Perceval
and the Prince Regent
(October 1809 to May 1812)
Summary.
The Government was chiefly concerned with pursuing the war against Napoleon who
was still all-powerful on the Continent. British participation was largely
confined to the navy, the Mediterranean, and the Spanish Peninsula. Wellington
established a secure base at Torres Vedras outside Lisbon from which the French
could be attacked. The Irish Government under Wellington's brother William
Wellesley-Pole pursued a programme of practical reforms. The Catholics,
attempting to broaden the base of the Catholic Committee fell foul of the
Convention Act and had to settle for a Catholic Board. a short-lived attempt was
made to secure the repeal of the Act of Union. At this point began the rise of
Daniel O'Connell, the stormy petrel of Irish politics. Whenever he appeared
strife followed.As the king became finally incurably mad, the Prince of Wales
became Prince Regent, and leaving the Whigs, the friends of his youth, retained
his father's ministers.
***********************************************************************
Perceval’s Ministry
The Catholic Committee
Progress of the
War
The Rise of O’Connell
Government Administration
***********************************************************************
Perceval’s
Ministry
[October 1809] After
the ministry of the dying Duke of Portland collapsed following the duel of
Castlereagh and Canning, Spencer Perceval stitched together another ministry.
The Marquis Wellesley, (Lord Wellington’s elder brother) an Irishman with views
similar to Castlereagh's, replaced Canning as Foreign Secretary, while the Earl
of Liverpool became Secretary for War. A younger brother of the marquis,
William Wellesley-Pole, became Irish Secretary. Another brother, Henry
Wellesley, replaced the marquis as ambassador to the Spanish Cortes. On the
resignation of the Marquis Wellesley as Foreign Secretary in February 1812
Castlereagh succeeded him, and held that post until his death in 1822. Apart
from a period at the Board of Control in charge of British affairs in India
Canning was out of office until he succeeded Castlereagh in 1822, though he was
employed on other missions. He was therefore out of office during one of the
most important decades in British history, forever associated with the names of
Wellington and Castlereagh. He and Castlereagh however
co-operated on the question of Catholic Emancipation which both of them
favoured. Canning, being out of office and not constrained by cabinet
responsibilities took the leading part in the campaign for emancipation.
George Canning’s father was
from Garvagh, county Londonderry, Robert Stewart, Lord Castlereagh, was from
county Down, and the Wellesley brothers were from county Meath. The eldest
brother was Richard Colley Wellesley, second Earl of Mornington, raised to the
Irish peerage as Marquis Wellesley. The second brother was William who changed
his named to Wellesley-Pole and was raised to the peerage of the United Kingdom as Baron Maryborough. The third boy was Arthur
was raised to the peerage as Viscount Wellington, Marquis of Douro, and Duke of
Wellington. The fourth boy was Gerald who took Holy Orders and became rector of
the enormous new fashionable church of St. Luke, Chelsea, near London. The youngest boy was Henry, raised to the
peerage as Baron Cowley; he had a distinguished career in the diplomatic
service but did not work in Ireland. As Castlereagh’s titles were in the peerage of Ireland he was eligible for election to the House of
Commons. (So too later was Lord Palmerston.) The Marquis Wellesley had been
created Baron Wellesley in the peerage of the United Kingdom in 1797, and sat in the House of Lords from that
date, having previously sat in the House of Commons and the Irish House of
Lords. He had been to Eton and Oxford with Lord Grenville, and had known Addington at
Oxford.
It was believed in
Dublin that the Lord Lieutenant, Richmond, objected to Wellesley-Pole on the grounds that he
might offend the Catholics. But he proved an able and energetic administrator,
and followed the guidelines given to Hardwicke and Richmond. Like Castlereagh he was often attacked by the
Press, but he was able to counterattack.
