text:
James Larkin

James Larkin (28 January 1874 – 30 January 1947), sometimes known as Jim Larkin or Big Jim, was an Irish republican, socialist and trade union leader. He was one of the founders of the Irish Labour Party along with James Connolly and William O'Brien, and later the founder of the Irish Worker League (a communist party which was recognised by the Comintern as the Irish section of the world communist movement), as well as the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union (ITGWU) and the Workers' Union of Ireland (the two unions later merged to become SIPTU, Ireland's largest trade union). Along with Connolly and Jack White, he was also a founder of the Irish Citizen Army (ICA; a paramilitary group which was integral to both the Dublin lock-out and the Easter Rising). Larkin was a leading figure in the Syndicalist movement.

Larkin was born to Irish parents in Toxteth, Liverpool, England. Growing up in poverty, he received little formal education and began working in a variety of jobs while still a child. He became a full-time trade union organiser in 1905. Larkin moved to Belfast in 1907, where he was involved in trade unionism and syndicalist strike action including organising the 1907 Belfast Dock strike. Larkin later moved south and organised workers in Dublin, Cork and Waterford, with considerable success. He founded the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union after his expulsion from the National Union of Dock Labourers for his taking part in strike action in Dublin against union instructions, this new union would quickly replace the NUDL in Ireland. He later moved to Dublin which would become the headquarters of his union and the focus of his union activity, as well as where the Irish Labour Party would be formed.

Larkin is perhaps best known for his role in organising the 1913 strike that led to the Dublin lock-out. The lock-out was an industrial dispute over workers' pay and conditions as well as their right to organise, and received worldwide attention and coverage. It has been described as the "coming of age of the Irish trade union movement". The Irish Citizen Army was formed during the lock-out to protect striking workers from police violence. Not long after the lockout Larkin assumed direct command of the ICA, beginning the process of its reform into a revolutionary paramilitary organisation by arming them with Mauser rifles bought from Germany by the Irish Volunteers and smuggled into Ireland at Howth in July 1914.

In October 1914 Larkin left Ireland and travelled to America to raise funds for the ITGWU and the ICA, leaving Connolly in charge of both organisations. During his time in America, Larkin became involved in the socialist movement there, becoming a member of the Socialist Party of America. Larkin then became involved in the early communist movement in America, and he was later jailed in 1920 in the midst of the Red Scare after being found guilty of "criminal anarchy". He then spent several years in Sing Sing, before he was eventually pardoned by the Governor of New York Al Smith in 1923 and later deported. Larkin then returned to Ireland where he again became involved in Irish socialism and politics, both in the Labour Party and then his newly formed Irish Worker League. Connolly by this time had been executed for his part in the Easter Rising and Larkin mourned the passing of his friend and colleague.

After he lost control of the ITGWU, Larkin formed the Workers' Union of Ireland (WUI). The WUI was affiliated to Red International of Labour Unions (Profintern) soon after its formation. Larkin served as a Teachta Dála (TD) on three occasions, and two of his sons (James Larkin Jnr and Denis Larkin) also served as TDs. Jim Larkin served as Labour Party deputy in Dáil Éireann from 1943 to 1944, leaving Dáil Éireann for the last time in 1944, and dying in Dublin in 1947. Catholic Archbishop of Dublin John Charles McQuaid gave his funeral mass, and the ICA in its last public appearance escorted his funeral procession through Dublin to his burial site at Glasnevin Cemetery.

Larkin was respected by commentators both during and after his lifetime, with George Bernard Shaw describing him as the "greatest Irishman since Parnell", his friend and colleague in the labour movement James Connolly describing him as a "man of genius, of splendid vitality, great in his conceptions, magnificent in his courage", and Vladimir Lenin noting him as 'a remarkable speaker and a man of seething energy [who] performed miracles amongst the unskilled workers'. However other commentators have noted that Larkin was "vilified as a wrecker by former comrades", with anthologist Donal Nevin noting that some of Larkin's actions, including his attacks on others in the labour movement, meant Larkin had "alienated practically all the leaders of the movement [and] the mass of trade union members" by the mid-1920s.

"Big Jim" Larkin continues to occupy a position in Dublin's collective memory and streetscape, with a statue of him unveiled on O'Connell Street in 1979.

Early years
Larkin was said to have been born on 21 January 1876, and this was the date that he himself believed was accurate. However, it is now believed that he was actually born on 28 January 1874. He was the second eldest son of Irish emigrants, James Larkin, from Drumintee and Mary Ann McNulty, from Burren, County Down. The impoverished Larkin family lived in the slums of Liverpool during the early years of his life. From the age of seven, he attended school in the mornings and worked in the afternoons to supplement the family income, a common arrangement in working-class families at the time. At the age of fourteen, after the death of his father, he was apprenticed to the firm his father had worked for but was dismissed after two years. He was unemployed for a time and then worked as a sailor and docker. By 1903, he was a dock foreman, and on 8 September of that year, he married Elizabeth Brown.

From 1893, Larkin developed an interest in socialism and became a member of the Independent Labour Party. In 1905, he was one of the few foremen to take part in a strike on the Liverpool docks. He was elected to the strike committee and, although he lost his foreman's job as a result, his performance so impressed the National Union of Dock Labourers (NUDL) that he was appointed a temporary organiser. He later gained a permanent position with the union, which, in 1906, sent him to Scotland, where he successfully organised workers in Preston and Glasgow. Larkin campaigned against Chinese immigration, presenting it as a threat that would undercut workers, leading processions in 1906 in Liverpool with fifty dockers dressed as 'Chinamen', wearing faux-'pigtails' and wearing powder to provide a 'yellow countenance'.

Belfast Dock Strike
In January 1907, Larkin undertook his first task on behalf of the trade union movement in Ireland, when he arrived in Belfast to organise the city's dock workers for the NUDL. He succeeded in unionising the workforce and, because employers refused to meet the wage demands, he called the dockers out on strike in June. The Belfast Dock strike was soon joined by carters and coalmen, the latter settling their dispute after a month. With active support from the Independent Orange Order and its Grand Master, R. Lindsay Crawford, urging the "unity of all Irishmen", Larkin succeeded in uniting Protestant and Catholic workers and even persuaded the local Royal Irish Constabulary to strike at one point, but the strike ended by November without having achieved significant success. Tensions regarding leadership arose between Larkin and NUDL general secretary James Sexton. The latter's handling of negotiations and agreement to a disastrous settlement for the last of the strikers resulted in a lasting rift between Sexton and Larkin.

Formation of Irish Transport and General Workers' Union and founding of the Irish Labour Party
In 1908, Larkin moved south and organised workers in Dublin, Cork and Waterford, with considerable success. His involvement, against union instructions, in a dispute in Dublin resulted in his expulsion from the NUDL. The union later prosecuted him for diverting union funds to give strike pay to Cork workers engaged in an unofficial dispute. After trial and conviction for embezzlement in 1910, he was sentenced to prison for a year. This was widely regarded as unjust, and the Lord-Lieutenant, Lord Aberdeen, pardoned him after he had served three months in prison. Also in 1908, Arthur Griffith during the Dublin carter's strike described Larkin as an "Englishman importing foreign political disruption into this country and putting native industry at risk".

After his expulsion from the NUDL, Larkin founded the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union (ITGWU) at the end of December 1908. The organisation exists today as the Services Industrial Professional & Technical Union (SIPTU). It quickly gained the affiliation of the NUDL branches in Dublin, Cork, Dundalk, Waterford and Sligo. The Derry and Drogheda NUDL branches stayed with the British union, and Belfast split along sectarian lines. Early in the new year, 1909, Larkin moved to Dublin, which became the main base of the ITGWU and the focus of all his future union activity in Ireland.

In June 1911, Larkin established a newspaper, The Irish Worker and People's Advocate, as a pro-labour alternative to the capitalist-owned press. This organ was characterised by a campaigning approach and the denunciation of unfair employers and of Larkin's political enemies. Its columns also included pieces by intellectuals. The paper was produced until its suppression by the authorities in 1915. Afterwards, the Worker metamorphosed into the new Ireland Echo.

In May 1912, in partnership with James Connolly and William O'Brien Larkin formed the Irish Labour Party as the political wing of the Irish Trades Union Congress. Later that year, he was elected to Dublin Corporation. He did not hold his seat long, as a month later he was removed because he had a criminal record from his conviction in 1910.

Under Larkin's leadership, the union continued to grow, reaching approximately 20,000 members in the time leading up to the Dublin lock-out. In August 1913 during the lock-out, Larkin was described by Vladimir Lenin as a 'talented leader' as well as 'a remarkable speaker and a man of seething energy [who] has performed miracles amongst the unskilled workers'.

