Abstract: This paper examines the early relationship between a mid- to
late-nineteenth-century Anglo-Irish newspaper, The
Anglo-Brazilian Times (1865-1884), and
the political elite of the Brazilian
is largely unacknowledged that Irish immigration, along with free immigration,
was regarded in
in the 1860s, Brazilian exports (especially coffee) depended almost entirely on
the use of slaves, and most policy-makers feared that the sudden adoption of
legislation banning the practice might disrupt domestic economic life. In fact
the importing of enslaved African labourers had already been prohibited in
1850. Thenceforth, an internal
Emancipationist movement had grown, even though it did not present itself as a
real threat to the slavery system. When
major hostilities between
It was thought that free European immigration, in conjunction with other schemes, might provide a solution for the now permanent labour shortage. Irish immigration, in particular, was hailed by Catholics as one of the best options, but appears to have been identified with a cunning British colonialist manoeuvre and was therefore rejected by the Brazilian ruling elite. This paper is an attempt to understand how the Irish-born journalist William Scully, seemingly the principal advocate of Irish immigration in Brazil at that time, interacted with Brazilian Imperial society and came very close to actually establishing a potentially steady inflow of Irish colonists and free labourers into Brazil, starting in 1865/6.
1865 to 1884 William Scully resided in
goal of complete Abolition in
strategy is evident in an article published on
a course of action seemed to offer good prospects for Irish emigrants, who were
desperately seeking to escape from the economic and demographic pressures
engendered by the years of the Famine, between 1845 and 1849. Plans either to help them settle in colonies
on Brazilian territory or to afford them free access to employment or land
acquisition, however, were not successful, since
emigration to the
The first problem to be tackled in respect to the complete abolition of
Thus, in the early- to mid-1860s, the next move for British foreign
policy, as regarded slavery in
Since the Brazilian domestic slave labour force was tending to dwindle,
due to the absence of fresh supplies from Africa, a potential interest in
supporting journalistic activity designed to disseminate Liberal doctrines
among Brazilian intellectuals and policy makers may have developed in Britain,
sparked by the prospects of boosting, in a business-like fashion, the
substitution of Africans in Brazil by European free labourers. This would be especially true if the workers
were Irish – given the demographic and political problems
Such a niche of capitalist activity would have perfectly suited
authentically mid- to late-nineteenth-century modernising and enterprising
British Liberal (as opposed to Tory) immigration agents, to whom journalism
would have appeared an appropriate tool with which to achieve goals which,
apart from individual satisfaction, might prove strategically important, from
an institutional standpoint.
Conventional journalism would thus be combined with political and
ideological propaganda, in an effort to influence the hammering-out of public
According to estimates presented by Leslie Bethell, 371,615 slaves were
International diplomatic, demographic and ideological pressures for
greater political openness and free immigration, coupled with similar domestic
demands, seem to have been perceived by the Brazilian Conservative ruling
elite, however, as a major threat. This
situation became more alarming in the mid-1860s, when open warfare between
Conservatives, thenceforward, appear to have summoned up their domestic
political strength in defence of Brazilian national sovereignty against foreign
pressures and against
The Brazilian political system was parliamentary and had been conceived
of after the British model. However, there was an important distinction: in
When Parliamentarianism came fully and effectively into practice, in 1847, that special legal provision was employed by Dom Pedro II, the Emperor, to appoint and dismiss Prime Ministers at his own discretion. Brazilians themselves, scornfully referred to the system as “Parliamentarianism in reverse” (‘Parlamentarismo às avessas’): whenever the monarch chose a new Prime Minister, new majorities, accordingly, had to be assembled, which lent to the polling process the appearance of mere theatrics. Thus, election results were conveniently arranged in advance. Retainers and tenants had no choice but to vote in accordance with their patrons’ orientation, thereby securing their land titles or rights.
These arrangements, moreover, had serious administrative effects. In the wake of each Cabinet change, there were innumerable new appointments to positions within the entire Imperial bureaucracy, so as to adjust it to the new political environment. These sweeping administrative reshuffles were known as ‘derrubadas,’ (or ‘downfalls,’ probably evoking something like the collapse of a house of cards), and produced great administrative instability. This enormously enhanced the importance of patronage. Brazilian politicians actually had to spend most of their time writing letters of recommendation on behalf of their friends, relatives and protégés, in an effort to fill administrative positions in harmony with the Emperor’s wishes or strategic goals.