[1810] Among his very first actions on coming to Dublin was to institute a review of prison conditions,
and to undertake penal reform. This was the result of various adverse Reports
of the Inspector General of Gaols in Ireland tabled in the House of Commons (DEP 9 July 1808) He brought in an Irish
Gaol Act (1810) to commence his reforms. He provided for the payment of
chaplains, including Catholic chaplains, out of public funds. He gathered the
women prisoners in Dublin together and gave them their own chaplain. He
favoured penitentiaries where the prisoners were taught a trade and given work
to do. He provided ‘uniform suits of comfortable apparel’ for sixty poor female
prisoners sentenced to three years transportation. He began the removal of lunatics from common
gaols and established special asylums for them. The Richmond General Asylum for
Lunatics was established, and the Richmond Institute for the Industrious Blind.
He allowed the Insurrection Act to lapse, and contented himself with a modest
Arms Act (1810) for the control of firearms and a restricted Insurrection Act
(1810). The new Act removed the right of the Government to search houses for
arms. He suspended the Townlands Fines Act (1781) with regard to illicit
distillation, preferring to use extra patrols of troops. With the
ever-increasing excises placed on spirits to help pay for the War illicit
distillation flourished with all the crimes associated with the Prohibition era
in America. (Under the 1781 Act all the people in a townland
- a section of a parish - were fined if a still was found in it.) He passed an
Act allowing the licensing of stills of a size of at least forty four gallons.
He passed an Irish Lighthouse Regulation Act (1810) and commissioned Thomas
Telford to survey the proposed new route from Holyhead to London. A lightship was placed on the Kish Bank that lay
across the approaches to Dublin
harbour. He pushed forward the construction of the new packet harbour at Howth
and it came into use in July 1810. (In October 1809 a Dublin
newspaper gave an account of Fulton’s paddleboat on the Hudson SNL 31 Oct
1809.) He kept the Board of Inland Navigation in being though the
original sum of half a million pounds was now expended, and it was instructed
to advise on any new projects. In 1810 he followed Spencer Perceval in opposing
a motion of Sir Henry Parnell for a select committee to consider the
commutation of tithes, giving the same reasons as Perceval. A Commission for
Irish Public Records was appointed which was eventually to carry out a work of
national importance.
William Wellesley-Pole was the
first of a long line of capable administrators sent to Ireland after the Union. There can be little doubt that some at least of his impressive
record stemmed from the fact that his short-lived predecessors failed to bring
their ideas to fruition, and the his brother Arthur was more interested in the
war than in the administration of Ireland. But it showed what could be done
when an able person put his mind steadily to the job. The Secretary’s office
ceased to be an appendage of that of the Lord Lieutenant and became the chief
administrative office in Ireland. The Irish Secretary began to be called Chief
Secretary. (See also below on the abolition of sinecures.) The office of the
Lord Lieutenant became more and more one of dignity. Ireland gradually ceased to be a bit of a backwater, but
was kept up with developments in Britain and at times anticipated developments there. The
office of Lord Lieutenant was an expensive one. The Duke of Richmond’s official
salary was £20,000 a year, but he was obliged to spend £38,000 on maintaining
the dignity of the office. In 1810 an additional £10,000 was voted for him for
a single year until the Civil List could be revised. An ability and willingness
to pay part of the costs of the office became conditions for being offered the
post.
In 1810, Spencer Perceval,
John Foster, William Wellesley-Pole, and others were appointed Irish Treasury
Commissioners. In the same year, a young man named Robert Peel, shortly after
finishing university where he had a double first class degree in classics and
mathematics, was elected MP for the borough of Cashel. His father purchased the
seat for him. Also in 1810, Sir John Newport, while attacking the increased
spending and taxes in Foster’s budget noted the increased prosperity brought to
Ireland by his own Corn Importation Act.
The Bog Commissioners
presented their reports, and they claimed that about three million acre were
recoverable. The obstacles were immense. For example, many Irish estates were
encumbered, with creditors having first claim on any capital. The Report was
never used. The Irish Government considered the reports for several years but
not until 1819 was it decided to leave bog reclamation to private enterprise.
