Dr. Gabriela McEvoy was born in Peru. She received her B.A., M.A. and PhD from UC, San Diego and specialised in Latin American Literature. She is an Assistant Professor of Spanish at Lebanon Valley College in Pennsylvania in the United States. She teaches all levels of Spanish Language and Literature and has published articles and presented papers at conferences dealing with immigration into Latin America.

Introduction

The fragmented history of Irish emigration to Peru makes it difficult to follow its evolution chronologically. However, when tracing the Irish presence in Peru it can be shown that, although Irish immigration was not numerically large in comparison to that of other communities, it is possible to personalize Irish immigration by focusing on individuals who were important in the history of Peru.

Irishman Ambrose O’Higgins (c. 1721-1801) became Viceroy of Peru in 1795. His son, Bernardo O’Higgins Riquelme, was a major player for Chilean independence. It is worth pointing out that the Irish were represented both in the Colonial period and at the beginning of the Republican era. Another important figure was Henry Hilton Leigh, a native of County Wexford, who, together with his brother John, immigrated to Chile in 1853, and subsequently to Paita, Peru, in 1855. Initially he worked for an English firm, later opening his own business, H. H. Leigh and Company. Leigh became both the first person to export cotton from Piura to Europe as well as the first to establish a cotton press in the region. A model of the successful Irish immigrant was William Grace, who may be seen as one of those who brought about the inclusion of Peru into world capitalism. [1]

While there exist personal stories of successful Irish immigrants, such as those mentioned above, Irish immigration never meant ‘making one’s fortune in America’. On the contrary, it was mainly a search for survival. Six million Europeans left their homes in nineteenth century Europe; one million of these were Irish. There was a big surge in Irish emigration in the mid to late1840s, as many fled the potato famine mainly to the USA, Canada and Australia.  Some Irish emigrants settled in Latin America in what was a more organised form of emigration. The numbers started to increase from the1820s onwards. Argentina received the greatest number of immigrants, followed by Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. Fewer immigrants went to Peru. The numbers were lower as a result of Peru's limited incentives for immigration—in contrast with Argentina’s policy, based as it was on Domingo F. Sarmiento’s philosophy.[2] There was also political instability (the Pacific War/Guerra del Pacífico, for example, between 1879 and 1884) as well as a lack of a coherent national immigration policy [3].

The present article maintains that Irish immigration to Peru around the middle of the nineteenth century illustrates the effects that the expansion of world capitalism could have on the individual Irish emigrant. The entry of Irish immigrants into different socio-economic strata in Peru is examined within the context of the modernization process that began around the mid-nineteenth century. It might be suggested that Irish immigration to Peru is not a homogenizing process, but rather the opposite. Differences within the originating country were reproduced in Peru, thus creating both the entrepreneurial immigrant who helped consolidate the Peruvian bourgeoisie, and the migrant labourer immigrant who came to form part of the Peruvian working class. Following the line of thought of Etienne Balibar (1991), it could be said that the social basis of capitalism was responsible for a division of labour even among Irish immigrants. Further, social polarization brought about the formation of opposing classes whose ‘common’ interests diminished notably.

 Historical Context

The historical period in question coincides with the reshaping of the world economy by the Industrial Revolution and capitalist expansion. Within the Peruvian context, the abolition of slavery decreed by Marshal Ramón Castilla in the middle of the nineteenth century was seen as a threat, given Perú’s lack of an agricultural labour force. As a result, many landowners saw the recruitment of immigrants as offering a cheap alternative supply of workers. The first influx of Asian immigrants in 1849 is a good example of this immigrant labour force. These immigrants worked under semi-slavery conditions in both the sugar plantations and on the guano islands off the Chincha and Ica coasts.