Build up to the lock-out, and its proceedings
In early 1913, Larkin achieved some successes in industrial disputes in Dublin and, notably, in the Sligo Dock strike; these involved frequent recourse to sympathetic strikes and blacking (boycotting) of goods. Two major employers, Guinness and the Dublin United Tramway Company, were the main targets of Larkin's organising ambitions. Both had craft unions for skilled workers, but Larkin's main aim was to unionise the unskilled workers as well. He coined the slogan "A fair day's work for a fair day's pay". Larkin advocated Syndicalism, which was a revolutionary brand of socialism. Larkin gained few supporters from within, particularly from the British Trade Union Congress who did not want strike action such as the lock-out to lead to a growth in radicalism.

Guinness staff were relatively well-paid and enjoyed generous benefits from a paternalistic management that refused to join a lockout of unionised staff by virtually all the major Dublin employers. This was far from the case on the tramways.

The chairman of the Dublin United Tramway Company, industrialist and newspaper proprietor William Martin Murphy, was determined not to allow the ITGWU to unionise his workforce. On 15 August, he dismissed 40 workers he suspected of ITGWU membership, followed by another 300 over the next week. On 26 August 1913, the tramway workers officially went on strike. Led by Murphy, over 400 of the city's employers retaliated by requiring their workers to sign a pledge not to be a member of the ITGWU and not to engage in sympathetic strikes.

The resulting industrial dispute was the most severe in Ireland's history. Employers in Dublin engaged in a sympathetic lockout of their workers when the latter refused to sign the pledge, employing blackleg labour from Britain and from elsewhere in Ireland. Guinness, the largest employer in Dublin, refused the employers' call to lock out its workers but it sacked 15 workers who struck in sympathy. Dublin's workers, amongst the poorest in the whole of what was then the Great Britain and Ireland, were forced to survive on generous but inadequate donations from the British Trades Union Congress (TUC) and sources in Ireland, distributed by the ITGWU.

For seven months, the lockout affected tens of thousands of Dublin workers and employers, with Larkin portrayed as the villain by Murphy's three main newspapers, the Irish Independent, the Sunday Independent and the Evening Herald, and by other bourgeois publications in Ireland.

Other leaders in the ITGWU at the time were James Connolly and William O'Brien; influential figures such as Patrick Pearse, Constance Markievicz and W. B. Yeats supported the workers in the generally anti-Larkin Irish press. The Irish Worker published the names and addresses of strike-breakers, and the Irish Independent published the names and addresses of men and women who attempted to send their children out of the city to be cared for in foster homes in Belfast and Britain. However, Larkin never resorted to violence. He knew it would play into the hands of the anti-union companies, and that he could not build a mass trade union by wrecking the firms where his members worked.

A group including Tom Kettle and Thomas MacDonagh formed the Industrial Peace Committee to attempt to negotiate between employers and workers; the employers refused to meet them.

Larkin and others were arrested for sedition on 28 August, and he was released on bail later that day. Connolly told the authorities "I do not recognise the English government in Ireland at all. I do not even recognise the King except when I am compelled to do so." On 30 August, a warrant for Larkin's arrest was put out, claiming he had again been seditious and had incited people to riot and to pillage shops. When a meeting called by Larkin for Sunday 31 August 1913 was proscribed, Constance Markievicz and her husband Casimir disguised Larkin in Casimir's frock coat and trousers and stage makeup and beard, and Nellie Gifford, who was unknown to the police, led him into William Martin Murphy's Imperial Hotel, pretending to be her stooped, deaf old clergyman uncle (to disguise his instantly recognisable Liverpool accent). Larkin tore off his beard inside the hotel and raced to a balcony, where he shouted his speech to the crowd below. The police – some 300 Royal Irish Constabulary reinforcing Dublin Metropolitan Police – savagely baton-charged the crowd, injuring between 400 and 600 people. MP Handel Booth, who was present, said that the police "behaved like men possessed. They drove the crowd into the side streets to meet other batches of the government's minions, wildly striking with their truncheons at everyone within reach ... The few roughs got away first, most respectable people left their hats and crawled away with bleeding heads. Kicking victims when prostrate was a settled part of the police programme." Larkin went into hiding, charged with incitement to breach the peace. Larkin was later re-arrested, charged with sedition and was handed a 7-month imprisonment. The Attorney General claimed Larkin had said: "People make kings and can unmake them. I never said 'God Save the King', but in derision. I say it now in derision." to a crowd of 8,000 people from the windows of Liberty Hall. The sentence was widely seen as unjust. Larkin was released about a week later. As the lock out continued Larkin continued to speak out about the conditions being faced by workers and their families. On 4 October 1913 Larkin spoke at the lock out Tribunal of Inquiry: "When the position of the workers in Dublin was taken into consideration, was it any wonder that there was necessity for a Larkin to arise, and if there was one thing more than another in my life of which I will always be proud it was the part I have taken in rescuing the workers of Dublin from the brutalizing and degrading conditions under which they labored. We are out to break down racial and sectarian barriers. My suggestion to the employers is that if they want peace we are prepared to meet them, but if they want war, then war they will have."

Formation of the Irish Citizen Army
The violence at union rallies during the strike prompted Larkin to call for a workers' militia to be formed to protect themselves against the police, so Larkin, James Connolly, and Jack White created the Irish Citizen Army. The Citizen Army for the duration of the lock-out was armed with hurleys (sticks used in hurling, a traditional Irish sport) and bats to protect workers' demonstrations from the police. Jack White, a former Captain in the British Army, volunteered to train this army and offered £50 towards the cost of shoes to workers so that they could train. In addition to its role as a self-defence organisation, the Army, which was drilled in Croydon Park in Fairview by White, provided a diversion for workers unemployed and idle during the dispute.

End of the lock-out
The lock-out eventually concluded in early 1914 when calls by Connolly and Larkin for a sympathetic strike in Britain were rejected by the British TUC. Larkin's attacks on the TUC leadership for this stance also led to the cessation of financial aid to the ITGWU, which in any case was not affiliated with the TUC.

Although the efforts of the ITGWU and the smaller UBLU did not succeed in securing significantly better pay and conditions for the workers, they represented a turning point in Irish labor history. The principle of union action and workers' solidarity was firmly established. Perhaps even more importantly, Larkin's rhetoric condemning poverty and injustice and urging the oppressed to stand up for themselves left a lasting impression.

Not long after the lockout Jack White resigned as commander and Larkin assumed direct command of the ICA. Beginning the process of its reform into a revolutionary paramilitary organisation by arming them with Mauser rifles bought from Germany by the Irish Volunteers and smuggled into Ireland at Howth in July 1914. A written constitution was established stating the Army's principles as follows: "the ownership of Ireland, moral and material, is vested of right in the people of Ireland" and to "sink all difference of birth property and creed under the common name of the Irish people".

After the lock-out
Exhausted by the demands of organising union work, Larkin fell into bouts of depression, took a declining interest in the now crippled ITGWU, and became increasingly difficult to work with. Speculation had risen during the lock-out that he was planning to leave for America. A speaking tour of the New World had been suggested to Larkin by Bill Haywood in November 1913 and the following month. The growing speculation prompted the New York Times to publish an editorial simply titled 'Larkin is coming'. This dismayed colleagues in the ITGWU and Larkin felt obliged to deny that he was planning on running away. However, noting the effect of the strain of the lock-out on Larkin, union officials reluctantly concluded that a break would probably be of great benefit to him. Following the advice given by 'Big Bill', 'Big Jim' therefore left for America. His decision to leave dismayed many union activists, including a large number of his colleagues in the ITGWU. In addition to recuperating from the strain of the lockout and undertaking a tour of the United States, Larkin also intended to raise funds for the union and the fledgling ICA, and to rebuild their headquarters Liberty Hall. Many in the union assumed that Larkin's trip would be a short one and that he would soon return. However, it quickly became clear that this would not be the case. Shortly before his departure, he declined a request by the Irish Trades Union Congress to join a two-man mission to raise funds for the Labour Party, replying that if he went he would be 'going alone and freelance'. His intention was to agitate in America rather than organise, but it is unclear whether he intended to return. Larkin set sail for America on 25 October 1914, leaving long-time associate James Connolly in charge of the ITGWU and the ICA, the latter of which he would soon utilise as a revolutionary force.

Arriving in America - activism and links to espionage

Larkin arrived in New York on 5 November 1914. Following his arrival there were positive initial prospects. The lock-out had been widely reported in America and he was well received by socialists there. He found support from both socialists and Irish-Americans, who were eager to hear his position on the World War which was by now raging throughout Europe. Opposition to the war was intended to be his main position whilst in America. Upon presenting his credentials to the Socialist Party of America and John Devoy, the Irish leader of Clan na Gael (the leading Irish republican supporting organisation in America), his services were quickly taken up by both and he also became involved in the Industrial Workers of the World union (the Wobblies).

