 1914; RDM, 10 June 1914; Star (Johannesburg), 10 June 1914.

45 Star, 10 and 24 June, and 8 and 29 July 1914.

46 Transvaal Leader, 11 June 1914.

47 RDM, 9 July 1914.

48 Star, 24 June 1914.

49 RDM, 19 February 1914.

50 RDM, 11 July 1914; BWN, 17 July 1914.

51 RDM, 29 July 1914.

52 BWN, 11 April 1912.

53 Stewart, The Ulster Crisis, 139.

54 S.M. Miller, Volunteers on the Veld: Britain’s Citizen-Soldiers and the South African War, 1899–1902 (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2007), 119–159; Star, 24 June 1914.

55 Thames Star (New Zealand), 5 June 1914.

56 Keith, An Irish Empire?, 192.

57 BNL, 17 January 1914.

58 BNL, 16 August 1913; Riverine Grazier, 14 July 1914.

59 Yorkshire Evening News (Leeds), 7 March 1914.

60 W.G. Martin, South Africa and the World Economy: Remaking Race, State, and Region (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 2013), 21.

61 N.M. Stultz, Afrikaner Politics in South Africa, 1934–1948 (Berkely: University of California Press, 2022), 2.

62 D. Gordon, Transformation and Trouble: Crime, Justice and Participation in Democratic South Africa (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 2009), 25.

63 A. Wessels, The Phases of the Anglo-Boer War, 1899–1902 (Bloemfontein: War Museum of the Boer Republics, 1998), 37.

64 Stultz, Afrikaner Politics, 1-2.

65 G. L’Ange, The White Africans: From Colonisation to Liberation (Johannesburg: Jonathan Ball, 2005), 150.

66 McCraken, ‘Irish Settlement and Identity’, 135.

67 Daniel, ‘Faith and Stepfatherland’, 78.

68 Daniel, ‘Faith and Stepfatherland’.

69 Belfast Telegraph, 15 April 1912.

70 Eastern Province Herald, 12 April 1912; Mafeking Mail and Protectorate Guardian, 13 April 1912.

71 Indian Opinion, 27 April 1912.

72 Imvo Zabantsundu, 16 April 1912.

73 BWN, 30 November 1905.

74 BWN, 18 July 1912.

75 BWN, 25 July 1912.

76 Otago Daily Times, 13 April 1909.

77 Loyal Orange Institution of British South Africa, Orangemen’s Guide, January to December, 1909 (Johannesburg: Loyal Orange Institution of British South Africa, 1909), 31–34; BWN, 4 April 1912.

78 D.M. MacRaild, Faith, Fraternity and Fighting: The Orange Order and Irish Migrants in Northern England, c. 1850–1920 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2005), 301.

79 Daily Telegraph (Tasmania), 25 April 1908; BWN, 8 May 1913.

80 J.W. McAuley and P. Nesbitt-Larking, Contemporary Orangeism in Canada: Identity, Nationalism, and Religion (Basingstoke: Springer International Publishing, 2017), 63–83.

81 BWN, 23 May 1912.

82 Watchman, 7 May 1914; Age, 11 June 1914.

83 Keith, An Irish Empire?, 192.

84 Martin, South Africa and the World Economy, 21.

85 S. Jones and A. Muller, The South African Economy, 1910–90 (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016), 11–13.

86 RDM, 6 June 1914.

87 Northern Whig, 13 May 1914.

88 Drogheda Independent, 24 January 1914.

89 BWN, 21 August 1913, 21 January, 5 and 19 March, and 28 May and 27 August 1914.

90 RDM, 12 August 1914.

91 Anonymous, ‘Orangeism at Pretoria, South Africa’, Orange Standard, 7, 76 (1920), 47.

92 Anonymous, ‘“Prince of Orange” L.O.L. No. 4, Johannesburg’, Orange Standard, 6, 72 (1919), 149.

93 BNL, 18 March 1922.

94 R. Hyam, Understanding the British Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 333.

95 I.J. Van der Waag, Sights, Sounds, Memories: South African Soldier Experiences of the Second World War (Stellenbosch: African Sun Media, 2020), 267–307.

96 B.L. Reid, The Federal Party, 1953–1962: An English-speaking Reaction to Afrikaner Nationalism (Durban: University of Natal, 1979), 140.

97 Keith, An Irish Empire?, 200–201.

98 Reid, The Federal Party, 143.

99 Government of South Africa, ‘Department of the Interior’, South Africa Government Gazette, No. 6557 (1960), 1–3.

100 Reid, The Federal Party, 199–204, 216, 246.

101 Imperial Grand Orange Council of the World, Report of the Twenty-Eighth Triennial Meeting of the Imperial Grand Orange Council of the World Held at Liverpool, England, on 9 and 10 July 1964 (Belfast: Imperial Grand Orange Council, 1964), 31.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Samuel Gary Beckton

Samuel Gary Beckton has a PhD in History from Ulster University. His thesis focuses on the history of the Protestant associations of Cavan, Donegal, and Monaghan for the period 1920–2016. He has a BA (Hons) in Politics and International Relations from the University of Hull, an MPhil in International Peace Studies from Trinity College Dublin, and an MPhil in Politics from Queens University Belfast. He is a project historian on the Newtowncunningham Community Outreach Project and presented evidence in the Seanad Éireann Public Consultation on the Constitutional Future of the Island of Ireland Committee.