While the process of industrialisation was commencing in Europe (mainly in England), Latin America became an important supplier of natural resources (for example guano, rubber, sugar and cotton) and it was mainly foreign traders who began to take control of Peru’s economic activities. By the early decades of the twentieth century, as David Hollett mentions in his book, More Precious than Gold (2008), Great Britain was the owner of the central railway created by Henry Meiggs. Moreover, the Italian Bank in Lima managed fifty per cent of all financial activities, and Italians were in total control of the postal service. In addition, Casa Grande, one of Peru’s most important sugar companies, was in the hands of the German family Gildemeister. W.R. Grace and H.H Leigh were active participants in this commerce. Therefore, it can be said that some European immigrants were beginning to take control of Peru’s different economic sectors.[4] While the Italians, Germans and Britons were in Peru for economic purposes during the nineteenth century, many of the Irish immigrants were fleeing adverse circumstances.[5]

In pre-famine years the Irish peasantry lived in abject poverty. This situation grew worse with the failure of the potato crop and consequent famine (1845-1855). The causes of the famine and what might have been done to prevent it have been widely discussed. Areas of debate include the gross indifference of the English government, opportunities offered by science to combat the phytophthora fungus, and the English government’s insistence on controlling grain exports that might have relieved the hunger of the peasantry. While most Irish emigrated to the U.S., Canada, Argentina and Australia, Peru was also a destination, although on a smaller scale. Sporadic projects offered incentives for Irish emigration to that country.

The lack of studies concerning Irish immigration to Peru makes it difficult to carry out a detailed statistical analysis of the Irish population in that country. However, using the list of deaths of Irish people obtained by the Asociación del Cementerio Británico del Callao (this lists three hundred and three burials), it has been possible to put together statistics which provide a better picture of the Irish immigrant. In this framework the tables below offer details of principal causes of death, age at decease, together with the most representative Irish surnames. 

Table No. 1 – Most significant causes of death among Irish immigrants.

Source: Association of the British Cemetery of Callao, 2009.

*The year 1868 reported deaths from an epidemic of yellow fever.

Table No. 2 – Age at Death

Source: Association of the British Cemetery of Callao, 2009.

Table No. 3 – Representative sample of Irish surnames

Source: Association of the British Cemetery of Callao, 2009.

It is important to point out that of the three hundred and three deaths, seventy per cent were male and thirty per cent were female. These figures could suggest a greater wave of male immigrants. However, the presence of Irish women made endogamous marriages possible and served to preserve an Irish community. For example, Tomas J. McEvoy, a native of County Kilkenny married Marta Feeley of Arlas, Queen’s County (Lima, September 1855). Enrique Feeley, a native of Queen’s County (now County Laois) married Ana Derby, also from Queen’s County (Lima, January 1859) and Santiago (James) Grahan, from Killaban, Queen’s County, married Ana Feeley born in Arlas, Queen’s County (Lima October 1859). In fact, just as we have seen from these marriage certificates, many Irish immigrants met in their native land as well as during the journey to Peru. For example, one of the witnesses to the marriage of Santiago Grahan and Ana Feeley stated that he met the couple ‘in their own country, and because of the friendship he had with both of them they also made the journey [to Peru] together’. In this light, one may suggest that endogamous marriages served not only to continue cultural traditions on the private and personal level, but also to facilitate the process of adaption and integration into a completely unfamiliar society.[6]  

Although the Irish presence in Peru is far from being a mass immigration, this investigation can postulate three important Irish immigration attempts into this Latin American country..[7] Firstly, in 1851, James Grace (a small Irish landowner) recruited unskilled Irish labour to work for the Scottish (or possibly Irish) sailor and doctor John Gallagher. The latter had settled in Peru around 1840. Three hundred and twenty Irish, hired by Gallagher according to Eduardo Salazar, arrived to work his estates at La Legua, Villegas and Valverde de Callao. Although it is believed that this project did not work out, there are indications that some Irish immigrants did indeed work on Gallagher’s estate. For example, Santiago Bordan, witness to the marriage of Santiago Gahan and Ana Feeley in 1858, identified himself as an Irish farmer who was a resident of the Villegas holding. However, the community of Irish workers began to disperse. Some established themselves in Peru, many died of dysentery, and others travelled on to Australia.[8] James Grace returned to Ireland but his son, William Russell Grace, settled in Peru for a while. He grew apart from the community of Irish immigrants and associated himself with John Bryce, a Scotsman. Grace subsequently opened one of the most important and dynamic commercial companies in Peru, amassing a large fortune. Years later, he travelled to the United States and established himself there, becoming an important Pan-American businessman. W.R. Grace even came to occupy political positions in the United States, such as Mayor of New York in 1881 for example.[9] It could be suggested that his privileged position (education and work experience in England and the United States) as much as his marriage to Lillius Gilchrist, the daughter of the North American businessman George Gilchrist, facilitated not only the consolidation of his fortune but also granted him access to North American political circles.[10]