Within days of arriving in the country, he addressed a crowd of 15,000 people gathered at Madison Square Garden to celebrate the election of Socialist candidate Meyer London to the United States House of Representatives. Soon after his speech at Maddison Garden, he was invited by Devoy to speak to a combined audience of German Uhlans and Irish Volunteers in Philadelphia, where he enthusiastically called for money and arms for the Republican cause in Ireland to a cheering crowd. During this speech, Larkin showed one of the rifles that had been smuggled into Ireland at Howth, which he noted could be better but still worked. (He added that better weapons could be obtained with more money.) He compared it with a rifle given to the Irish Volunteers by John Redmond, which was an obsolete weapon for which no new ammunition could be procured, using this to vilify Redmond as a traitor to the Irish people and who had had no intention of arming the movement effectively for Irish independence. He also claimed that in the process of receiving and protecting the guns, 100 of his men from the ICA with no ammunition or bayonets had faced and routed 150 of the King's Own Scottish Borderers, whom he disparagingly said had been referred to as 'England's best'. He went on to attack the First World War directly, particularly the efforts of the British to get men from Ireland to join their war effort, going on to say that if Ireland was to fight it would be against the British in an effort to create an Irish republic: 'Why should Ireland fight for Britain in this war? What has Britain ever done for our people? Whatever we got from her we wrested with struggle and sacrifice. No, men and women of the Irish race, we shall not fight for England. We shall fight for the destruction of the British Empire and the construction of an Irish republic. We shall not fight for the preservation of the enemy, which has laid waste with death and desolation the fields and hills of Ireland for 700 years. We will fight to free Ireland from the grasp of that vile carcase called England'.

In a speech to Clan na Gael in November 1914, Larkin promoted his Irish Republican ideals stating 'I assure you that the workers of Ireland are on the side of the dear, dark-haired mother, whose call they never failed to answer yet ... again will the call ring out over hill and dale to the men who have always answered the call of Caithlin-ni-Houlihan. For seven hundred long, weary years we have waited for this hour. The flowing tide is with us ... [and we must be] ready for the Rising of the Moon'. He went on to say, in the same speech, that 'The time is ripe for an active movement. We have waited years for this opportunity, and it could not come at a better time. We have the men and the plans, but only have 5000 rifles and no ammunition. Give us more guns and ammunition and we will not fail you. We have got something better than England ever had—destiny'. His speech was received well by the Clan and other nationalists, and his initial time with the clan was successful being asked to attend other speaking engagements.

Divisions began to appear, however, largely stemming from his anti-capitalist socialist ideals and pro-worker ideology, which were fundamentally at odds with many of the views of those in the clan and the Irish-America movement. Larkin's religious ideals were also at odds with the largely secular American left, so he effectively alienated himself from both movements and speaking engagements began to dwindle. His speeches had attracted interest from the German embassy and he had been approached by military Attachés shortly after his speech in Philadelphia and offered $200 per week to undertake waterfront sabotage work. Larkin refused on humanitarian grounds and informed them that he was already engaged in organising strikes that would effectively hamper the Allied war effort by restricting American war-related industry, and that he had established the Four Winds Fellowship a society open to all trade unionists and socialists born in the British Empire and who were opposed to the war. Elsewhere, he was reported as having said that he did not want a German victory, instead preferring a military deadlock, leading to workers' revolts in the belligerent countries, a desire which came partly true, following the Russian Revolution of 1917. This perceived association with German agents further distanced him from American socialists, and his reputation as a syndicalist and association with the Industrial Workers of the World was looked down on by the right wing of the Socialist Party of America.

Larkin was reported as having helped to disrupt Allied munitions shipments in New York City during World War I. In 1937, he voluntarily assisted US lawyers investigating the Black Tom explosion by providing an affidavit from his home in Dublin. According to British Army Intelligence officer, Henry Landau:

"Larkin testified that he himself never took part in the actual sabotage campaign but, rather, confined himself to the organising of strikes to secure both higher pay and shorter hours for workmen and to prevent the shipment of munitions to the Allies."

Larkin, however, had first-hand knowledge of German sabotage operations, supplied them with intelligence and contacts and was involved in the transfer of monies from the Germans to Irish Republican causes. He maintained communication with his German contacts. However, they began to tire of his refusals to cooperate with violence and broke contact with him after a rendezvous in Mexico City in 1917.

Communism and arrest for "criminal anarchy"
Following this, Larkin briefly worked with the IWW in San Francisco, before settling in New York and becoming involved with the Socialist Party of America again. He took advantage of the growing support for left-wing politics, and also of the increasing support for Irish republicanism amongst Irish Americans to gain influence amongst its ranks. Larkin was instrumental in the establishment of the New York James Connolly Socialist Club on St Patrick's Day, 1918. Whilst in America, Larkin had become an enthusiastic supporter of the Soviets and, following an address at the club by Jack Reed, who had recently returned from Russia, interest in the Bolsheviks was revitalised. Larkin decided to put all his efforts into reforming the SPA into a communist party. This meant that he had to turn down an offer to lead the St Lawrence Mill Strike in March 1919. The Connolly Club became the national hub of the new communist project, housing the offices of Larkin's SPA faction's Revolutionary Age and Reed's Voice of Labour. In June 1919, Larkin topped the polls for elections to the national left-wing council. He supported the view that the left of the SPA should attempt to take control at its national convention in August. A minority faction favoured the immediate creation of a new communist party and left in protest. Larkin, along with numerous other sympathisers of the Bolsheviks, was expelled from the Socialist Party of America at its national convention during the Red Scare of that year. As a result of this exodus, two new parties were formed from the ranks of the SPA's communist former members, namely the American Communist Party and the Communist Labor Party of America. Favouring the latter, as he believed it to be more 'American' (something which he believed was crucial), Larkin joined their ranks.

Larkin's speeches in support of the Soviets, his association with founding members of both the American Communist Party and Communist Labor Party of America, and his radical publications made him a target of the "First Red Scare" that was sweeping the US and he was arrested on 7 November 1919 during a series of anti-Bolshevik raids. Larkin was charged with 'criminal anarchy' due to his part in the publishing of the SPA's 'Left-wing manifesto' in Revolutionary Age. Larkin was released on 20 November, after $15,000 bail was paid, of which John Devoy paid $5,000. He resumed his political activities but was under no illusion of what was to come, expecting to be handed a lengthy jail sentence. New York State Prosecutor Alexander Rourke took advantage of a query from Scotland Yard as to whether Larkin would be allowed to travel to South Africa to turn his allies in the Irish nationalist movement, including Devoy, against him. In reality, this request did not stem from any association with figures of authority in Britain, but rather a request by Archie Crawford, President of the South African Federation of Labour who wanted Larkin for a speaking tour of the country. A trial took place in which Larkin represented himself, presenting his view that his own beliefs rather than his deeds were on trial, and exhibiting a philosophy incorporating his new-found Bolshevism as well as his Christianity, Socialism, Syndicalism, Communism and Irish nationalism. Despite many onlookers being of the opinion that he had gained enough sympathy to divide the jury, Larkin's fears were instead realised: he was found guilty and sentenced to five to ten years, to be served in the notorious Sing Sing prison.

Time in prison
While most of his sentence was served at Sing Sing, Larkin also spent time in other prisons in America, briefly moving to Clinton prison (Dannemora) after only one month at Sing Sing. This move was in order to discourage visitation. A journalist from the New York Call managed to gain an interview with Larkin whilst he was incarcerated there, and the reported deterioration of Larkin's condition led to international protests which ultimately resulted in him moving back to Sing Sing later that year. Whilst at Sing Sing, Larkin was supplied with books and the means to write and communicate with the outside world. Keeping a keen eye on Irish affairs, Larkin sent a 'thunderous denunciation of the Anglo-Irish Treaty' to Dublin on 10 December 1921. Larkin's most famous visitor whilst he was imprisoned was Charlie Chaplin who noted that he was 'diffident' and 'concerned for his family', about whom he had heard nothing since his incarceration. Chaplin sent presents to Larkin's wife Elizabeth and their children. Larkin was later moved to Great Meadow, a comfortable, open prison, where he was visited by Constance Markievicz who, whilst noting his apparent appreciation of his conditions, also sensed his fretfulness at being cut off from politics. On 6 May 1922, Larkin was released before being rearrested shortly afterwards for another charge of criminal anarchy and served with a deportation warrant. Larkin appealed and, during his time out of jail, he was cabled by Grigory Zinoviev President of the Communist International (Comintern) who gave their 'warmest greetings to the undaunted fighter released from the "democratic" prisons'. In February of that year, Larkin had been elected to the Moscow Soviet to represent the Moscow International Communist Tailoring Factory by a union of tailors, most of them returnees to Russia from the USA. Larkin's court appeal failed and he was back in custody by 31 August, despite various plans being discussed, including a potential escape plan raised by Thomas Foran of the ITGWU and numerous legal challenges. Larkin decided to bide his time. During this time it was also arranged for Larkin's son, James, to visit him in prison.