Such practices had the effect of blurring the ideological distinctions between the existing political parties. It was generally held by Brazilians that there was no real difference between Liberals (or ‘luzias’) and Conservatives (or ‘saquaremas’). William Scully himself noted, in an article published on 24 May, 1865, that ‘[...] if the truth be told, [...]’ any differences originated ‘[...] more in the desire for place and patronage than in disapproval of the policy of the Government.’
However, this deceptive indistinctiveness often concealed the fact that there were characteristically Liberal proposals on the table, like Emancipation. With the notable exception of the Catholic Ultramontanes (who will be discussed below), most Conservatives were not at all inclined to accept the idea, whereas those willing to support the Emancipationist cause would normally join the Liberal Party. Other points of contention, like the free navigation of the Amazon River, clearly separated ‘saquaremas’ from ‘luzias,’ the former being fiercely against that measure until it became law, in December 1866.
In addition to the concentration of political power, land policies were tailored to suit the large estate owners’ interests, especially from a Conservative standpoint. However abundant, arable land was not cheap, the best tracts really being affordable only to the very rich. Scarcely any good terrain was left over for the purposes of European colonisation, which, being additionally subject to State control, was thus severely restricted.
Given the above circumstances, the idea of free immigration stood little
chance of being espoused by the Emperor, or of being seriously considered by
most Brazilian statesmen. However, the perception, especially from 1865
onwards, that the domestic slave workforce would inevitably diminish, opened up
prospects for Liberals in Brazil to make alliances with foreign interests and
so advance ideological propaganda advocating the free introduction of white,
Christian, and so-depicted progressive and hard-working agricultural in
Brazil. Foreigners like Scully were
quite optimistic about it, as the following quotation from the edition of The Anglo-Brazilian Times dated
Paradoxically, this also appealed to Ultramontane Catholic
Conservatives. Free European immigration was regarded by this ultra-radical
branch of Catholics as an opportunity for
The Irishman, perhaps justly accused of unthriftiness and insubordination at home, for he is hopeless there and has the tradition of a bitter oppression to make him feel discontented, becomes active, industrious, and energetic when abroad; intelligent he always is. He soon rids himself of his peculiarities and prejudices, and assimilates himself so rapidly with the progressive people around him that his children no longer can be distinguished from the American of centuries of descent. (The Anglo-Brazilian Times, 23 January, 1867.)
Politically, Irish immigration looked like a means of enlarging the
flocks of those truly faithful to the Holy See (and to Pope Pius IX). Catholic
clergymen would thereby stand on firmer ground and be able to lay a stronger
claim for a ban on the Emperor’s religious privileges. The Brazilian Imperial ruler, Dom Pedro II,
was constitutionally empowered as Head of the Brazilian Catholic Church and
had, thus, religious prerogatives, like the right to veto bulls issued by the
Having aligned themselves with the Progressive faction of the Conservative Party, Brazilian Ultramontanes joined forces with the Liberal movement, in opposition to the monarch. In 1866, led by the Ultramontane Senator Zacarias de Góes e Vasconcelos, a Liberal-Progressive parliamentary majority gradually developed, sympathetic towards new immigration policies.
All this seems to account for the fervent optimism with which Scully
began publishing The Anglo-Brazilian
Times. Playing a strategically
convenient role for
On the other hand, Scully’s paper featured critical portraits of the Brazilian Conservative ruling classes, despite his initial commitment to avoid comments on personalities. A number of aspects of this criticism deserve closer analysis. Firstly, the slavery system was persistently deemed ‘irrational,’ and directly identified with those responsible for its survival. In other words, Conservatism was tantamount to irrationality. Secondly, Scully regarded the country’s political life with considerable contempt, even though the all-embracing Brazilian system of patronage actually elicited seemingly ambiguous responses from him. At various times he would either praise it, as if he desperately needed to appease the Brazilian Emperor, or decry it violently, showing how it hindered the country´s institutional and economic development.