The second attempt to attract Irish immigrants was in 1859. The official daily newspaper El Peruano, dated 27 August 1859, mentions the following: ‘Colonists. The proposal by Dr. Eduardo Cullen for the introduction of 25,000 Irish immigrants has been approved’ (El Peruano 1859: 19, 69). This project failed as the English government would not permit Irish immigrants to leave (at the time they were English subjects). Though the motives behind the opposition of the English government are not mentioned, it could be suggested that the lack of an organized immigration policy provides, among others, a reason why the project presented by Cullen did not proceed. Various concessions had already been made to bring in immigrants besides the Irish colonists. For example, writing about German immigration, Alfredo Sacchetti argues that ‘in 1851 more than a thousand German colonists had arrived in Peru who, like the Irish, were soon reduced to the most horrible poverty’. Sacchetti also adds that ‘this endeavour, although fundamentally based on land ownership, faced difficulty from the outset. The Peruvian government had to provide relief to the colony for three years of one hundred pesos per month, until 1860, when with the increased harvest of rice, sugar, coffee and cereals, Congress was able to cut this subsidy’.

A third attempt to attract Irish immigrants came about in 1919. According to Eduardo Salazar, the government of Augusto B. Leguía (first term in office 1908-1912, second term 1919-1930) brought in one hundred Irish colonists, but these ended up returning home when they failed to find work. Faced with the lack of an organized Peruvian labour plan, the Irish immigrant was a victim of his native country as much as of the socio-economic system of the host country. Therefore, the Irish immigrant who settled in Peru (without any apparent hope or desire to return) became a type of migrant worker. Following the words of Giovanni Bonfiglio Volpe, we can summarize that ‘the lack of state support (shortage of roads and land in coastal areas) and, on the other hand, the non-acceptance by European workers of the near servile working conditions that dominated the coastal estates’ (Bonfiglio 1987: 34) were some of the reasons that inhibited any major Irish presence in Peru.

 Reconstructing the Irish Experience Through Family Stories

This research has led to a reconstruction of the Irish immigrants’ memories through family histories. In studying the personal archives of the Peruvian Admiral Frank Boyle Alvarado and examining private correspondence of immigrants and the children of Irish immigrants (the first generation born in Peru), the following ideas arise. Firstly, it should be pointed out that this is assisted immigration; that is to say, the outbound voyage was subsidized and there were promises of employment opportunities. However, once Irish immigrants arrived in Peru, they often had to find work on their own, basically becoming part of the working class. According to documents obtained through Boyle Alvarado, for example, the Irish immigrant Tomás J. McEvoy (born in Kilkenny, Ireland, 1832, died of influenza in Callao, Peru 1892) arrived in Peru in 1853 and worked as a mechanic and carpenter on the railroads in the cities of Callao (Lima), Tarma (Junín), Lambayeque y La Libertad.[11] Additionally, the immigrant William Boyle O’Lavel (born in Armagh, Ireland in 1857, died in Callao 1912) arrived already possessing experience in railroad construction, having worked as a mechanical engineer and a train driver. According to Boyle’s employment record, he worked for one year (1906-1907) as a locomotive engineer in Cerro de Pasco Railway Co. in the Sierra Central in Peru.

At the same time, it should be noted that the movement of the immigrant workforce developed both internally in Peru and throughout the region. For example, Carlos Víctor (Charles) McEvoy Feeley (born in Lambayeque, Perú in 1873, product of an endogenic marriage and first generation Irish born in Peru) followed the movement patterns of the migrant workforce. His involvement in the construction of the Panama Canal, opened in 1914, is substantiated by the following postcard which was sent to his wife in Lima on 11 August 1911. Referring to the image on the postcard, McEvoy writes,‘this dredging boat is from when the French were here; it is being used in Gatun, Panama and as you can see, it’s very pretty. Kisses. C. McEvoy’.

