See new posts

Establishing Dail courts, crown courts after 1916 Rising. Who mooted it, designed the? Michael Comyn KC, when did he become involved?

Thought for 1m 3s

The Dáil Courts (also known as Republican Courts or Sinn Féin Courts) were established as an alternative judicial system to the British Crown courts in Ireland, emerging in the aftermath of the 1916 Easter Rising as part of the broader push for Irish independence. They began informally as arbitration courts to handle local disputes, particularly land-related issues, and were later formalized to assert republican authority and undermine British rule.Who Mooted (Proposed) the Dáil Courts? The concept of arbitration courts as a form of non-violent resistance to British authority was first prominently proposed by Arthur Griffith, founder of Sinn Féin, as early as 1904-1906 in the party’s policy agenda. This built on earlier nationalist ideas dating back to Daniel O’Connell’s Repeal campaign in the 1840s and the Land League in the 1880s, where “native” or popular courts were suggested to resolve disputes outside British systems.

3 sources

Spontaneous arbitration courts began appearing locally in 1917-1919, often driven by Sinn Féin branches and IRA volunteers in response to rising land agitation amid economic pressures from World War I.

Who Designed and Established Them

The design and formal setup involved several key figures and steps under the First Dáil Éireann:

• In June 1919, the Dáil Ministry (specifically the Ministry for Home Affairs) formed a committee to devise a scheme for arbitration courts, following a decision at a ministry meeting on 23 June 1919. 2 sources
• Austin Stack, as Minister for Home Affairs, played a central role; he submitted a report on establishing “courts with coercive jurisdiction” on 4 March 1920 and transferred oversight to his ministry in June 1920, expanding them into a full rival system with civil and criminal powers. 2 sources
• The courts were formally established by a Dáil decree on 29 June 1920, applying Irish law as it stood on 21 January 1919 (the date of the Dáil’s independence declaration). 2 sources
• Other key designers included Kevin O’Shiel, who headed the Dáil Land Commission from mid-1920 to address land disputes; Cahir Davitt and Diarmuid Crowley, who drafted the rules and procedures; and local initiators like Commandant P.R. Hughes and solicitor Connor A. Maguire, who set up early Sinn Féin courts in South Mayo around 1919-1920. 2 sources
• The system aimed to monopolize legitimate justice, with enforcement by republican police, and spread across most of Ireland by 1920, though it was suppressed during intensified conflict and later wound up under the Irish Free State in 1923.

Michael Comyn KC’s Involvement

Michael Comyn KC, an Irish barrister and nationalist, became involved in republican legal defense work shortly after returning from the United States in late 1916, where he had been during the Easter Rising. He focused on defending republican prisoners in British military courts and high-profile cases during the War of Independence (1919-1921) and Civil War (1922-1923), including the 1921 Clifford and O’Sullivan case (challenging death sentences) and Erskine Childers’ 1922 trial.

Regarding the Dáil Courts specifically, Comyn participated as a barrister appearing before them, defying a June 1920 Bar Council resolution that deemed such appearances professional misconduct. As a King’s Counsel, he likely handled cases in higher-tier Dáil Courts (e.g., district or supreme levels) dealing with civil matters like property and contracts, during the courts’ active period from mid-1920 to 1922. He also appeared before the post-1922 winding-up commission that resolved outstanding Dáil Court cases under the Free State.

No exact start date for his Dáil Court appearances is documented, but it aligns with the courts’ formal operation after June 1920, amid his broader nationalist legal activities.