If one takes it that he was a Catholic Liberal, possibly aligned with
the political currents that supported William Gladstone at home, it could be
assumed that, although he may have counted on British official sponsorship, he
was left, in a foreign country, to fend for himself, so to say, since Liberals
in Britain did not have so steady a hold on national political power, and were
constantly vying with Tories like Lord Derby and Disraeli, between 1865 and
1868, for control over Britain’s destiny. The Irish Question and the rise of Fenianism,
English merchants in
Hence Scully’s comment, on the bilateral crisis triggered off by William
Christie, that ‘[...] the Brazilian is innately courteous, and, appreciating in
a high degree the quality in others, will yield much more to the politeness and
suavity of the stranger than could be extorted by the menaces of the Foreign
Office.’ In several other instances he conveyed his
seeming acceptance of the practice of patronage and the perception that the
Brazilian Imperial government was ‘stable and strong.’ The country itself,
However, in spite of his own appreciation that Brazilians expected
‘politeness and suavity’ on the part of foreigners and abhorred English
arrogance, Scully’s impatience with the Brazilian patronage system was soon
made patent. After having published (
Thirdly, and in connection with the foregoing aspects of his position, Scully made disparaging parallels between Brazilian slave-owners and the Chinese governing elite of the time. The former, and their male offspring, were deemed idle and unimaginative, living parasitically in posts afforded to them within the public administration: ‘true, our Brazilian boy is not unlearned [...] [...] still, all his studies are without an aim, his only view in life is towards the ‘dolce far niente’ of a government employment […].”
According to him, those traits were akin to those of the ruling classes in Asian societies. Curiously, Brazilian Conservatives at that time also put forward proposals for alternative immigration projects, aimed at the introduction of Chinese workers. Again, Scully disapproved of the initiative and wrote successive articles in defence of his arguments on this question. Further, Scully stressed, rather threateningly, that:
[…] the Brazilian educated classes have through indolence and pride
abandoned to the more utilitarian foreigner engineering, mining, trades,
commerce, and manufactures, and leave the resources and the riches of their
wonderful country undeveloped until the educated science of some enterprising
foreigner finds out the treasure and turns it to his own advantage. (
Nearly a century after Scully’s first articles in The Anglo-Brazilian Times, the late Brazilian sociologist Gilberto de Mello Freyre, in his classical work on the Brazilian colonial and imperial societies, The Masters and the Slaves, quoted several European observers whose impressions of the education of the young Brazilian male clearly matched Scully’s perceptions and apprehensions about the fate of the country’s ruling elite. Freyre noted that the main concern of Brazilian young males was ‘to syphilize themselves as soon as possible, thereby acquiring those glorious scars in the bouts of Venus that Spix and Martius were so horrified to see Brazilians proudly displaying.’ Scully’s opinions might be endorsed by the quotation below, again from Freyre:
Other remarks bluntly made by Scully on the Brazilian aristocracy’s lifestyle, however, did touch on a rather sensitive aspect of the image of the Brazilian male:
[...] Again we repeat that mind and body react upon each other and
enervate together, and we warn our Brazilian youth that, if they suffer to
degenerate and become emasculated through their indolence and contempt for
usefulness, they will ere long endure the mortification of being ousted even
out of their present stronghold of the public service, by those other classes
whose pursuits they affect so much to scorn, when once the energies that win
for these their wealth be directed to the loaves and fishes of government
Such disparaging comments on the
slothfulness that allegedly pervaded the Brazilian slave-owning aristocracy’s
way of life reveal two prominent features of Scully’s discourse. On the one hand, there stood his conviction
that the Brazilian people had to be regenerated, as a whole –and not only the ‘colored race.’ On the other hand, that first aspect was
coupled with his strong attachment to British values. Although he upheld internationalist and
somewhat pacifist Liberal principles (as in his 9 October, 1866 article against
the destructiveness entailed by the war Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay were
waging against Paraguay), he enthusiastically called for the introduction of
classes of physical education into the syllabuses adopted by the incipient
Brazilian school system. Thus, Brazilian
youth might develop a greater sense of discipline, responsibility, and a
stronger character, emulating, or adopting, British models of education. Physical education was referred to as the
tool which “[...] joined with Western utilitarian science, makes two hundred
thousand Europeans the arbiters of two hundred millions of the inhabitants of Indian
climes.” Further, Brazilians had to remember that “[…]
Scully’s writings appear to fit into the wider context of Anglo-Irish Victorianism in an authentic way, with a discourse that combined Liberal ideas and patronising Conservative (Tory) attitudes. As discussed above, the British policy towards Brazil in 1865 could no longer afford to follow guidelines related to a purely commercial kind of hegemony, as expressed by the Anglo-Brazilian Treaties of 1810 and 1827, whereby Britain secured significant customs and other privileges, from Portuguese and Brazilian authorities. Although the aristocratic, Palmerstonian kind of diplomacy had become inadequate, the middle-class, Liberal substitute, however persuasive, intrusive, officially non-diplomatic, journalistic, nevertheless had to be pungent, aggressive, whenever necessary.