About
this time Lord Cloncurry and other magistrates began holding regular petty
sessions of the magistrates’ courts.
The local penny post in Dublin was extended, and four posts a day were delivered
to each sub-post office. A Militia Interchange Act (1811) was passed to enable
militia regiments to serve in other parts of the British Isles without having to depend on volunteers from each
regiment. Irish militia regiments in England were forbidden to wear Orange emblems when in uniform.
The English educationalist,
Joseph Lancaster visited Ireland spreading his views on education, and he received
a warm welcome. In December some gentlemen met in Dublin to see if there was some way of putting his views
into practice. At this time in England there were two gentlemen putting forward their
sharply contrasting views regarding the education of working-class children. By
education was largely meant teaching the three Rs, reading, writing and
religion. By teaching religion was meant teaching the Bible. This was common
ground. But with regard to teaching and the management of schools there were
two rival theories, one promoted by Joseph Lancaster and the other by Andrew
Bell. The contest between them became known as ‘The Struggle between Bel and
the Dragon’ (See Book of Daniel, Chapter 14). Andrew Bell was a strong
supporter of the Established Church. He wished to see all education controlled
by members of that Church, and considered that all education was to be for the
benefit of religion. His idea of education was to fill a child’s mind with facts,
chiefly facts about the Bible, and relied on rote learning. Later he followed
Lancaster’s teaching methods. Joseph Lancaster,
also believed in religious education, but not under the control of the clergy
of any particular Church. He thought that children of all denominations should
be taught together, and taught those elements which were common to all branches
of Christianity. The clergy of the individual denominations could then
separately impart their particular tenets. Schools he considered as the equivalent
of factories for imparting education, and devised a regimented system where
older children helped to teach the younger ones. The struggle between these two
systems was to be-devil efforts at improving education in Ireland for the next century. Most of the clergy of the
major Churches preferred Bell’s
theories, with the proviso however that they should have exclusive control over
the education of their own adherents. The Government, mindful of the dire
effects of separate education in producing a spirit of sectarian division,
preferred Lancaster’s system. Even Peel supported Lancaster.
The policy of treating the
Catholics fairly within existing law was (officially at least) continued. The
Minister for War, Lord Liverpool, hearing that there were
Orange lodges in the army forbade such, and also forbade
the wearing of Orange badges by any military units. (The Orange Order
promptly changed its constitution, dropping the secret articles.) Another
circular was sent out from the Adjutant General's office making clear that
Catholic soldiers were not to be paraded to church services but were to be
allowed to attend mass privately.
In 1810 Irish industry was
beginning to feel the effects of the Continental System. Several merchants,
especially among those engaged in the linen trade became bankrupt. (In
accordance with the then existing laws the first persons to file suits of
bankruptcy against a merchant who failed to pay a bill had the best chance of
being paid.) The Lord Lieutenant authorized the advancing of loans from public
funds to merchants in temporary distress. The opening of new markets especially
in the Spanish colonies soon relieved the distress.
The distress had an unexpected
side-effect, namely, an increase in the number of demands for repeal of the Act
of Union (1800) on the part of the merchants and tradesmen of Dublin. Trade was not prospering very well in
Dublin at the time for a variety of reasons. Those with
capital preferred to invest outside Dublin where waterpower was available, where the trade
guilds of merchants did not restrict development, and where trade unions or
combinations did not make excessive demands. Those merchants in
Dublin connected with the carriage trade lost some
business when members of the Irish Parliament no longer came to
Dublin to reside for some months each year. It was easy
to blame all problems on the Act of Union. The merchants and journeymen who
objected to the Union were mostly Protestants, and of a decidedly Orange complexion. For them restoration of a native Parliament meant the
continuance of the policy of 'ascendancy'.
(After Emancipation O'Connell was to get most of his early support from
Catholic tradesmen in Dublin
and deluded himself that Protestant tradesmen would
advocate the establishment of a Catholic Parliament.)