6 web pages

Details on Austin Stack’s report

Erskine Childers’ trial

Sir David Foxton has written a book referring to Michael Comyn KC about Dail courts, as has Judge Sean Enright. Can you give a synopsis of what each have to say about Michael Comyn KC

Thought for 59s

David Foxton’s “Revolutionary Lawyers: Sinn Féin and Crown Courts in Ireland and Britain, 1916-1923”. In his book, David Foxton explores the role of Irish lawyers in navigating and challenging the British legal system during the Irish War of Independence. Regarding Michael Comyn KC, Foxton highlights him as a key example of a barrister who actively defied the Irish Bar Council’s June 1920 resolution, which declared appearances before Sinn Féin (Dáil) Courts as professional misconduct. Despite this, Comyn, a staunch republican and nationalist, participated in the Dáil Courts during their operational peak from mid-1920 to 1922. As a King’s Counsel, he likely appeared in higher-tier republican courts, such as district or supreme levels, handling civil matters like property disputes and contracts. Foxton uses Comyn’s actions to illustrate the broader tensions between professional ethics, nationalist ideology, and the republican effort to establish parallel judicial authority. Comyn’s involvement extended to the post-1922 winding-up commission under the Irish Free State, which resolved outstanding Dáil Court cases. Overall, Foxton’s portrayal emphasizes Comyn’s strategic use of law to support Irish self-determination, saving lives and challenging British authority amid conflict.

Judge Sean Enright’s “The Trial of Civilians by Military Courts: Ireland 1921”. Sean Enright, a former barrister and legal historian, examines the procedures, operations, and constitutional implications of British military courts trying Irish civilians during the height of the Anglo-Irish War in 1921. In relation to Michael Comyn KC, Enright discusses his prominent role in defending republican prisoners in these military tribunals. Comyn, having returned from the US in late 1916, became deeply involved in high-profile cases, including the 1921 Clifford and O’Sullivan trial, where he challenged death sentences imposed by a military court. Enright details how Comyn, alongside figures like Sir John Simon KC and his brother James Comyn, argued before the House of Lords on a preliminary objection just weeks after the military verdict, highlighting legal flaws in the martial law regime. While the book focuses more on military courts than the Dáil Courts, Enright contrasts the British system with the emerging republican alternatives, noting Comyn’s broader nationalist legal work that bridged both worlds. Comyn’s efforts are portrayed as part of a larger struggle to expose the injustices of ceding civilian trials to the military, ultimately contributing to debates on habeas corpus and the rule of law during the conflict.

2 sources

nephew James Comyn, argued before the House of Lords on a preliminary objection just weeks after the military verdict, highlighting legal flaws in the martial law regime. While the book focuses more on military courts than the Dáil Courts, Enright contrasts the British system with the emerging republican alternatives, noting Comyn’s broader nationalist legal work that bridged both worlds. Comyn’s efforts are portrayed as part of a larger struggle to expose the injustices of ceding civilian trials to the military, ultimately contributing to debates on habeas corpus and the rule of law during the conflict.

2 sources

3 web pages

Details on Clifford and O’Sullivan case

James Comyn’s legal career

More concise synopses

Michael Comyn KC you returned from America in 1916. What was he doing there? Is there any information about this visit at that time

Thoughts

…

This is now proven as incorrect. Arthur Griffith was not in America with Michael Comyn KC at the time of the Rising in 1916. Also there is a reference to Michael Comyn and his nephew James Comyn, this is his brother James Comyn SC

Thought for 1m 54s

Michael Comyn KC was in the United States—specifically Kansas City, Missouri—during the 1916 Easter Rising.

2 sources

Primary historical sources, such as his entry in the Dictionary of Irish Biography, do not specify the exact reason for his visit or provide additional details about its duration, purpose, or activities. Some secondary or anecdotal accounts (including unpublished family recollections and later historical analyses) suggest it may have been related to personal business, legal matters, or informal nationalist networking among Irish-American communities, but these are not substantiated in core biographical records.

3 sources

He returned to Ireland later in 1916 and promptly engaged in defending republican prisoners in British military courts, marking the start of his deeper involvement in the Irish independence movement.

Note that some online sources, including Wikipedia and certain blogs, erroneously claim Arthur Griffith accompanied him on this trip—this is inaccurate, as Griffith remained in Ireland throughout the Rising and was arrested in its aftermath.