The incorporation of first-generation Irish into the workforce provides an example of the transfer of pre-existing skills developed in their homeland. On the other hand, it shows the limited social mobility between the two generations of Irish immigrants. For this reason, it may be suggested that Irish immigration shows horizontal social progression rather than vertical, particularly in the first generations. That is to say, leaving home did not enable the immigrants to improve their economic circumstances, by obtaining land and becoming wealthy, in the most optimistic scenario, since there is evidence of a certain social determination at work between the generations. Nevertheless, it can be pointed out that there was a group of immigrants (characterised by William R. Grace or Henry Hilton Leigh), who lived at the top rank of the economy, that of capital penetration and the accumulation of wealth. For other marginal groups, integration into Peruvian society meant joining the Third World. Thus, the Irish case highlights the duality of the capitalist system: enrichment of a select few and cheap labour provided by the many.

Reconstructing the personal memory of Irish immigrants serves to mark the socio-economic situation in Peru. Indeed, during the period after the war between Peru and Chile (1879-1884) the economic crisis in Peru worsened due to increased levels of government debt, the loss of territory and of vital natural resources (sodium nitrate or saltpetre). The suspension of construction consequently gave rise to increased unemployment in Peru, particularly within the working class. Hence Irish immigrants took advantage of connections based on shared ethnic backgrounds in order to find work in Latin America. For example, John Francis Donohue O’Kelly[12] (a smelter by trade) sent a letter to John Lee looking for work in Chile. Lee replied:  

Iquique, 6th August, 1894

Mr. John Donohue

Dear friend

I received your welcome letter on the 5th August by which you wanted to

know how the foundry business was here as you wanted a job.

I am very sorry I can’t do anything for you at present as the Morro Foundry

is closed down since the end of July.

As for the Railway shop at the Puntilla they are not doing much for times are very

bad in this Province at the present time.

If you come down to Iquique you are quite welcome to my house Calle Bulnes

No. 3 esquina Anibal Pinto.

Yours truly

John Lee

Italian and Spanish immigrants assisted one another through their support organisations. These bodies aided the integration of immigrants into society by helping them to find work and by providing them with financial and medical support.  It would appear that there were no such mutual aid organisations for Irish immigrants. Yet ethnic solidarity among Irish immigrants did exist, and aided them in finding the means to survive within Latin American society. In spite of Lee’s disappointing news, Donohue O’Kelly emigrated to Pisagua, Chile with his family at the end of 1896. A newspaper notice even appeared that served as both a farewell from the family and an announcement of the closure of the primary school which his daughter, Sara Donohue Grotrian, had run:

FAREWELL

Carmen G. de Donohue and family wish to bid their many friends a personal farewell, in the light of their imminent departure, and advise them to forward their orders to Pisagua, where they will be happy to fulfill them.

Callao, 20 November 1896

In compliance with her obligation, the undersigned publicly announces the closure of her primary school, located at calle de Mejico No. 85, due to her departing for Pisagua. She invites orders from parents and others who have honoured her with their friendship and confidence.

Callao 30 November 1896

Sara Donohue

According to oral family tradition, Donohue O’Kelly died in the city of Antofagasta (apparently a suicide) and his wife and children returned to Peru in 1898. They lived for a while in Callao and later moved to the port of Pisco (Ica). The following letter written by Donohue’s widow, Carmen Grotrian (an Ecuadorian of German ancestry) shows the activity of those female immigrants who forced their way into the employment market in the face of extreme survival situations. Further, it demonstrates their fighting spirit when faced with difficult economic circumstances. In the hope of persuading her daughters, Carmen Grotrian describes the advantages of working as a teacher in the town of Pisco (Ica):

Miss Sara Donohue

Lima, 8 March 1899

Dear daughter:

I am writing to you to tell you the news about the school in Pisco. It seems positive to me. I went with Elena and spoke to Mr Elías. He was very kind to us and told us that he would do all he could to help us. The wage is 60 soles with a house and milk. He will provide us with coal. There is a little garden and the town is nice. You would have to teach 80 children. Mr Elías only wants you to teach them to read, write, count and be good Christians. You see, you don’t need to worry. Apart from us being able to eat at mid-day in the school, he told me that we could save half of the wages because things are very cheap and the people are generous. My darling, this could be the gift that God that has been keeping for us, for all the disappointments that you have suffered so patiently. As soon as you receive this, contact me immediately to let me know if you are agreeable. The journey would be after Easter, so there is time to get ready. I really want you to take baths so that you are strong for the journey which lasts a whole day. Hoping that you stay well, your loving mother says goodbye and blesses you.

Carmen G. V de Donohue

Florita sends her thoughts and those of her brothers and sisters. Excuse my handwriting, I cannot see well. It’s only a mother’s love has made me write to you.

The correspondence between mother and daughter shows a mixture of emotions on the part of Carmen G. V. de Donohue, who has to go back to rebuild her life in Peru following the disappearance of her husband. She is the widow who negotiates her daughters’ working conditions with Elías (owner of the Hacienda Hoja Redonda Estate in Chincha, Peru and guano contractor). Work as a teacher is the traditional role designated for working women in the nineteenth century. Additionally, it shows a slight improvement in the socio-economic status of the following generation, which consequently gave rise to their leaving the working classes to which many of the Irish descendents in Peru belonged. Following her death in 1923, María Elena Donohue Grotrian was described as an ‘outstanding and intelligent teacher’. To sum up, while this letter can be read as literary correspondence which breaks the nineteenth century stereotype of the passive female, it also outlines the tradition role of the mother, trying to comfort her daughter during a time of difficulty.

The various types of correspondence analyzed here refer to different historical periods and were also written under dissimilar circumstances; however, the common theme is the constant search for work. The Irish immigrants who appear as railroad workers, construction workers on the Panama Canal or even teachers or tutors on the estate of Peruvian landowners, exemplify the economic instability of Irish immigrants during this period, a time which saw a surge in the export of raw materials by large corporations under foreign management. When the voices of marginalized immigrants are heard, they demonstrate the legacy of Irish immigrants in the construction of modern Latin American society, especially in Peru. The importance of this correspondence lies in the fact that it gives an insight into the ordinary lives of these Irish immigrants and the difficulties they faced upon arriving in a foreign country. Although highlighting the marginality of the immigrants may not resolve other historical and social difficulties, the perspective of the minority demonstrates the ambiguities in the story of Irish immigration.  

Conclusion

This article has allowed the author to map the Irish immigration experience from both the perspective of the working class and that of the entrepreneurial class. As has been shown, immigrants were vulnerable to the false hopes that characterized the ‘century of exile and immigration’. The difficulty in adjusting to Peruvian society, a completely unfamiliar culture, one probably idealized during a time of hunger and hardship has been discussed. Peru was the hope of a small group of Irish immigrants, many of whom were left to their fate following their arrival to their new country. Limited transport facilities and their own economic situation made it impossible for them to look back or return to their homeland. Thus they accepted their fate and the few opportunities that the South American continent could offer them. In many instances they started families. Although they were only a small community of immigrants, they integrated with great ease into Peruvian society.

This study has attempted to demonstrate that the famous saying ‘from rags to riches’, is nothing more than a myth that masks the inequalities that exist in Peruvian society. It was not only the seasonal and migratory work that created the social gap between immigrant groups, it was also their living conditions. Hence Irish immigration was a heterogeneous social phenomenon that reproduced the same social hierarchy that existed in Peru. Irish immigrants were both victims of the socio-economic systems of both countries (homeland and recipient country) as well as heroic actors in constructing their own destinies. To conclude, in spite of the small number of Irish immigrants, they played an important role in Peruvian life, because their integration into the different sections of society helped construct present-day Peru. In the words of Michel Foucault, ‘the search for origin is not fixed; on the contrary, that which seemed fixed, moves, and that which was thought to be unified, divides’ (Foucault 2000:29). Following this line of thought, it is the hope of this study to encourage wider studies that may serve to construct a greater understanding of the Irish influence in Peru.