A Good Beginning for Ireland

Today’s installment concludes Catholic Emancipation in Ireland,
with our final installment from William E.H. Lecky and then we present the third part of the series with Daniel O’Connell. For works benefiting from the latest research see the “More information” section at the bottom of these pages.

If you have journeyed through all of the installments of this series, just one more to go and you will have completed eight thousand words from great works of history. Congratulations! For works benefiting from the latest research see the “More information” section at the bottom of these pages.

Previously in Catholic Emancipation in Ireland.

Time: 1829

It was succeeded by another indication of the same spirit. By the Emancipation Act the higher positions in the bar were thrown open, as well as the Parliament. A distribution of silk gowns naturally followed; and, while several Roman Catholic barristers obtained this distinction, O’Connell, who occupied the very foremost position, was passed over. Among those who were promoted was Sheil, who had cooperated with him through the whole struggle. It now, too, become manifest that the Tories were determined to render the Emancipation Act as nugatory as was possible by never promoting a Roman Catholic to the bench. For some time under their rule the exclusion was absolute. The Relief Bill was also accompanied by a temporary act suppressing the Catholic Association, and enabling the Lord-Lieutenant, during the space of rather more than a year, to suppress arbitrarily, by proclamation, any association or assembly he might deem dangerous. A measure of this kind suspended every vestige of political liberty, and left the people as discontented as ever. O’Connell declared that justice to Ireland was not to be obtained from an English Parliament, and the tide of popular feeling set in with irresistible force toward repeal.

Of all possible measures, Catholic emancipation might, if judiciously carried, have been most efficacious in allaying agitation, and making Ireland permanently loyal. Had it been carried in 1795 as it undoubtedly would have been if Pitt had not recalled Lord Fitzwilliam — the country would have been spared the Rebellion of 1798, and all classes might have rallied cordially round the Irish Parliament. Had it been carried at or immediately after the union, as it would have been if Pitt had not again betrayed the cause it might have assuaged the bitterness which that measure caused and produced a cordial amalgamation of the two nations. It was delayed until sectarian feeling on both sides and in both countries had acquired an enduring intensity, and it was at last conceded in a manner that produced no gratitude and was the strongest incentive to further agitation.

In estimating the political character of Sir Robert Peel, it must never be forgotten that on the most momentous question of his time he was for many years the obstinate opponent of a measure which is now almost universally admitted to have been not only just but inevitable; that, his policy having driven Ireland to the verge of civil war, he yielded the boon he had refused simply to a menace of force, and that he accompanied the concession by a display of petty and impotent spite which deprived it of half its utility and of all its grace.

The exasperation of O’Connell at these measures was extreme. He denounced the Ministry of Wellington and Peel with reckless violence, endeavored in 1830 to embarrass it by a mischievous letter recommending a run upon gold, revived the Catholic Association under new names and forms, and energetic ally agitated for the repeal of the union. The proclamations of the Lord-Lieutenant, however, suppressed these associations, and when he attempted to hold public meetings, he was compelled to yield to a prosecution; the upper classes strongly discouraged the new agitation, and the Ministry of Wellington soon tottered to its fall. In the beginning of 1831, he accordingly desisted from agitation, ostensibly in order to test the effect of emancipation upon the policy of the Imperial Parliament.

The Reform question was at this time rising to its height. O’Connell advocated the most extreme radical views, and in 1830 brought in a bill for universal suffrage, triennial Parliaments, and the ballot. He wrote a series of letters on the question. He brought the whole force of his influence to act upon it, and his followers contributed largely to the triumph of the measure of 1832 — a fact which was remembered with great bitterness when the Reformed Parliament began its career by an extremely stringent Coercion Bill for Ireland.

Daniel O’Connell

Now we begin the third part of our series with our selection from Correspondence by Daniel O’Connell,

Daniel O’Connell (1775-1847) was the great activist whose career was narrated above.

THE FIRST DAY OF FREEDOM!
APRIL 14, 1829
To James Sugrue:

MY DEAR FRIEND — I cannot allow this day to pass without expressing my congratulations to the honest men of Burgh Quay on the subject of the Relief Bill.

It is one of the greatest triumphs recorded in history — a bloodless revolution more extensive in its operation than any other political change that could take place. I say political to contrast it with social changes which might break to pieces the framework of society.

This is a good beginning, and now, if I can get Catholics and Protestants to join, something solid and substantial may be done for all. “

It is clear that, without gross mismanagement, it will be impossible to allow misgovernment any longer in Ireland. It will not be my fault if there be not a “Society for the Improvement of Ireland,” or something else of that description, to watch over the rising liberties of Ireland.

I am busily making my arrangements respecting my own seat. As soon as they are complete you shall hear from me.

I reckon with confidence on being in the House on the 28th instant, the day to which the adjournment is to take place. I think my right now perfectly clear and beyond any reasonable doubt.

Wish all and every one of ‘The Order of Liberators’ joy in my name. Let us not show any insolence of triumph, but I confess to you, if I were in Dublin, I should like to laugh at the corporators.

I am writing a congratulatory address to the people. It will appear, I hope, on Easter Monday in Dublin.
Believe me, etc.,

DANIEL O’CONNELL

This ends our selections on Catholic Emancipation in Ireland by three of the most important authorities of this topic:

• an article in Great Events by Famous Historians, Vol. 16 by William E. Gladstone published in 1905.
• Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland by William E.H. Lecky published in 1871.
• Correspondence by Daniel O’Connell.

William E. Gladstone began here. William E.H. Lecky began here.

This site features short and lengthy pieces on all aspects of our shared past. Here are selections from the great historians who may be forgotten (and whose work have fallen into public domain) as well as links to the most up-to-date developments in the field of history and of course, original material from yours truly, Jack Le Moine. – A little bit of everything historical is here.

More information on Catholic Emancipation in Ireland here and here and below.

We want to take this site to the next level but we need money to do that. Please contribute directly by signing up at https://www.patreon.com/history