Release and departure from the United States
The election of Irish-American Al Smith to the position of Governor of New York in November 1922 represented a change in circumstances and was also a clear indication that the Red Scare had largely abated. Smith granted Larkin a pardon hearing which was set for January 1923, the pardon was granted and he was released from prison. Foran cabled Larkin to convey the ITGWU's satisfaction with the events and to seek the date of his return to Ireland. Although Larkin had his mind set on a return to Ireland, he had grander plans than a return to union work. The Comintern wrote to Larkin on 3 February to express their 'great joy' at his release and to extend an invitation to visit Soviet Russia at his earliest opportunity, to 'discuss a number of burning questions affecting the international revolutionary movement'. Larkin made a number of financial requests to the ITGWU, including asking them to cover the costs of purchasing passage on a steamer ship, although he, in characteristic fashion, did not reveal the reason. The union's new leadership began to see him as out of touch, and that if allowed to do so he would attempt to restore his previous near-total command over the union. The union had also already spent large sums of money on Larkin's behalf—making sure his wife Elizabeth was taken care of, covering his medical expenses and covering the costs of James Jnr's visit to see him in America. For these reasons, the additional financial requests were denied, a decision which begat what would become an intense split in the union movement in Ireland. After lobbying the Secretary for Labor for a deportation order, which was granted, he was arrested and charged with being an alien activist. He was then taken to the British consulate where he was given a passport to travel by ship first to the United Kingdom and then to Ireland. Although Larkin had hoped to have been allowed to travel to Germany, Austria and Russia on business matters, this request was denied. On 21 April, he boarded a ship bound for Southampton and left America for good.

Return to Ireland - communist activity and split in Irish trade union movement

Upon his return to Ireland in April 1923, Larkin received a hero's welcome and immediately set about touring the country, meeting trade union members and appealing for an end to the Irish Civil War. However, he soon found himself at variance with William O'Brien, who, in Larkin's absence, had become the leading figure in the ITGWU and the Irish Labour Party and Trades Union Congress. Larkin was still officially general secretary of the ITGWU. The ITGWU leaders (Thomas Foran, William O'Brien, Thomas Kennedy: all colleagues of Larkin during the Lockout) sued him. The bitterness of the court case between the former organisers of the 1913 Lockout would last over 20 years.

Formation of the Irish Worker League and involvement with Soviet Union
Larkin agreed with British and Soviet communists to take on the leadership of communism in Ireland and, in September 1923, Larkin formed the Irish Worker League (IWL), which was soon afterwards recognised by The Communist International (Comintern; a Soviet Union controlled international organisation that advocated world communism) as the Irish section of the world communist movement. The IWL enrolled 500 members on its inauguration and, following the death of Lenin on 21 January 1924, Larkin led a march of 6,000 people to mourn his passing. In March 1924, Larkin lost his battle for control of the ITWGU and, in May, the army prevented his followers from seizing Liberty Hall. In June 1924, Larkin attended the Comintern congress in Moscow and was elected to its Executive Committee. The League's most prominent activity in its first year was to raise funds for imprisoned members of the Anti-Treaty IRA.

During Larkin's absence from Ireland at the 1924 Comintern Congress in Moscow (and apparently against his instructions), his brother Peter took his supporters out of the ITGWU, forming the Workers' Union of Ireland (WUI). The new union quickly grew, gaining the allegiance of about two-thirds of the Dublin membership of the ITGWU and of a smaller number of rural members. It was affiliated to the Soviet Red International of Labour Unions (Promintern).

With Soviet support, Larkin sought to remove British unions from Ireland, seeing them as 'outposts of British imperialism'. It was also agreed that Irish sections of the communist movement would deal directly with Moscow and would have permanent representation there, rather than going through Britain. Larkin later launched a vicious attack on Tom Johnson who was now leader of the Labour Party and who like Larkin, was Liverpool-born. Johnson had been born to English parents but had spent much of his life in Ireland. Larkin, although born to Irish parents, had spent as long in the US as he had in Ireland. Larkin said that it was "time that Labour dealt with this English traitor. If they don't get rid of this scoundrel, they'll get the bullet and the bayonet in reward. There's nothing for it, but a dose of the lead which Johnson promises to those who look for work." This implied incitement to murder Johnson in a still-violent post-Civil War country resulted in the court awarding Johnson £1000 in libel damages against Larkin. In his 2006 biographical anthology, Donal Nevin noted that his attacks on colleagues in the labour movement, including those the subject of this libel action, meant that Larkin "alienated practically all the leaders of the movement [and] the mass of trade union members".

In January 1925, the Comintern sent Communist Party of Great Britain activist Bob Stewart to Ireland to establish a communist party in co-operation with Larkin. A formal founding conference of the Irish Worker League, which was to take up this role, was set for May 1925. A fiasco ensued when the organisers discovered at the last minute that Larkin did not intend to attend. Feeling that the proposed party could not succeed without him, they called the conference off as it was due to start in a packed room in the Mansion House, Dublin. Larkin perceived certain actions undertaken by Stewart as attempts to circumvent his authority, including sending a republican delegation to Moscow and directing £500 sent by the Russian Red Cross intended to aid the Irish famine relief effort to George Lansbury a left-wing British Labour M.P., rather than to the WUI.

Under pressure from Comintern to operate as a political party or risk losing affiliation, Larkin fielded three candidates at the September 1927 Irish general election; himself, his son James Larkin Jnr, and WUI President John Lawlor. Larkin ran in Dublin North and, in circumstances that surprised many, was elected, becoming the first and only communist to be elected to Dáil Éireann. However, as a result of a libel award won against him by William O'Brien, which he had refused to pay, he was an undischarged bankrupt and could not take up his seat. Between November of that year and March 1928, six students including Larkin's son James Larkin Jnr were sent to Moscow to attend the International Lenin School. In February 1928, Larkin made what would be his penultimate visit to Moscow for the ninth plenum of the Executive Committee of the Communist International. Here he departed from his usual subject matter. His public speeches in Russia were usually and almost exclusively centred on the need for trade union solidarity and largely avoided comment on communist politics. However, he now delivered a lecture on "Ireland, trade unions and the peasantry" at the Moscow Soviet, and asked the audience to support Josef Stalin. He also endorsed the Comintern line that the Communist Party of Great Britain should adopt a hostile rather than fraternal attitude towards the British Labour Party as well as denouncing the CPGB's refusal to back the removal of British unions from Ireland and their record on trade unions in general. Before leaving, Larkin warned Solomon Lozovsky (General Secretary of Profintern) that the WUI executive wanted to break with Profintern unless their promises were made good.

Relations between Larkin and Moscow would ultimately continue to strain, despite occasional apparent promise, and, in the time building up to the 1930s, the final break was fast approaching. In 1929, in a letter to Moscow, Larkin announced his retirement from active political work. However, he asked that the Irish at the Lenin School be supported, noting that James Jnr was "his own man and an earnest communist". Larkin would, in fact, continue to be politically active for all of his life and used the League as a political platform into the 1930s. He did, however, sever ties with Profintern, declaring that they had not given the WUI proper financial support and accusing Lozovsky of intriguing against him. In September 1929, a new communist group became active in Dublin but had orders not to "disturb the big noise", with Moscow fearing that Larkin would smash its initiatives in the city, whilst also secretly still hoping that Larkin would provide the mass base it desired in Ireland. Ultimately, Larkin would neither support communist activity nor oppose his successors.

Larkin's unsuccessful attempts to gain a position as a commercial agent in Ireland for the Soviet Union may have contributed to his disenchantment with Stalinism. The Soviets, for their part, had been increasingly impatient with what they saw as his ineffective leadership. From the early 1930s, Larkin drew away from the Soviet Union entirely. In the 1932 general election, he stood, without success, as a communist and, in 1933 and subsequently, he ran as "Independent Labour". The reasons for the eventual collapse in relations between the Soviet Union and Larkin can, to some extent, be put down to his underlying motivations. According to Emmet O'Connor, his aims were to "discredit the ITWGU, and Labour Party leadership, drive the British unions out of Ireland, and build an anti-imperialist front with republicans". His Syndicalist ideology was also largely out of place in a Leninist context, eventually being regarded by Comintern as a "first generation communist leader" whose ideology had been formed during the period prior to 1914. It is also claimed that he had, by this time, fallen into a degenerated state of egomania, was "violently" averse to being accountable to anyone but himself and consequently suspicious of anything that was outside of his own personal control. It could be said that some of Larkin's suspicions and apparent paranoias were justified, as it was clear that the Communist Party of Great Britain frequently attempted to circumvent him in liaising with the IRA and the Worker's Party behind his back. Additionally its Minority Movement blatantly ignored Profintern instructions and refused to honour the agreement on the withdrawal of British unions from Ireland, which resulted in Larkin directing much of his irritation on the matter towards Profintern.