Turning the focus of this discussion, at this point, to the symbolic aspects of Scully’s colonialist discourse and its emphasis on the risk of the Brazilian aristocracy becoming emasculated ‘through indolence,’ it could be argued that he tentatively spearheaded the reproduction, in mid- to late-nineteenth-century Brazil, of the male/female, either/or, kind of dichotomy that the ideal of an intellectual, transcendental androgyny later embodied in James Joyce’s Ulysses appears to have disavowed, as Declan Kiberd puts it:
In espousing the ideal of androgyny, just one year after the declaration of the Irish Free State, Ulysses proclaims itself a central text of national liberation. Against the either/or antitheses of British Imperial psychology, it demonstrated the superior validity of a both/and philosophy.
The subsequent quotation seems illustrative of how the Victorian mentality operated, in
[…] Antithesis had been the master-key to the Imperial mind, causing people to make absolute divisions between English and Irish, but also between men and women. By this mechanism the British male could attribute to the Irish all those traits of poetry, emotion and hypersensitivity which a stern muscular code had led to suppress in himself. In like manner, Victorian men insisted that their women epitomise domestic virtues and emotional expressiveness which a harsh mercantile ethic had led them to deny in themselves.
Scully’s 1865 article on Education
Having drawn a depressing picture of
Brazilian upper-class youth, and of their presumable fate, Scully went on to
describe the kind of remedy necessary to improve the fabric of Brazilian
society. Apart from the proposed
educational reform, the ‘regeneration’ should be triggered by the massive
introduction into Brazil of Irish and other sanguine, laborious, disciplined
and forward-looking European immigrants. Incoming former Confederates,
displaced by the North American Civil War and emigrating to
Signs that the Brazilian Imperial government really favoured European immigration
came, officially, on
Meanwhile, early in
The object of the association ought not to be take any direct part in the bringing of emigrants to this country; that is the province of the Government and parties directly interested in the matter. But the society can, indirectly, largely supplement the direct efforts to promote emigration. (January, 1866.)
Naturally, his propositions, which pointed to the adoption of policies suitable to the promotion of free immigration, failed to elicit a positive response. Among other dubious initiatives implemented by some of its Brazilian directors, the society was employed as a springboard for the establishment of an emigration agency in New York, the purpose of which was to recruit and remove to Brazil, in connection with the Brazil-United States Mail Steamship Company, emigrants who had not adapted to life in the United States. William Scully maintained a long and acrid series of accusations against one of the directors of that agency, the Brazilian journalist Quintino Bocayuva. According to the Irishman, the agency was sending to Brazil ‘the scum of New York,’ thereby undermining current colonisation programmes.
Although free immigration was therefore out of question, arrangements were made between Scully and the Established Church of Ireland, in order to actually enlist Irish families willing to settle in Brazil. In October 1866, he personally addressed the Clergy of Ireland asking for immigrants and, even though he did not approve of governmental colonisation schemes, approximately 330 Irish Catholics were sent to Brazil aboard the ship “Florence Chipman,” from Wednesbury, England. After having been greeted by the Emperor in person in Rio de Janeiro, they were dispatched to the then province of Santa Catarina, in Southern Brazil.
There, in April 1868, most Irish incomers joined a group of Confederates that had already settled on the Colony Príncipe Dom Pedro, on the margins of the Itajahy-Mirim River, along with colonists of various nationalities, including Irishmen recruited in New York by Bocayuva’s agency. Upon their arrival most of the Irish colonists from Wednesbury appear to have received the lots ascribed to them, but soon the whole enterprise collapsed.