On the 18th September 1810 a meeting was held in Dublin with the High Sheriff in the chair and a young
journalist named Frederick William Conway as secretary to the meeting. Daniel
O'Connell was among the speakers. It was resolved to petition Parliament for
the restoration of an Irish Parliament. Interest died down as quickly as it
arose, and the petition was left in the hands of young Mr. Conway with nobody
prepared to pay the expenses. [Top]
The
Catholic Committee
In November 1809 the newly
reconstituted Catholic Committee assembled with 58 members present, and with
the Earl of Fingall in the chair. The petition was revised and transmitted to
Grattan. The War was going badly in Spain and the Whig leaders felt that they would soon
return to office as people got tired of the war. Wellington had a habit of weeding out incapable officers and
sending them home. The Whigs (and Napoleon) relied over-much on their reports
printed in English newspapers about conditions in Spain. They were anxious that the Catholics should not
present their petition before that, and when they did, that they would modify
their stance somewhat with regard to securities. Lord Grenville contacted the
Earl of Fingall while Lord Grey contacted the leaders of the English Catholics.
The English Catholics met on the 1st February 1810 and passed various resolutions. In one, the
'Fifth Resolution', they agreed in general terms to some form of security. In Ireland however both the Catholic laity and the Catholic
bishops refused to change their stance. In addition the Irish bishops stated
that only bishops could discuss matters of Church discipline. (This latter
point seems to have been directed at the English Catholic lawyer, Charles
Butler, with whom Milner had an everlasting feud. The Irish bishops always
accepted Milner's version of events even when he was in a minority of one among
the English Vicars Apostolic.) The Irish bishops' pastoral (1810) was then
issued. They bound themselves not to accept any bull, brief, rescript, or any
other communication from the Pope while he was a prisoner of the French.
At a public meeting in
Tipperary it was suggested that those concerned with
selecting an Irish bishop should bind themselves to choose only from among
those priests whose loyalty to the crown was incontestable. This became known
as Domestic Nomination. This issue became confused later as various clerical
factions struggled for modifications in the manner of appointing Irish Catholic
bishops. When rights conceded to the crown lapsed with the last of the Stuarts,
and most of the chapters of canons that had the right to elect were
non-existent, the matter was regulated in Ireland by local custom. The Holy See was not opposed in
principle to granting a negative role to a Protestant monarch in the selection
of Catholic bishops in places like Canada, Ireland, or Gibraltar,
where Catholic dioceses came under a Protestant monarch. A Protestant ruler
could not be allowed to nominate officially a bishop for a diocese, but would
be allowed officially to lodge an objection. This power would be granted by
means of a Concordat like the one the Holy See made with Napoleon, and was
called a veto, from the Latin veto I
forbid. (Unofficially, the Protestant monarch could suggest, or favour, or
object to a particular candidate.) A candidate could also request the support
of a particular king or minister, and we know that Dr. Curtis in Armagh asked for the support of the Duke of Wellington. The essential role
of the Pope was to confirm a choice sent to him, or make a selection from a
list sent to him. There was no reason why a candidate could not send his own
name to Rome, and St Oliver Plunket in Armagh in fact did this over a century earlier. When
making his decision, the Pope, or the cardinals appointed for that purpose,
took into account recommendations or warnings sent to them by interested
parties. The Pope was not opposed to a veto. In considering the dispute between
the Vetoists and Anti-vetoists we must remember that neither side was right or
wrong, but the Anti-vetoists were opposing the express will of the Pope in the
matter. The Anti-vetoists at first could claim that the Pope was then a
prisoner of the French, and could not be regarded as a free agent. In the event
the Pope delayed making a final decision in principle until 1829 when the
Government abandoned any demand for securities.