One of Larkin's primary ambitions from his association with the Soviet Union was to finance his new trade union, and thus many of the same issues that had arisen from his time with James Connolly arose again. That being the hyperfocus on union activity, with political mobilisation an after thought, the Labour Party had suffered from this diversion of attention and so consequently did the IWL. Larkin had advocated revolutionary socialism. However, neither Larkin nor Connolly had focused on building a revolutionary party, frequently seeing political developments as only "an echo" of the industrial battle, and played down the need for a party that had a consistent and clear ideology and view of the world, thinking mass unionisation would be enough. At the height of the 1913 lock-out, when the men were at the height of their popularity, they made no particular concerted effort to recruit workers to a socialist party. This allowed other political parties to take advantage of much of their work, despite not having supported workers during the lock-out. Through a combination of a lack of cohesion and co-operation, an opportunity for a successful communist movement in Ireland, in a time where a revolutionary mentality still remained, was missed. This was perhaps a movement which only Larkin could have achieved, as an obvious figurehead who still remained widely popular amongst the Irish left, and with an Irish Labour movement which had swung towards Syndicalism. Communism in Ireland at this time also had a distinct lack of controversy surrounding it, with the IRA sending delegations to Moscow and maintaining a widespread and open association with Profintern. Following the Catholic Church's rallying against Communism from 1929 onwards, the mood quickly changed.

In 1934, Larkin gave important evidence on the 1916 Black Tom explosion to John J. McCloy, allowing a case for damages against Germany to be reopened, presumably because of Germany's new Nazi government. During this period, he also engaged in a rapprochement with the Catholic Church, from whom he had become distant after the Church's vehement ostracisation of communism, which had followed a resurgence of Catholic social power, stemming from the centenary celebrations of Catholic emancipation in 1929, and the publishing of Quadragesimo anno in 1931. In 1936, he regained his seat on Dublin Corporation. He then regained his Dáil seat at the 1937 general election but lost it again the following year. In that period, the Workers' Union of Ireland also entered the mainstream of the trade union movement, being admitted to the Dublin Trades Council in 1936, but the Irish Trades Union Congress would not accept its membership application until 1945.

Return to Labour Party
In 1941, a new trade union bill was published by the Government. Inspired by an internal trade union restructuring proposal by William O'Brien, it was viewed as a threat by the smaller general unions and the Irish branches of British unions (known as the "amalgamated unions"). Larkin and the WUI played a leading role in the unsuccessful campaign against the bill. After its passage into law, he and his supporters successfully applied for admission to the Labour Party, where they were now regarded with more sympathy by many members. In response, O'Brien disaffiliated the ITGWU from the party, forming the rival National Labour Party and denouncing what he claimed was communist influence in Labour. Larkin later served as a Labour Party deputy in Dáil Éireann from 1943 to 1944.

Death

In late 1946, Larkin fell through a floor whilst supervising repairs to the Worker's Union of Ireland's Thomas Ashe Hall in Dublin. He suffered serious internal injuries and was rushed to hospital. He survived the accident but he never recovered from his injuries and died in his sleep in the Meath Hospital on 30 January 1947. Fr Aloysius Travers, OFM (who had administered last rites to James Connolly in 1916) also administered extreme unction to Larkin. His funeral mass was celebrated by the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, John Charles McQuaid, who had visited him in the hospital before he died, and thousands lined the streets of the city as the hearse passed through on the way to Glasnevin Cemetery, escorted by the Irish Citizen Army in its last public appearance.

Religion and personal life
Larkin is said to have been a Christian socialist. Larkin remained a Catholic throughout his life, and asserted there was no inherent conflict between his religious views and his politics: "There is no antagonism between the Cross and socialism! A man can pray to Jesus the Carpenter, and be a better socialist for it. Rightly understood, there is no conflict between the vision of Marx and the vision of Christ. I stand by the Cross and I stand by Karl Marx. Both Capital and the Bible are to me Holy Books."

Larkin was married to Elizabeth Brown, with whom he had four sons; James Larkin Jnr, Denis Larkin, Fintan Larkin and Bernard Larkin. Two of whom (James Jnr and Denis) followed their father into socialist politics and trade unionism, serving in political parties and unions established by their father and serving terms in Dáil Éireann. James Larkin Jnr represented both Dublin South and Dublin South-Central, and Denis Larkin represented one of his fathers' previous constituencies Dublin North-East and also later served a term as Lord Mayor of Dublin from 1955 to 1956. Larkin's sister Delia Larkin was also a prominent trade unionist and a founder of the Irish Women Workers' Union. Larkin separated from his wife Elizabeth, and did not live with her again following his return from America, although her death in 1945 is said to have affected him a great deal.

Allegations of antisemitism
Allegations of antisemitism have been levelled at Larkin, and he has been accused of running antisemitic verses in the Irish Worker paper. One told of a "Jewess" (female Jew) who was demanding back the price of her pushy son's theatre ticket when, rushing to get the best seat in the house, he fell to his death from a balcony. He soon republished the same caricature. Larkin ran a cartoon aimed at a particular group of Jewish immigrants which were described as "foreigners masquerading under Irish names". The cartoon used stereotypical physical characteristics, as well as mock-immigrant pronunciation and ikey, said to be regarded as a derogatory nickname for Jews. Larkin's The Jew's Shilling has been provided as another example by Colum Kenny.

Literature
Larkin has been the subject of poems by Brendan Behan, Patrick Kavanagh, Frank O'Connor, Donagh MacDonagh and Lola Ridge; his character has been central in plays by Daniel Corkery, George Russell (Æ), and Seán O'Casey; and he is a heroic figure in the background of James Plunkett's novel Strumpet City and Lyn Andrews' Where the Mersey Flows. Strumpet City was later developed into a television mini-series of the same name, in which Larkin was portrayed by British-Irish actor Peter O'Toole.

Songs
James Larkin was memorialised by the New York Irish rock band Black 47, in their song "The Day They Set Jim Larkin Free". Donagh MacDonagh's "The Ballad of James Larkin" was recorded by Christy Moore, The Dubliners and The Buskers. Paddy Reilly sings a song simply entitled "Jim Larkin" that describes the lot of the workers and their appreciation of the changes made by Larkin and Connolly. The song "The Lockout" by Joe O'Sullivan describes Larkin's organisation of workers which led to the Dublin Lockout of 1913.

Monuments
Today a statue of "Big Jim" stands on O'Connell Street in Dublin. Completed by Oisín Kelly, and unveiled in 1979, the inscription on the front of the monument is an extract in French, Irish and English from one of his famous speeches:

Les grands ne sont grands que parce que nous sommes à genoux: Levons-nous. Ní uasal aon uasal ach sinne bheith íseal: Éirímis. The great appear great because we are on our knees: Let us rise.

The slogan, first used on the 18th-century French radical paper Révolutions de Paris, also appeared on the masthead of the Workers' Republic, founded by James Connolly in Dublin in August 1898. Originally the organ of the Irish Socialist Republican Party, this periodical later became the official organ of the Communist Party of Ireland, which was founded in 1921. The original slogan is usually attributed to Camille Desmoulins (1760–1794), the French revolutionary; but it appears, only slightly modified, in an essay written by Étienne de La Boétie (1530–1563) and first published in 1576.

On the west side of the base of the Larkin monument is a quotation from the poem Jim Larkin by Patrick Kavanagh:

On the east side of the monument, there is a quotation from Drums under the Windows by Seán O'Casey:

"... He talked to the workers, spoke as only Jim Larkin could speak, not for an assignation with peace, dark obedience, or placid resignation, but trumpet-tongued of resistance to wrong, discontent with leering poverty, and defiance of any power strutting out to stand in the way of their march onward."

A life-sized statue of Larkin is located in Donegall Street Place, Belfast.

Roads and buildings
A coastal road in Raheny, north Dublin, is named after him. A road in L4 1YQ, Kirkdale, in his home city of Liverpool, just off Scotland Road, is called James Larkin Way. James Larkin House, flats in the North Strand of Dublin takes his name.