That colony, created by the government in 1867, was located not far from the predominantly German settlement of Blumenau, which was already prospering. The latter faced problems similar to those affecting the English-speaking settlement on the Itajahy-Mirim, but its founder, Dr. Hermann Blumenau, being one of the actual settlers, was personally involved in the task of establishing and administering the whole business, having become a real bulwark against administrative misconduct. The English-speaking colony, on the other hand, as pointed out by Scully himself in an article of 22 April, 1870 (‘Why the colony failed’), not only had to cope with the difficulties posed by the terrain, which was somewhat improper for cultivation and subject to flooding (as was also the case in Blumenau), but fell prey to other problems, administrative, logistical, and inter-cultural. Eventually, the Irish colonists were forced to leave the country, in 1869, as did most of the first settlers. The original area was later developed by immigrants from Poland. Nowadays it corresponds, to a certain extent, with the municipality of Brusque.
The deeper causes behind the failure of the colony seem to relate to the Cabinet change that took place in July 1868. The Progressive-Liberal cabinet was dissolved by the Emperor, after a political crisis had been generated by Liberal criticism against the military operations on the Paraguayan front line. Given the Brazilian patronage system, the subsequent poll placed a strong Conservative majority in power. All support for the English-speaking colony in Santa Catarina appears to have been withdrawn henceforth. That Liberal criticism was, unfortunately, initiated by Scully, according to whom the then Marquis of Caxias, Commander-in-Chief of the Brazilian armed forces and later of the combined Brazilian, Argentine and Uruguayan armies, was conducting the military operations in Paraguay very slowly, thereby allowing the enemy to regroup and set up new defensive lines. Besides, the alleged “moroseness” displayed by the Brazilian army under Caxias’ command was, again according to the journalist, remarkably costly. In an article of 7 January, 1868, among several diatribes against the Brazilian general, he accused him of causing ‘[...] the war ... to linger on as long as the country can find the gold to squander,’ and pointed out that the ‘[…] favorite weapon […]’ of Caxias’ was ‘gold-bags.’ The accusations were echoed by the Brazilian Liberal press, producing a clamour so negative that Caxias was prompted to submit his resignation. The Emperor refused to accept it and the Progressive-Liberal Prime Minister, Zacarias de Góes e Vasconcelos, eventually had to step down.
From a military standpoint, the ‘moroseness’ Scully alluded to was a result of the strategy devised by Caxias, designed not to attack the Paraguayan capital directly. Although the general refused to track down Solano López personally in 1869, on the grounds that such a role did not suit him, his plan, from the start, appears to have been directed towards the creation of a stifling effect on Paraguay and thus affording no opportunity for the enemy to escape – or surrender. López was eventually killed on 1st March, 1870, after a nine-month pursuit.
Prime Minister Zacarias de Góis e Vasconcelos’ substitute, Joaquim José Rodrigues Torres, Viscount of Itaborahy, was an old saquarema. From his inauguration, on 16 July, 1868, the English-speaking immigrants of the Príncipe Dom Pedro colony seem to have been denied financial assistance. Further, the derrubada that followed the Cabinet change, depriving Liberals of their appointments, ensured that they remained unaided. All this appears to have been a retaliation against Scully.
In the aftermath of this debacle it is reasonable to assume that renewed attempts to foster British colonisation schemes in Brazil would have been ruled out, but other colonies were established in the subsequent years, in the Paraná and São Paulo provinces. Measures to promote massive free immigration into Brazil, however, were not adopted until the 1880s.
Although Scully was successful neither in helping Irish colonists to settle in Brazil in large numbers nor in having free immigration legislation adopted in the country, the period spanning from 1865 to 1884, which corresponds to Scully’s professional life in Brazil, saw the establishment in the Brazilian territory of various industries, the expansion of foreign trade, the construction of railroads, unprecedented urban growth and the improvement of public works, much of which was implemented with British capital and manpower.
It is difficult to make an assessment of the importance of Scully’s activities as a journalist and businessman in the joint effort to make these economic developments come to life, from the inauguration of The Anglo-Brazilian Times onwards. Many of Scully’s original objectives, as featured in his newspaper’s first issue, of 7 February, 1865, were never achieved. Massive free immigration, for instance, only became possible when the slave labour system finally showed signs of undeniable exhaustion and of its incapacity of sustaining the profitability of the Brazilian coffee production, in the 1880s. Irish immigration, in particular, was rendered unviable.