In May 1810 Grattan put
forward the Catholic petition offering Domestic Nomination as security. In the
Lords, Lord Grenville refused to put forward the petition but the Earl of
Donoughmore, an Irish peer, a brother of Lord Hutchinson, stepped in. Lord
Castlereagh supported the Catholics for the first time since 1801, and in
future all cabinets, which hoped for any credibility, had to accept ministers
who wished to support the Catholics. Castlereagh, in addition, as Leader of the
House of Commons, always ensured that Catholic petitions or motions received
parliamentary time. A person less favourable to their cause could have been
obstructive. (He was succeeded in the office in 1822 by
Canning who followed the same line.)
[Top]
Progress
of the War
In 1810 matters continued to
go badly for Perceval's ministry and support for it could not be guaranteed in
the House. But Perceval was a tough little fighter, and nobody could think of
any better policies, or suggest a more able leader. In Parliament a Committee
was appointed to study the state of the currency. It is known to history as the
'Bullion Committee'. It was impressed by the inflation and depreciation of
value of the coinage that occurred in Ireland when the circulation of gold was stopped.
Accordingly it recommended the resumption of a coinage based solidly on
gold. Nicholas Vansittart, who had
briefly been Irish Secretary under Lord Hardwicke, with Castlereagh’s
assistance in the House of Commons, had the resumption deferred until after the
War.
Austria had been defeated at Wagram (5 July 1809) and forced to join the Continental System. Napoleon divorced his barren wife Josephine
and married, Marie-Louise, the daughter of the Austrian emperor in April
1810. In May 1810 Napoleon handed over
command of the 350,000 French troops in Spain to Massena. Wellington’s problem was that he was faced with vastly
greater numbers of French troops. He could only advance into Spain when the French troops were dispersed. After
Talavera, Marshal Soult had concentrated the French
army. Wellington withdrew towards the lines he had constructed at
Torres Vedras, where he knew he could hold the French in an advanced position
indefinitely. He cleared all food from the country as he went. He fought and
won a defensive battle at Busaco (27 September 1810) to bring relief to the hard-pressed cabinet.
Just before the winter rains arrived he had his army under cover behind the
lines. The lines stretched across a
narrow peninsula between the lower Tagus and the
sea. Massena, pursuing closely, walked into the trap set for him. For some
incredible months he kept his starving troops in the open under the rains
before the lines until he was forced to withdraw to feed his army. Massena gave
the order to withdraw on 5 March 1811. The initiative passed to Wellington. During the next five years of the Regency
Wellington was to bring military glory to Britain and Castlereagh was to match them with diplomatic
triumphs. The policies of William Pitt were beginning to pay off, and fittingly
it was his most loyal supporters who reaped the glory. It was a tragedy that
Spencer Perceval, the courageous politician who did so much to bring about
victory, was not there to enjoy it.
In December 1810, when
Wellington was seemingly penned in at Torres Vedras, the
king's physicians reported that he no longer had possession of his faculties. A regency was inevitable. Perceval made no concessions to
the Prince of Wales. He proposed a limited regency for
one year, strict economy for the Prince, a continuation of the War, and no
concessions to the Catholics. After searching around to see what better terms
he could get, Prince
George kept
Perceval in office. In doing this he was abandoning the Irish friends of his
youth, Lord Moira, Lord Hutchinson, the Earl of Donoughmore, and Richard
Brinsley Sheridan. But now he was falling more under the influence of the
Countess of Hertford and her circle.
[Top]
The Rise of
O’Connell
Meanwhile in Ireland, O'Connell began that curious struggle with the
Government with regard to the Convention Act (Irish Parliament 1793) which was
to last until his death. He wanted a forum for agitation, and the Catholic
Committee had two drawbacks. Firstly, it could do nothing but petition
Parliament for the redress of grievances (and collect money only for that
purpose), and secondly the aristocracy too heavily influenced it for his
liking. To get round this latter point O'Connell sought 'delegates' from those parts of Ireland (and only those) where his own views were
strongly supported. Without the support of these delegates people could say
O’Connell was speaking only for himself. Apart from that, the rows among the
Catholics continued more fiercely than ever with Keogh now listening to nobody.