Liverpool Irish Festival 2008
To celebrate Liverpool's year as European Capital of Culture, the Liverpool Irish Festival held a James Larkin Evening at the 'Casa' bar — the dockers' pub in central Liverpool. This was attended by Francis Devine who wrote the general history of the trade union movement in Dublin and the formation of SIPTU. It was introduced by Liverpool Irishman Marcus Maher, who travelled from Dublin to present a specially commissioned painting by Finbar Coyle to James Larkin's last remaining Liverpool nephew, Tom Larkin. The painting reflects on one side Dublin and on the other side the Liver Bird and his home city of Liverpool.

People
The Transport and General Workers' Union activist Jack Jones, whose full name was James Larkin Jones, was named in honour of his fellow Liverpudlian.

title: James Larkin


license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Category:400


text: Category:Jeep

title: Category:Jeep


text:
User:Kalumnu

Kalumnu, once a First Nations Philosopher Medicine Man (Wanaghi Wakan'K'Cha/Spirit Speakers-or Speakers for the Dead) who travelled with a group of like Medicine Men throughout the Yematasi Adawa, a trading area covering from the East Coast of North America into the Plains Regions and from the Gulf of Mexico northward into the Arctic Regions. Kalumnu was the youngest of the Wanaghi Wakan'K'Cha and in a tribute to the First Counsel of Nations in the city of the Fire Eagle, where New Mexico is today stated:

"I am Kalumnu the young. I am a true seer spirit self of the Chowala Keh. In Heyarts eyes is oldness, but with them he sees with great truth even the cry of a baby, the sound of a drum lost to normal sight. Marlymak of the ears can hear the strange sounds of black, yellow, red, blue, brown, and all colours; even the voices of the stone to the Great Mother. Quahints hands which taste the flavours of the earth, air, water, and even fire; and form death in their bite. Pren'Chak the foot smells life and walks through the passages of time alone and eats of all elements. Olimak whose nose grasps pain, joy, hate, love, death, and life. Chanui the mouth who speaks of his foolishness, inability, and unworthiness does so as he is wise, and talented, and great in all things of thought and speech. Each in all are my body, and I am that to they. I know naught. We are seven of the Chowala Keh, call us by name, we are humble before you.

I am myself, and you are you. Together we are brothers. Brothers of which make up the Brotherhood of Mankind. I like to think myself a warrior, or a man whom repels violence. Do not mistake my words, do not test my ability. I cast warlike actions from my conscious thought, I do not throw them from my being. I walk upon two paths in life. A man is like a mountain. There is an ascent, and there is a descent. It is a burden of the outer self on the speed of the descending. Yet it is the quality of the inner self in the ascension. I like to think myself a warrior, quiet, calm, each movement thought of before it is made. Man has many emotions, they cover an area from the bitterness of hate, to the sweetness of love. When a man hates he knows it; when he loves he must look around himself. What do you think yourself to be? A contrary, a hunter, a priest, an artist? Or do you perceive yourself to be what you truly are. We know each person dreams to be that which they are not. Almost every woman beautiful; every man courageous. But... Whatever you like to think yourself to be, remember one thing; it cannot be changed, it cannot be overcome in any way. You are yourself! A child of the earth! You must grow knowing you are one day to die. You must learn pessimism can be conquered; optimism will help you grow.

Here are we, seven, in a galaxy of nines. That of the Chowala Keh, call us by name, we are humble before you."

The Chowala Keh listed among its' members Heyart, Marlymak, Quahint, Pren'Chak, Olimak, Chanui, and Kalumnu. Later they developed the Yematasi Adawa and Formed alliances with the Epacawani Atawa with the Chief Tsimn Shian, the Athapaskan Atawa also know as the Teacha'Chi Atawa with the Chief Wi'Nema. The Yematasi brought together not just trade goods in the forms of worked metal, pots and pans, tomahawk heads, knife blades, lance and spear heads; fruits and vegetables; different art and cloth making technics; it also blended the spiritual practices of almost 2,200 tribes/nations to a single unified way of life. A peace and unity that would last some 20,000 years until the coming of the "white devil with flaming hair". The Viking brought diseases which the First Nations had no cures nor immunity, and introduced unhonourable war practices. Compounded by the Spanish introduction of smallpox, syphilis, and gonorrhea which wiped out millions of people. The Yematasi spread the concepts of the Earth Mother, Sun Father, Grand Creator, and Children of the Earth which took on as many forms as there were tribes. Then the Yematasi developed the concept of no "right" way to believe or practice your belief so long as you gave honour and respect to humanities strangers, other communities, other clans, other families, you would in turn receive honour and respect.

To be continued....

title: User:Kalumnu


title: Category:600


title: Category:500


text:
Federal Court of Canada

The Federal Court of Canada, which succeeded the Exchequer Court of Canada in 1971, was a national court of Canada that had limited jurisdiction to hear certain types of disputes arising under the federal government's legislative jurisdiction. Originally composed of two divisions, the Appellate Division and the Trial Division, in 2003 the Court was split into two separate Courts, the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal. The court used facilities as the Supreme Court of Canada Building as well as Thomas D'Arcy McGee Building and registry office at 90 Elgin Street.

Pre-Confederation to Confederation
Prior to Confederation, the predominantly English-speaking Canada West (which succeeded Upper Canada) and the predominantly French-speaking Canada East (which succeeded Lower Canada) each had a separate system of courts. During pre-Confederation negotiations, the creation of a national court had been contemplated to deal with matters relating to federal law. The Constitution Act, 1867 thus provided under s. 101 that:

"The Parliament of Canada may, notwithstanding anything in this Act, from Time to Time provide for the Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of a General Court of Appeal for Canada, and for the Establishment of any additional Courts for the better Administration of the Laws of Canada."

Despite the language in the constitution, a national court was not established until 1875. Prime Minister John A. Macdonald made several attempts between 1869 and 1873 to create a national court under the powers granted to Parliament under s. 101 of the Constitution Act, 1867. However, these early attempts were rebuffed due to concerns over jurisdiction, particularly because the early proposals would have established a federal Supreme Court exercising both original (trial) jurisdiction and concurrent appellate jurisdiction potentially in conflict with existing courts administered by Ontario and Quebec.

While no court per se was created, provision was made for the appointment of Official Arbitrators, whose decisions soon became subject to a final appeal to a Board of Arbitrators, until a further right of appeal to the new Exchequer Court was created in 1879.

Exchequer Court
In 1875, the Liberal government of Prime Minister Alexander Mackenzie passed The Supreme and Exchequer Court Act (introduced by Minister of Justice Telesphore Fournier), which was based on Macdonald's earlier unsuccessful bill of 1870. This act created both the Supreme Court of Canada and the Exchequer Court. The jurisdiction of the Exchequer Court was provided under sections 58 and 59 of the Act:

"58. The Exchequer Court shall have and possess concurrent original jurisdiction in the Dominion of Canada, in all cases in which it shall be sought to enforce any law of the Dominion of Canada relating to the revenue, including actions, suits, and proceedings, by way of information, to enforce penalties and proceedings by way of information in rem, and as well in qui tam suits for penalties or forfeitures as where the suit is on behalf of the Crown alone; and the said Court shall have exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases in which demand shall be made or relief sought in respect of any matter which might in England by the subject of a suit or action in the Court of Exchequer on its revenue side against the Crown, or any officer of the Crown.

59. The Exchequer Court shall also have concurrent original jurisdiction with the Courts of the several Provinces in all other suits of a civil nature at common law or equity in which the Crown in the interest of the Dominion of Canada is plaintiff or petitioner."

The Supreme and Exchequer Court Act made it clear that the Exchequer Court of Canada was inspired by the Court of Exchequer in England, both in name and in jurisdiction, focusing as it did on matters of revenue. In the same year, however, England abolished the Court of Exchequer, merging its jurisdiction into the High Court of Justice. Nonetheless, the jurisdiction provided to the Exchequer Court of Canada initially consisted of:

 * concurrent original jurisdiction over all cases relating to the enforcement of the revenue laws;
 * exclusive original jurisdiction over any demand or relief sought in like manner as the English Court of Exchequer in its revenue side; and
 * concurrent original jurisdiction over all civil cases where the Crown is the plaintiff or petitioner.

The independence of the Exchequer Court was not immediately established. Indeed, justices of the Supreme Court also sat as justices of the Exchequer Court in the early years. The two Courts were not separated until 1887, at which time the functions of the Official Arbitrators were subsumed into the Exchequer Court. George W. Burbidge, a lawyer from New Brunswick, was the first Exchequer Court judge appointed under this new arrangement. At the same time, the Court's jurisdiction was expanded to include exclusive original jurisdiction over all claims against the Crown.