Nation-building was, for nineteenth-century Brazilian policy-makers, a major challenge. Various problems had to be tackled simultaneously, complicated by material and political constraints. The preservation of the country’s sovereignty was their main concern, in a domestic context dominated by a political life that gravitated around a hierarchically organised system of patronage, cunningly orchestrated by Dom Pedro II. Slavery, the huge area of the country (over 8 million km2), the lack of a military force compatible with the size of the territory, and an administrative structure dependent on revenue obtained from an economic infrastructure almost entirely based on the exporting of primary goods, all these were geopolitical and economic factors accounting for a certain degree of national decentralisation and strategic vulnerability.
Brazilian Conservative politicians displayed greater aptitude in resolving these problems, during the Imperial period (1822-1889), and, justifiably, rejected Liberal policies. The political changes that accompanied the end of the Empire and the installation of the current Republican regime also owed very little, if anything, to the old Liberalism of the 1860s. Positivism became the doctrine espoused by the ruling civil and military Republican elites, whereas the Conservative Party dissolved after the end of slavery.
As a result, the legacy of William Scully has been almost completely, and undeservedly, neglected. Although imbued with certain nineteenth-century Victorian prejudices, his writings seem to be an acknowledgeable Anglo-Irish contribution to the History of Ideas and of Liberalism in Brazil, having played an arguably considerable, if controversial, role in the country’s Political History.
 GRAHAM 1979: 68-70.
 AZEVEDO 1997: 62-68; VIEIRA 1980: 95-112.
 RANELAGH 1983: 125.
 KOROL & SÁBATO 1981.
 For a brief account of the role played by Irish military in, for example, the building-up of Bolivia, please see DUNKERLEY 199.
 MANCHESTER 1973; BETHELL 1970.
 BETHELL 1970.
 BETHELL 1970: 382.
 MANCHESTER 1973; GRAHAM 1979.
 BETHELL 1970: 388.
 BETHELL 1970: 72.
 AZEVEDO 1987: 62-68.
 DORATIOTO 2002: 272-276.
 SALLES 1990; SILVA 1997.
 GRAHAM 1990.
 CARVALHO 1996.
 CERVO 1981: 228.
 CARVALHO 1996: 301-325.
 VIEIRA 1980: 245.
 BETHELL 1996: 26.
 ROBBINS 1998: 161-186.
 LIBBY 1984.
 SCULLY 1866: x.
 FREYRE 1964: 358.
 FREYRE 1964: 359.
 This argument draws on the distinctions between aristocratic and middle-class mentalities in Britain during the XIX century as expounded in PERKIN 1978.
 KIBERD 1992: lxiv.
 KIBERD 1992: lxiv-lxv.
 BRASIL 1988: 264.
 PLATT 1964: 23.
 VIEIRA 1980: 245; MARSHALL 1999.
 LAUTH 1987: 21.
 SILVA 1995: 74.
 LAUTH 1987.
 HOLANDA 1972: 7-13 and 95-104; DORATIOTO 2002: 334; VIEIRA 1980: 247- 253.
 DORATIOTO 2002: 115-121.
 DORATIOTO 2002: 383-455; BETHEL 1996: 8.
 LAUTH, 1987: 73- 80.
 MARSHALL 1999.
 HALL 1969: 4-11.
 GRAHAM 1968.
 CERVO 1980.
1) AZEVEDO, Célia Maria Marinho de. Onda negra, medo branco: o negro no imaginário das elites – século XIX. Rio de Janeiro: Paz & Terra, 1987. 267 p. (Coleção Oficinas da História, v.6).
2) BETHELL, Leslie. The abolition of the Brazilian slave trade: Britain, Brazil and the slave trade question , 1807-1869. London: Cambridge University, 1970. 425 p. (Cambridge Latin American Studies, n. 6).
3) ____________. The Paraguayan War (1864-1870). London: University of London, 1996. 41 p. (ILAS Research Papers, 46).
4) BRASIL. Senado Federal. A abolição no Parlamento: 65 anos de lutas (1823-1888). Brasília: Subsecretaria de Arquivo, 1988. v.1.
5) CARVALHO, José Murilo de. Teatro de Sombras. In: A construção da ordem: a elite política imperial; Teatro de sombras: a política imperial. Rio de Janeiro: Relume Dumará, 1996. 435 p.
6) CERVO, Amado Luiz. O Parlamento brasileiro e as relações exteriores (1826-1889). Brasília: Editora Universidade de Brasília, 1981. 254 p. (Coleção Temas Brasileiros; 21).
7) CONRAD, Robert. The destruction of Brazilian slavery (1850-1888). Berkeley and Los Angeles, Cal.: University of California, 1972.
