JOURNAL OF THE IRISH LABOUR HISTORY SOCIETY

THE DECLINE AND FALL OF DONNYBROOK FAIR 15have operated chasteningly, therefore beneficially upon the temper of the people'. He concluded hisassessment of the "moral revolution by admitting that' doubtless other ameliorating agencies may havebeen at work', without however specifying them.Quite clearly one of these unspecified forces or influences acting as a major agency in the moralreform that chastened the common people and abolished popular resorts and recreations like DonnybrookFair was that of religion. It was, after all, the Sabbatarians' sense of decency affronted andSundays desecrated that led Lord MayorRichard Smythin the 1820s and Lord Mayor WiIliam Hodgesin the 1830s to take the first practical steps to ~hallenge the traditions of Donnybrook Fair. Likewiseit was the resurgent Roman Catholic Churctijn thy persons of the ,Rev. P.J. Nowlan, Dr. John SprattandCardinal Paul Cullen who orgariised the final moral assault on the pleasures of Donnybrook Fair. Sprattwas a splendid example of the zeal for moral reform. He spent his life in Dublin working for the reliefof its poor, the protection of.animals and in the attack on drink. He was involved in the cause oftemperance even before his friend Fr. Mathew became a celebrity.59 Donnybrook Fair fell victim toa religious reformation and a temperance crusade just as much asit did to police desire for social controlof the populace. Donnybrook Fair was not the only victim of clerical zeal for the moral improvementof the masses. Beyond the northern boundaries of the city the village of Finglas had for long held"a MayFair on its green, and its May Queen was chosen in a ceremony 'celebrated with great pomp', but inthe early 1840s the new curate of Finglas parish, Fr. Young, put an end to the ancient popular festivitiesand saw to the cutting down of the May pole on the village green. 60The crusade for the moral reform of Donnybrook was not exclusively the product of a resurgentRoman Catholicism: rather it was an assault based on an alliance of the most zealous eiements inevangelical Protestantism working with the forces of militant Catholicism. This was ironic in a citywhich still exhibited an extreme, if normally covert, sectarianisrri. C~ltholics and Protestants, howeverprofessional, educated or respectable, entertained deep mutual hostility.61 Nevertheless, these deeplyheld mutual suspicions and animosities were quietly put aside between 1835 and 1866 in the religiousalliance to save the common people from the sinful pleasures of Donnybrook Fair.The ~lliance did not endure and in 1865 had a very remarkable denouement indeed. The newCatholic Church of the Sacred Heart had cost more than its originators had intended. In order to lessenthe outstanding debts the fund-raising committee decided to organise a lottery or raffle. The prize fundwas impressive, listing 450 separate items. First prize was a six-roomed cottage on DaIkey Hill, rentfree for ever. The draw was to take place at the Rotunda in Dublin on 16 October, 1865. Some ofDublin's Protestants took exception to this lottery and contacted Charles Bird, secretary of theProtestant Alliance in London. In turn he wrote to Thomas Mostyn, Crown Solicitor in Dublin Castle,on 8 September, 1865. He enclosed a sixpenny lottery ticket for this Catholic undertaking and hoped'measures will be taken to stop the drawing which is illegal'. He pointed out that Mostyn had stoppeda similar 'illegal and demoralising practice' in Ireland in 1860. 62 Mostyn wasted no time in sendingBird's letter and the lottery ticket to the Undersecretary, and begged to know 'if it is the desire of thegovernment that I take any steps'. Promptly caine the reply: 'no steps to be taken' .63First the police, and now the Catholic Church had been in breach of the law in association withattempts to extirpate the moral plague of Donnybrook. Although the Church could have found itselfin conflict with the secular authorities it is indicati ve of the growing power of the Church and significantof the government's sensitivity to this that the authorities acquieSCed in the Church's breach of the law.This, one must add, was no flash in the pan. There are other examples in the'1850s and 1860s of theCatholic Church in breach of law or customary rights in trying to prevent the holding of markets andfairs on Church holy days and where, despite protests, the state turned a blind eye. 64 Such examplesdemonstrate the growing moral power of the Catholic Church and make clear its moral contribution tothe qecline and fall of Donnybrook Fair and of other popular amusements of which it disapproved. Yet,that Church cannot be isolated from the society of which it was a part. Earlier in the century JonahBarrington spoke of,