The Convention Act (1793) was
aimed at preventing the recurrence of events like the Convention of the Volunteers
in 1782 where armed groups (of Protestants) from various parts of Ireland assembled in Dublin and were able to overawe the Government at a time
when there were few troops in the country. Contrary to what has been sometimes
stated, this Act was not aimed at delegates to the Catholic Committee in 1793
but at delegates to meetings of the newly-formed United Irishmen, in particular
a proposed National Assembly of United Irishmen at Athlone. It was carefully
crafted solely to prevent assemblies composed of elected delegates from other
more local bodies with political agendas, such that it could be regarded as a
rival democratic parliament. Under the law private groups could assemble for
any lawful purpose in Ireland, such as for the promotion of education or
agriculture. Such societies, and even the Orange Order, could federate with
each other so long as each remained distinct, and were not ruled by a
convention of delegates. Public assemblies could be held for one purpose only,
to bring before Parliament petitions for the redress of grievances or to
promote the public good.
These conditions O'Connell
found constricting. He wanted a forum that he could claim represented the views 'the Catholics
of Ireland'. What he was looking for was something like a modern political
party. But there was one very good reason, if no others, why no Irish
Government would meet his wishes, and this was the existence of the Orange
Order. Anything conceded to O'Connell would be instantly taken up by the
extremists in the 'ascendancy' faction, so all legislation dealing with
O'Connell's societies was equally aimed at the Orange Order to the mutual
disgust of both parties. Yet there seems an element of the irrational in
O'Connell's behaviour resulting in a determination never to be bested by the
Government.
In the summer of 1810 he
succeeded in getting a resolution passed at a general meeting of Catholics
authorizing the Committee to deal with all their affairs, and not merely with
petitioning parliament. In December he raised the question of an alleged
grievance of a Catholic soldier. He then went on to propose that the Catholic
Committee should broaden its base by co-opting
new members who had been nominated by rural county groups to conduct their
affairs. A letter was sent out by the Catholic Secretary Edward Hay inviting
nominations. O'Connell claimed that he was keeping within the letter of the
law.
[1811] Richmond was not inclined to intervene, but Wellesley-Pole
sent a circular to all the Irish magistrates warning them of intended breaches
of the Convention Act. On the 23rd February 1811 he sent the Dublin police to suppress an attempted meeting of the
expanded Catholic Committee. In accordance with previous form the Catholics
indulged in angry recriminations among themselves. At a general meeting of the
Dublin Catholics on the 9th July it was decided to reconstitute the Catholic
Committee. (Apparently these meetings were made into private gatherings by the
payment of a subscription at the door.) It was announced that the Committee
would have one sole purpose, to petition Parliament for Emancipation, but each
county was invited to choose delegates to sit on the Committee. (It was quite
feasible to do, as the Dissenters did, and those opposed to the Slave Trade
did, to organize local petitions in cities, towns, counties, and parishes, but
that was obviously what O’Connell did not want.) Though the Lord Lieutenant
issued a proclamation suppressing this new Committee very many eminent people
considered that O’Connell had found a loophole.
County Louth chose Lord Southwell and Sir Edward Bellew as delegates, while Meath
chose Lords Fingall, Netterville, Gormanston, and Killeen. (Wellesley-Pole was also incidentally a
Meathman.) Clare elected the banker Nicholas Mahon, who had been a delegate to
the Catholic Convention in 1793. Summonses were issued against the noble lords
and other delegates. It was agreed between the parties that a few cases would
be brought to trial as test cases. In both cases the judges gave the
construction of the law desired by the Government, and both sides desisted from
further action.