8) DORATIOTO, Francisco F. M. Maldita guerra: nova história da Guerra do Paraguai. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2002. 617 p.
9) DUNKERLEY, James. The third man: Francisco Burdett O’Connor and the emancipation of the Americas. London: University of London, 1996. 41 p. (ILAS Occasional Papers, 20).
10) FREYRE, Gilberto de Mello. The masters and the slaves: a study in the development of Brazilian civilization. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, abridged ed., 1964. 433 p.
11) GRAHAM, Richard. Britain and the onset of modernization in Brazil, 1850-1914. London: Cambridge University, 1968. 385 p.
12) ___________. Escravidão, reforma e imperialismo. São Paulo: Perspectiva, 1979. 195 p. (Coleção Debates, 146).
13) ___________. Patronage and politics in nineteenth-century Brazil. Stanford, Cal.: Stanford University, 1990. 382 p.
14) HALL, Michael McDonald. The origins of mass immigration in Brazil, 1871-1914. [New York]: Columbia University, 1969. 198 p. (Coleção Enciclopédia Latino-Americana). Ph.D Dissertation – Columbia University, 1969.
15) HOLANDA, Sérgio Buarque de. Do Império à República. In: __________. História geral da civilização brasileira. São Paulo: Difusão Européia do Livro, 1972. t. 2, v. 5.
16) KIBERD, Declan. Introduction. In: JOYCE, James. Ulysses. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1992.
17) KOROL, Juan Carlos and SÁBATO, Hilda. Cómo fue la inmigración irlandesa en Argentina. Buenos Aires: Plus Ultra, 1981. 214 p.
18) LAUTH, Aloisius Carlos. A colônia Príncipe Dom Pedro: um caso de política imigratória no Brasil Império. Brusque: Museu Arquidiocesano Dom Joaquim, 1987. 110 p.
19) MANCHESTER, Alan K. Preeminência inglesa no Brasil. São Paulo: Brasiliense, 1973. 301 p.
20) MARSHALL, Oliver (Ed.). Imagining Brazil: the recruitment of English labourers as Brazilian colonos. In: _______. English-speaking communities in Latin America since Independence. London: Palgrave, 2000.
21) PERKIN, Harold. The origins of modern English society, 1780-1880. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978. 465 p.
22) PLATT, Desmond C.M. British colonization in Latin America. Inter-American Economic Affairs, Washington, DC, v. 18, n. 3, p. 3-38, july/sept. 1964.
23) RANELAGH, John O’Beirne. Breve historia de Irlanda. México, D.F.: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1989. 307 p.
24) ROBBINS, Keith. Great Britain: identities, institutions and the idea of Britishness. New York: Longman, 1998. 377 p. (Past and Present.).
25) SALLES, Ricardo. Guerra do Paraguai: escravidão e cidadania na formação do Exército. Rio de Janeiro: Paz & Terra, 1990. 165 p.
26) SCULLY, William. Brazil: its Provinces and Chief Cities; the Manners and Habits of the People; Agricultural, Commercial and Other Statistics, Taken from the Latest Official Documents with a Variety of Useful and Entertaining Knowledge, Both for the Merchant and Emigrants. London: Murray, 1866.
27) SILVA. Eduardo. Dom Obá II d’África, o príncipe do povo: vida, tempo e pensamento de um homem livre de cor. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1997. 262 p.
28) SILVA, J. Ferreira da. O Dr. Blumenau. Florianópolis: EDEME/Paralelo 27, 1995. 103 p.
29) VIEIRA, David Gueiros. O protestantismo, a maçonaria e a Questão Religiosa no Brasil. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília, 1980. 409 p. (Coleção Temas Brasileiros.).
PRIMARY SOURCES – NEWSPAPERS
1) Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: The Anglo-Brazilian Times. Issues from 1865 to 1870 (Biblioteca Nacional)
1) MARSHALL, Oliver. The English-language press in Latin America. London: University of London, 1996. 107 p.
2) _________________. European immigration and ethnicity in Latin America: a bibliography. London: University of London, 1991. 165 p.
3) McGINN, Brian. The Irish in South America: a bibliography. Alexandria, VA: The Irish Diaspora net, 1999. Available from http://sobolstones.com/papers/index.cfm?outfit=ids. Accessed: 26 July 2002.