Jurisdiction over railway insolvency
Beginning in 1901, railways gained the ability under the Railway Act to apply to the Court to secure a scheme of arrangement in the event of insolvency.

Acquisition of admiralty jurisdiction
While s. 96 of the BNA Act, 1867 constituted the superior courts in the provinces, admiralty law jurisdiction was not conferred on them, which continued to be vested in the vice-admiralty courts under the British Vice Admiralty Courts Act 1863 (26 & 27 Vict. c. 24 (UK)). Separate courts existed in British Columbia, Lower Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. The absence of such a court for Ontario led to the Parliament of Canada, exercising its power under s. 101, to create the Maritime Court of Ontario through the passage of the Maritime Jurisdiction Act 1877. This was held to be a valid exercise of federal jurisdiction by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1879.

This mix of courts was rationalized after the British Parliament passed the Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act 1890, where British possessions were authorized to create their own courts of admiralty jurisdiction. This was followed shortly with the passage of the Admiralty Act 1891, which consolidated such jurisdiction throughout Canada in the Exchequeur Court of Canada, which under the British Act could "exercise such jurisdiction in like manner and to as full an extent as the High Court in England, and shall have the same regard as that Court to international law and the comity of nations."

The extent of this jurisdiction was held to be only that which existed on 1 July 1891, in an appeal decided in 1927 by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. This situation only changed after the Statute of Westminster 1931 came into force, after which Canada passed the Admiralty Act 1934, which broadened Canadian admiralty jurisdiction to match that of the High Court of England at that time: "18(1) The jurisdiction of the Court on its Admiralty side shall extend to and be exercised in respect of all navigable waters, tidal and non-tidal, whether naturally navigable or artificially made so, and although such waters be within the body of a county or other judicial district, and, generally, such jurisdiction shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, be over the like places, persons, matters and things as the Admiralty jurisdiction now possessed by the High Court of Justice in England, whether existing by virtue of any statute or otherwise, and be exercised by the Court in like manner and to as full an extent as by such High Court."

Federal Court of Canada
In 1971, the Federal Court of Canada was established, consisting of two divisions (the "Federal Court – Trial Division" and the "Federal Court – Appeal Division"), inheriting much of the jurisdiction of the Exchequer Court. The Federal Court of Canada gained the jurisdiction to hear judicial reviews from federal agencies and tribunals. With respect to maritime jurisdiction, the Trial Division was declared to have:

"concurrent original jurisdiction ... in all cases in which a claim for relief is made or a remedy is sought under or by virtue of Canadian maritime law or any other law of Canada relating to any matter coming within the class of subject of navigation and shipping except to the extent that jurisdiction has been otherwise specially assigned."

On July 2, 2003, the Court was split into two separate Courts, with the "Trial Division" continued as the Federal Court and the "Appeal Division" continued as the Federal Court of Appeal.

Until 1976, there was substantial judicial support for the view that Parliament could give a federal court jurisdiction over any matter (even a matter not regulated by federal statute law), on the basis that "the Laws of Canada" meant not only federal statutes, but provincial ones as well. However, in Quebec North Shore Paper Co. v. Canadian Pacific, the Supreme Court of Canada rejected this notion, as:

 * provincial law is not pro tanto federal law, nor can it be transposed into federal law for the purposes of giving jurisdiction to the Federal Court.
 * judicial jurisdiction of the Federal Court is not co-extensive with legislative jurisdiction of Parliament, as "the Laws of Canada" carries the requirement that there be applicable and existing federal law

Organization
The Court consisted of a first-level trial court, known as the Federal Court of Canada – Trial Division, and an appellate Court, known as the Federal Court of Canada – Appeal Division (more commonly referred to as the Federal Court of Appeal).

The Trial Division had jurisdiction to hear judicial review of decisions of federal boards and tribunals, including most immigration matters, as well as jurisdiction in admiralty, intellectual property, and disputes involving the federal government.

The Appeal Division had jurisdiction to hear appeals of decisions of the Trial Division, as well as to determine applications for judicial review of decisions made by specific boards and tribunals, set out in section 28 of the Federal Court Act. Decisions of the Appeal Division could be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, but only if leave (permission) was granted by either court.

The court did not use juries so all matters were decided by judge alone: a single judge in the Trial Division and a panel of three judges at the appeal level. Some pre-trial steps such as motions were decided by prothonotaries, a role similar to a master in other courts. The judges and prothonotaries were appointed by the Cabinet of the federal government.

Jurisdiction
Unlike the general courts set up by each province, matters could not be brought before the Federal Court of Canada unless a law explicitly allowed the proceeding. The docket of the court primarily consisted of judicial reviews of immigration, intellectual property, and federal employment disputes. The court could also deal with incidental aspects of a dispute that fell outside its jurisdiction if the primary dispute was within its jurisdiction.

The court was a national court so trials and hearings occurred throughout Canada. Any orders rendered by the court were enforceable in all the provinces and territories. This contrasts with the provincial superior courts which are organized by each province and require additional steps to enforce decisions in other provinces.

Presidents of the Exchequer Court of Canada
The position of President of the Court was not created until 1923. Before that time, justices of the Supreme Court of Canada sat as judges of the Exchequer Court from 1875 to 1887, at which time George Wheelock Burbidge was appointed as the first full-time judge of the Court. He served until 1908. when Walter Cassels was appointed. In 1912, authority was given to appoint an associate judge to the Court, and Louis Arthur Audette was appointed to that position. In 1945, authority was given to appoint more judges to the Court.

From 1923, the Presidents of the Court were:

 * Sir Walter Gibson Pringle Cassels, 19201923
 * Alexander Kenneth Maclean, 19231942
 * Joseph Thorarinn Thorson, 19421964
 * Wilbur Roy Jackett, 19641971 (subsequently Chief Justice of the Federal Court of Canada)

Prior judges
The judges of this court are listed below.

 * = former judge of the Exchequer Court of Canada
 * = stepped down from original appointment
 * † = died in office

title: Federal Court of Canada


text:
Talk:Euclidean group

Inversion with respect to a point in 3D
How come "inversion with respect to a point" is "not preserving orientation" in 3D? BTW what it means to preserve orientation in 3D? --TMa

Improvements
I've done some work on the ordering of sections, and other tweaks. It shouldn't be too hard to put this into approved 'concentric' style. Charles Matthews 15:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC) OK, that should be somewhat better now. The only point of real concern I have is this: does the article really need the non-closed subgroups enumerated? I would have thought the closed subgroups were enough. Charles Matthews 15:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

 * If the overview is restricted to closed subgroups this has to be mentioned, you cannot say the subgroups are all of type A, B, or C, when there is also a type D. However, to clarify the restriction you have to explain it, so you end up briefly explaining the additional kind anyway.--Patrick 22:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't agree: if it is thought of as a topological group, why not just explain the closed subgroups? I don't see the need for any more than that. Charles Matthews 12:23, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I was thinking of the algebraic concept of a group. The concept of a topological subgroup seems more complex.--Patrick 23:39, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Notation special Euclidean group : SE vs E+
In this article the notation $$ E^+ $$ is used for the special Euclidean group, but SO for the special orthogonal group (the rotations). I would prefer SE for the special orthogonal group thus making the notation consistent.

--Benjamin.friedrich (talk) 22:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess you mean I would prefer SE for the special Euclidian group thus making the notation consistent —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.178.150.69 (talk) 17:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The Euclidean group E(3) as a matrix Lie group
When actually working with the E(3), it is very useful to write the elements of E(3) as matrices; this is done using homogenous coordinates.

I am unsure where to include information about homogenous coordinates: Possible options are the articles on rigid bodies, rigid body motion and the Euclidean group.

Here is a start for a section on homogenous coordinates (source: A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation by Richard M. Murray, Zexiang Li, S. Shankar Sastry)

Homogenous coordiantes and the E(3):

Both points $$ p=(p_1,p_2,p_3)^T $$ of three-dimensional space and vectors $$ v=(v_1,v_2,v_3)^T $$ of three-dimensional space are usually written as 3-vectors. Since points and vecors differ in their transformation behaviour under Euclidean motions, we use alternative notation and write them as 4-vectors

p=\begin{pmatrix} p_1 \\ p_2 \\ p_3 \\ 1 \\ \end{pmatrix} \quad and \quad v=\begin{pmatrix} v_1 \\ v_2 \\ v_3 \\ 0 \\ \end{pmatrix} $$.