[Top]
Government
Administration
The Irish Government, like the
Government in Britain, began a campaign in the courts to curtail the
excesses of language used in the Press. It was an age when men used quite
vitriolic language in the newspapers about their opponents. The Irish Chief
Justice of Common Pleas (Lord Norbury) about this time ruled that a particular
libel did not contain 'the grossness of invective' necessary for the attention
of the court, nor were the inaccuracies or falsehoods so considerable as to
merit its attention either. It was a time of industrial unrest in England and
agrarian disturbances in Ireland, and the Government was concerned that violent
language might lead to sedition, i.e. popular disturbances. In one trial in
Dublin for 'seditious libel' the author was found guilty
of using the words 'They insulted, they oppressed, they murdered and they
deceived' of the Duke of Richmond's administration. The cases would in fact be
of little interest if O'Connell had not managed to involve one unfortunate
defendant in his personal feud with the Attorney General, Saurin.
Wellesley-Pole continued
dealing with the routine of government. The Reports of the Commissioners of
Inquiry into publicly-funded education in Ireland were to hand. He introduced an Irish Education
Act in 1811 to set up a Board of Education to supervise these schools, chiefly
grammar schools, established by grants from public funds. It was passed as the
Endowed Schools (Ireland) Act (1813). (This was not the
same as the later Board of National Education established in 1831.) He
had to procure the survival of the Royal Canal that had debts of over three-quarters of a million pounds and was
still uncompleted. The Government took over the canal, completed it to the Shannon, as it was a matter of national interest, and later handed it over
to the creditors of the old company. In 1811, John Foster abruptly retired so
Wellesley-Pole took over his duties. An Irish Freeholders Act (1811) clarified
the law of freehold in Ireland and the rules for registering voters. Each man
registering was to testify on oath the number of acres he held by freehold and
the income derived from them. A Parliamentary Committee on the
Holyhead Road from Shrewsbury to Holyhead made several recommendations, and
endorsed the proposal of Mr. Telford for a suspension bridge over the Menai
Straits as ‘a very ingenious contrivance’. In 1811 too there was a serious outbreak
of agrarian crime in Louth and Meath by groups calling themselves
the 'Carders'. In Munster they were called ‘Caravats’ and ‘Shanavests’
seemingly from distinctive articles of dress cravats and old vests. (There was
at times a confusion between faction fighters who used
these names and secret societies, but the same people may have been involved in
both activities.) The Carders may have been named after a carding implement
used as a means of torture. Later these groups were generally known as Ribbonmen
and were to trouble Ireland for the next half century. The Solicitor General
(Kendal Bushe) addressing the jury at a Special Commission in Clonmel said that
some people regretted the lapse of the old Insurrection Act but it had not been
used since 1803. Nor was the Whiteboy Act (1776) part of the ordinary law of
the land, but only applied in proclaimed counties of which there were only
seven at present in Ireland where it applied.
[1812] In 1812, a rather minor fiscal Bill was introduced to end
sinecures in Ireland. The term sinecure (sine cura, without care of souls) was derived from medieval papal
practice of appointing prelates engaged in special tasks for the Pope as abbots
of wealthy monasteries whose superfluous revenues they drew as a salary when engaged
in such duties. The monks then elected a prior to carry out the duties of the
absent abbot. The system was liable to abuse, and was widely abused, especially
by the kings of France who also claimed feudal rights to dispose of
Church lands. The same principle was applied to various offices to which a
fixed salary or fees were attached. For example, a person could be appointed to
a parish, from which he could draw the tithes, while appointing a vicar to
carry out the pastoral duties. In time, in some places, the right to draw the
tithes became almost completely separated from the pastoral duties, so that a
layman could become the owner of the right to the tithes, but he was still
obliged to employ a vicar to discharge the pastoral duties. Over the centuries
there grew up a number of offices like Master of the Revels, the official
employed to provide entertainment to the Lord Lieutenant. The duties had
vanished, but the salary remained and was awarded to some court favourite or
other. Another was the Chief Remembrancer of the Court of Exchequer, whose
duties were discharged by a clerk. The salary in this case went to the Marquis
Wellesley. The measure proposed however did not deprive him of his revenue. It
merely provided that whenever he ceased to be Chief Remembrancer, the next
official appointed would have to undertake the duties in person. As is
well-known, the Marquis Wellesley, when he became Lord Lieutenant in 1821, gave
up the office, and appointed a Catholic, Anthony Blake as his successor. Blake
was thus the first Catholic to be appointed to a high public office since the
time of James II.