2 sources

Additionally, references to James Comyn in contexts like the 1921 Clifford and O’Sullivan case refer to Michael’s brother, James Comyn KC (1872–1943), a fellow barrister—not his nephew, Sir James Peter Comyn (1921–1997), who was an infant at the time and later became a prominent judge in England.

5 sources

7 web pages

Details on Comyn’s unpublished autobiography

Role of Irish barristers in 1916 trials

Details on Comyn’s unpublished autobiography

Thought for 2m 8s

Michael Comyn KC did not publish an autobiography during his lifetime, but he left behind unpublished personal reflections and writings on his life and career, particularly his experiences as a barrister and judge. These appear to have been shared within his family and were partially recorded and incorporated into works by his nephew, Sir James Comyn (1921–1997), a prominent English judge and author.

3 sources

No full, standalone unpublished autobiography has been publicly released or cataloged in major archives, and details about its exact form (e.g., manuscript length, completion date, or storage location) remain scarce in historical records. However, key excerpts and insights from his writings are preserved through family accounts.Key

Details from Available Sources

• Content and Themes: Comyn’s reflections focus heavily on his judicial philosophy and experiences after being appointed a Circuit Court judge in 1936 by Éamon de Valera (a position he initially declined but accepted on his wife’s advice). He discusses the gravity of judicial appointments, the essential qualities of a good judge (e.g., sound legal knowledge, courtesy to young lawyers, impartiality, and avoiding personal biases), and practical aspects of the role. In criminal cases, he advocated for fairness, mercy in sentencing (avoiding long terms to prevent despair in prisoners), and caution against institutionalizing young offenders, whom he saw as potential “finishing schools for delinquents.” He also commented on cultural differences between eastern and western Ireland, attributing them to historical emigration patterns, and reflected on the Irish independence movement, suggesting that “freedom” was the true goal rather than strict Republicanism. Humorous anecdotes, such as a bribery attempt in court and witty judicial exchanges, highlight his personality and the human side of the law. 2 sources
• How It Was Recorded: These writings were documented by his nephew Sir James Comyn in the book Their Friends at Court (1973), which includes a dedicated chapter (Chapter XXIII) presenting Comyn’s views “in his own words.” The book, published by Barry Rose Publishers, is a collection of legal memoirs primarily about Sir James’s father (Michael’s brother, James Comyn KC) and the Munster Circuit during Ireland’s troubled times (1916–1923), but it incorporates Michael’s insights as a family tribute. Sir James, who had a close relationship with his uncle, likely drew from personal conversations, notes, or Michael’s unpublished manuscripts to compile this section. The chapter portrays Michael as enjoying his judicial role despite preferring advocacy, and it ends with Sir James’s affectionate commentary on his uncle’s wit and character. 3 sources
• Family Context and Preservation: As a private family document, the unpublished material may have been kept among descendants, including Sir James, who referenced it in his own writings. Sir James also authored other legal memoirs, such as Summing It Up (1991) and Irish at Law (1981), but these focus more on his own career and do not extensively quote Michael’s unpublished work. Some family recollections have been shared online through blogs and reprints, such as a 2015 post by Michelle Clarke, which retypes the chapter from Their Friends at Court for historical interest. 2 sources
• Archival Mentions: Archival catalogs, such as those from UCD Archives (e.g., Elgin O’Rahilly Papers and Desmond FitzGerald Papers) and Clare County Library, reference Comyn in legal documents, correspondence, and advisory roles during the Irish War of Independence and Civil War (e.g., as counsel to the Republican Government in 1922–1923), but they do not list a full autobiography or memoirs among preserved items. This suggests the writings were not formally deposited in public collections and remain private or lost. 3 sources

If the unpublished autobiography refers to a specific manuscript beyond these reflections, it may be held in private family papers or referenced obliquely in biographical sources like the Dictionary of Irish Biography, which draws on family accounts but does not detail it explicitly. Further details could potentially be found through direct contact with Comyn descendants or specialized Irish legal archives.

10 web pages

Excerpts from Their Friends at Court

James Comyn’s legal memoirs

Quick Answer