This has the benefit that we can represent an Euclidean motion being the composition of a rotation with rotation matrix W and a translation with translation vector T as a 4x4-matrix G, which reads in block-matrix form

G=\begin{pmatrix} W & V \\ 0 & 1 \\ \end{pmatrix}. $$

Transforamtion of points and vectors is now given by simple matrix multiplication. --Benjamin.friedrich (talk) 22:40, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Rigid body motion: why not a curve in E(3)?
The article says "A rigid body motion is in effect the same as a curve in E+(3)" but then goes on to explain that a curve can't jump between the two cosets. This explanation would seem more relevant if rigid body motion were defined as a curve in E(3) rather than E+(3), starting from the identity. --Vaughan Pratt (talk) 05:44, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

 * I have added more words. Charles Matthews (talk) 13:02, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks great. Thanks.  --Vaughan Pratt (talk) 01:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Degrees of freedom
Currently the article notes these degrees of freedom for E+(3): Selection of an axis amounts to selection of a point on the unit sphere and presents two degrees of freedom. Amount of rotation about that axis gives another degree. Thus the total should be three. For a screw displacement the total should be four as the length of translation along the axis affords one more degree.Rgdboer (talk) 22:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
 * rotation about an axis – 5
 * rotation about an axis combined with translation along that axis (screw operation) – 6

Okay, the center of that sphere has freedom to move, so the article is right. At Plücker coordinates one reads that lines in space have four degrees of freedom.Rgdboer (talk) 21:28, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Isometries of E(4)?
I'm curious where this section is sourced, Euclidean_group and whether it can be extended for Isometries of E(4)? Tom Ruen (talk) 16:47, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

We didn't define euclidean group.
It is fundamentally impossible to read about a math subject without defining precisely, formally what it means, it one of the most important piece of any math article, along with motivation, applications, theorems, properties... It amazes me there is not a place where it says "definition" in this article... this needs to be promptly fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Santropedro (talk • contribs) 01:46, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

 * Yes. By you. And please sign your comments. YohanN7 (talk) 10:27, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Is the name correct?
Is "Euclidean transformation" a good name for this article? The concepts of Euclidean geometry are invariant with respect to arbitrary similarities (transformations of Euclidean space that preserve angles). For example, in plane Euclidean geometry one can define an equilateral triangle, and say that one triangle is twice as big as another one, and tilted 10 degrees with respect to it. But one cannot define "a triangle with side 2" or "a triangle with a horizontal base" or "an obtuse angle that turns to the left". Once one has a proper reference figure (like an ordered list of three non-collinear points), one can define all those concepts relative to it. However, still many theorems of Euclidean geometry do not depend on such a frame: they talk about about congruent or similar figures, and may or may not involve handedness. That is, in Euclidean geometry one deals with two basic groups of transformations: isometries (transformations of the space that preserve distances) and similarities (that preserve only angles). Each of the two groups has a subgroup that preserves chirality. The rigid body motions are only the isometries that preserve chirality, which seems unquestionable. However, the rigid body tras]nsformations" are defined in the current version of this article as being the same as general Euclidean isometries. This is at the very least confusing, and posibly incorrect (since some authors may justifiably define "rigid transformation" as the same as "rigid motion"). It seems safer to have separate articles on each of those concepts, with unambiguous names (so that other articles can link directly to the proper one), and maybe have Euclidean transformation be a small article that points out those four options, with links to the above articles. All the best,--Jorge Stolfi (talk) 01:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Your question is "Is "Euclidean transformation" a good name for this article?". There is a problem, as Wikipedia does not has any article with this name. is a redirect to Rigid transformation, to which Euclidean isometry redirects also. I understand from your general considerations that you find "Euclidean transformation" ambiguous and "Rigid transformation" confusing. I would agree  transforming  into a disambiguation page and to move Rigid transformation to Euclidean isometry. But both must be discussed in the right place, which is Talk:Rigid transformation, not here. D.Lazard (talk) 08:55, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

shouldn't this article spend significantly more focus on screw motions?
It seems weird that screw motions (i.e. general orientation-preserving rigid motions in 3-space) are only really mentioned in the one sentence "Chasles' theorem asserts that any element of E+(3) is a screw displacement." It seems to me like the description and representation of screw motions (including an explanation of Chasles's theorem, etc.) should be something like half of this article. No? (And likewise for rigid transformation, which is currently more or less a stub.) –jacobolus (t) 06:14, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Euclidean group


title: Category:700


title: Category:800


text:
Spittoon

A spittoon (or spitoon) is a receptacle made for spitting into, especially by users of chewing and dipping tobacco. It is also known as a cuspidor (which is the Portuguese word for "spitter" or "spittoon", from the verb "cuspir" meaning "to spit"), although that term is also used for a type of spitting sink used in dentistry.

United States in the 19th century

In the late 19th century, spittoons became a common feature of pubs, brothels, saloons, hotels, stores, banks, railway carriages, and other places where people (especially adult men) gathered, notably in the United States, but allegedly also in Australia.

Brass was the most common material for spittoons. Other materials used for mass production of spittoons ranged from basic functional iron to elaborately crafted cut glass and fine porcelain. At higher class places like expensive hotels, spittoons could be elaborately decorated.

Spittoons are flat-bottomed, often weighted to minimize tipping over, and often with an interior "lip" to make spilling less likely if they tip. Some have lids, but this is rare. Some have holes, sometimes with a plug, to aid in draining and cleaning.

Use of spittoons was considered an advance of public manners and health, intended to replace previously common spitting on floors, streets, and sidewalks. Many places passed laws against spitting in public other than into a spittoon.

Boy Scout troops organized campaigns to paint "Do not Spit on the Sidewalk" notices on city sidewalks. In 1909 in Cincinnati, Ohio, scout troops together with members of the Anti-Tuberculosis League painted thousands of such messages in a single night. A mass-produced sign seen in saloons read:

"If you expect to rate as a gentleman Do not expectorate on the floor"

Spittoons were also useful for people suffering from tuberculosis who would cough up phlegm. Public spittoons would sometimes contain a solution of an antiseptic such as carbolic acid with the aim of limiting transmission of disease. With the start of the 20th century medical doctors urged tuberculosis sufferers to use personal pocket spittoons instead of public ones; these were jars with tight lids which people could carry with them to spit into. Similar devices are still used by some with tuberculosis.

After the 1918 flu epidemic, both hygiene and etiquette advocates began to disparage public use of the spittoon, and use began to decline. Chewing gum replaced tobacco as the favorite chew of the younger generation. Cigarettes were considered more hygienic than spit-inducing chewing tobacco. While it was still not unusual to see spittoons in some public places in parts of the US as late as the 1930s, vast numbers of old brass spittoons met their ends in the scrap drives of World War II.

A large public collection of spittoons can be found at Duke Homestead State Historic Site Durham, North Carolina. In 2008, the site's tobacco museum added 282 spittoons—claimed to be the world's largest collection—to its holdings of over 100.

In Chinese society
Spittoons have been used in China for a long time; the earliest porcelain spittoon was found in a tomb dating to Emperor Xianzong's reign during the Tang dynasty. During the Qing dynasty and later in Japan, a golden spittoon would be among the numerous objects displayed in front of the emperor at major ceremonies.

After China became a Communist state in 1949, the spittoon became much more prevalent: spittoons were placed at every conceivable public place, and were commonplace in homes as well. The mass introduction of spittoons was no doubt a public hygiene initiative, motivated by a desire to curtail the still common Chinese practice of spitting onto the floor. The spittoons used in China were typically made of white porcelain, sometimes with traditional Chinese art painted onto the exterior.

Spittoons were used even during official functions by the political leaders of China; especially when Deng Xiaoping had a frequent use of spittoon with other political leaders. This eventually became a source of ridicule by the mass media outside China. As a response, the spittoons have largely been withdrawn from public spaces in China since the late 1980s.

In May 2015, the Spittoon Collective came into being, probably the largest English-language literary collectives in China. They publish the Spittoon literary magazine.

Latter-day models

While spittoons are still made, they are no longer commonly found in public places (except as decorations). There are a few companies that currently make spittoons for users of smokeless tobacco, such as MudJug, Spitbud, and Mud Bud by DC Crafts Nation. Professions in which spittoons are commonly used are coffee, tea and wine tasting. A taster will sip samples and then spit them into a spittoon in order to avoid intoxication. Makeshift spittoons, such as large mixing bowls, can be used by people with a cold who are frequently coughing up phlegm.

Spittoons remained in use in the Southern United States in public buildings at least until the 1970s. For example, the Georgia Capitol Museum in the Georgia Capitol Building in Atlanta, Georgia, has on display a spittoon of the type that was used in legislative sessions into the 1970s.

The United States Senate also has spittoons spread across the Senate Chamber as they are considered a Senate tradition. Similarly, each Justice on the United States Supreme Court has a spittoon next to his or her seat in the courtroom. However, the spittoons function merely as wastebaskets; the last time the spittoon was used for its customary purpose was in the early 20th century.

title: Spittoon


title: Category:900