But the office of Irish
Secretary had itself become a sinecure. The various duties of the office were
discharged by the Under-secretaries, one for civil and one for military
affairs. The term secretary is itself ambiguous. It is derived from the Latin
verb secernere, past participle secretum, to set aside, and meaning
those matters the king set aside to deal with personally. It can mean a
principle officer of state, or a private secretary. At the time of the Act of
Union 1800, the sinecure office of Irish Secretary was merged with the office
of the Lord Lieutenant’s Secretary, while the offices of Under-secretaries
remained unchanged. When there was a succession of transient Irish Secretaries
this did not matter. Nor would it matter if the
Under-secretaries were nonentities, or themselves transient figures. As
it happened, there were four Under-secretaries between 1800 and 1812, none of
them memorable.
But in 1812, there was
appointed an able, and very anti-Catholic Under-secretary named William
Gregory, who was determined that none of the rights of his office should be
whittled away. He had a very good relationship with Robert Peel, and as Peel
was happy to accept his advice, there was no conflict between the Secretary and
Under-secretary. After the strongly pro-Catholic Marquis Wellesley was
appointed Lord Lieutenant in 1821 he became very obstructive. Finally, in 1827,
Lord Anglesey determined to get rid of him, but he managed to cling to office
until Anglesey’s re-appointment in 1831. He had the strong
support of Peel, the Home Secretary, until Peel’s belated conversion to the
Catholic cause in 1828. Thereafter, there was no doubt that the Irish
Secretary, or Chief Secretary was in sole charge. Eventually, the office of
Under-secretary was removed from the political sphere into that of the civil
service, and the Under-secretary became permanent head of the Irish Civil
Service. Under-secretaries sat in the Irish Parliament, but never it would seem in the United Kingdom Parliament after 1800
when the Irish Secretary represented the Government in the House of Commons.
It was unfortunate, to say the
least, that three men, with opinions strongly opposed to Catholic claims,
should have remained at the heart of the administration of Irish affairs for so
long. These were Baron Manners, Lord Chancellor from 1807 to 1827, William
Saurin, Attorney General 1807 to 1822, and William Gregory, Under-secretary
from 1812 until 1831. Though all three of them were in office together for only
ten years, and the youthful Peel, who was strongly who was strongly influenced
by them, was Irish Secretary for only six years, yet together they gave the
impression that ‘ascendancy’ was a permanent part of the constitution. None of
the three were reformers or innovators, nor did they try to turn back the
clock. Their chief aim was to prevent the appointment to any public office, not
merely of any Catholics, but of any Protestants who favoured the Catholics.
Peel however continued to give them his powerful support until 1828. Many Irish
Protestants in positions of authority tried to integrate Catholics into public
life. But the influence of these three men was out of proportion to their
numbers. They set the tone for much of the period.
In January l812 the year of
the restricted regency came to an end, and the Prince Regent assumed full
powers. He retained Perceval as Prime Minister. The Marquis Wellesley resigned
from the cabinet on the issue of Emancipation, but Castlereagh returned, this
time as Foreign Secretary, on the understanding that he could support measures
favourable to the Catholics. Napoleon assisted Wellington by withdrawing troops from Spain in order to invade Russia.
In 1812 there was a partial
failure of the potato crop, but it was felt best to continue distilling.
The Irish Catholics
established a Catholic Board similar to the undoubtedly legal English one.
Though any gentleman could join it was essentially a Dublin board, which again did not suit O’Connell, whose
support was greatest in Munster. A loyal address to the Regent on his accession was drawn up,
signed, presented, and graciously received. A Catholic petition and an Irish
Protestant petition signed by most of the Irish MP's in favour of Emancipation
were presented to Parliament.
On the 15th May
1812, the Prime Minister,
Spencer Perceval, was assassinated.