Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T08:01:13.062Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Catholic Relief Act in Ireland, 1778*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Robert E. Burns
Robert E. Burns
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Catholic relief act passed by the Irish parliament in 1778 was the first significant breach of that comprehensive system of legal discrimination against Irish Catholics known in the eighteenth century as the Popery laws. The act of 1778 removed virtually all of the legal restrictions respecting the acquisition and free testamentary disposition of landed property imposed on Irish Catholics by the legislators of William III and Anne and formed a powerful precedent for the subsequent acts of 1782 and 1791–93 that repealed discriminatory statutes affecting the Irish Catholic hierarchy, secular clergy, and the Catholic business and professional classes. While most scholars have fully recognized the revolutionary character of this act and have discussed its provisions many times, a mistaken impression that no detailed record of this measure's passage through the Irish house of commons existed has discouraged original research into the complicated set of circumstances surrounding its enactment. Consequently, the relation of the Anglo-American crisis to the cause of Catholic relief, the connection between this particular act and the movement for Irish legislative independence during the later phases of the war for American independence, and the extraordinary arguments and tactics employed by supporters and opponents of the bill in an exclusively Protestant parliament have remained unnoticed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , June 1963 , pp. 181 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. This act has been described as part of Lord North's scheme to court Catholics and avoid a struggle over Anglo-Irish commercial relations, as originating with the independent members of the Irish parliament, and as following from the tireless efforts of Edmund Burke on behalf of Irish in England. Froude, J. A., The English in Ireland in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1882), II, 227.Google ScholarLecky, W. E. H., History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1892), II, 213.Google ScholarLevack, A. Paul, “Edmund Burke, His Friends, and the Dawn of Irish Catholic Emancipation,” The Catholic Historical Review, XXXVII (01, 1952), pp. 385–414.Google Scholar

2. Lecky, op. cit., II, 213.

3. Middleton to Townshend, August 10, 1775, Sydney Papers 52, National Library, Dublin.

4. Brady, John, “Catholics and Catholicism in the Eighteenth Century Press,” Archivium Hibernicum, XVII (1935), Appendix, pp. 147f.Google Scholar

5. Ibid., Appendix, p. 161.

6. Young, Arthur, A Tour in Ireland (London, 1780), p. 77.Google Scholar

7. Renehan, Laurence F., Collections on Irish Church History (Dublin, 1861), I, 333–334.Google Scholar

8. Ibid., p. 335.

9. Ibid., pp. 335f.

10. Idem.

11. For details, see Faulkner's, Dublin Journal, 11 30-12 2, 1775;Google ScholarGentleman's Magazine (1775), p. 607Google Scholar; Young, op. cit., p. 77.

12. Renchan, op. cit., p. 334.

13. Fortescue, Sir John, Correspondence of King George III (London, 1928), III, 235–236.Google Scholar

14. Harcourt, Edward, Harcourt Papers (privately printed in London, no date), IX, 357–358.Google Scholar

15. Faulkner's, Dublin Journal, 08 19–22; 09 7–9, 1775.Google Scholar

16. Harcourt, op. cit., IX, 357–358.

17. Ibid., X, 196–200.

18. For Burke's role in preparing this petition see Levack, op. cit., pp. 293- 393, and Fitzwilliam, Earl, Correspond ence of Edmund Burke (London, 1844), II, 237–238.Google Scholar For the petition, see Curry, John, An Historical and Critical Review … to the Relaxation of the Popery Laws in the year,1778 (Dublin, 1786), II, 287–293.Google Scholar

19. Buckinghamshire to Weymouth, March 4, 1778, SP 63/459 Public Records Office, London. Hereafter cited as PRO. Lecky's account of Irish Government's attitude toward the petition and the cause of Catholic relief in 1778 is confused by his misreading of Buckinghamshire's letter to Weymouth cited above. Consequently, other scholars relying on Lecky's account of the Catholic relief act of 1778 have been misled.

20. Levack, op. cit., p. 399.

21. Buckinghamshire to Weymoutb, March 4, 1778 SP 63/459, PRO.

22. Brady, op. cit., XVIII (1954), Appendix, 188.

23. Debates in the Irish House of Commons 1776–1789, University of Notre Dame Library, January 26, 1778, 119. Hereafter cited as ID. The original manuscripts of this collection are in the Library of Congress and microfilm copies are on deposit in the University of Notre Dame Library. This collection includes forty-five volumes of short-hand notes and thirty seven volumes of transcriptions of the notes. Although this coilcction has material from 1776 to 1789, most of it relates to the period October, 1777, to July, 1782. The coilection is described in the Second Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Appendix, pp. 99–100 (London, 1871)Google Scholar, in Jernegan's, M. W. brief note in the English Historical Review (01, 1909), pp. 104–106,Google Scholar and the questions of shorthand style and authorship are discussed by Thomas, Peter D. G. in the English Historical Review, 01, 1962, pp. 94–95.Google Scholar The author of this article is presently engaged in preparing a critical edition of this material.

24. Buckinghnmshiro to Weymouth, March 4, 1778, and Buckinghamshire to Weymouth, March 4, 1778 (Enclosure) SP 63/459, PRO.

25. Idem.

26. Idem.

27. Idem.

28. Ever since the end of the fifteenth century legislative initiative in the Irish parliament had been limited by Poyning's Law. By the end of the seventeenth century, however, Poyning' Law had been so modified that the Irish parliament had assumed considerable legislative initiative through the practice of introducing heads of hills. These heads were biils in fact if not in form and were fully debated, committed, and amended according to the customs of the Irish parliament. If passed in the Irish parliament, the heads were sent to the Lord Lieutenant and Irish privy council for approval and transmittal to the King and English privy council. If approved in England, the heads were sent back to Ireland and laid before parliament there. In any stage of this complicated procedure the heads could he altered, amended, or suppressed. If the heads were suppressed, the Irish parliament had no remedy; if they were altered or amended, parliament could only accept or reject the bill in its new form.

29. The most outspokea opponents were George Ogle, Richard Longfield, John Foster, Sir Henry Cavendish. Faulkner's Dublin Journal, March 12–14, 1778; Hibernian Journal, March 13, 1778.

30. Reinforcements were sent to Newry, Belfast, and Cork. Buckinghamshire to Weymouth, March 9, 1778, SP 63/459, PRO.

31. ID, March 23, 1778, pp. 54–56.

32. Ibid., p. 67.

33. The Parliamentary History of England from the earliest period to the year, 1803, XIX, 1777–78 (Hansard, London, 1816) 1111–1112.Google Scholar Hereafter cited as Hansard.

34. Idem.

35. Weymouth to Buckiughamshire March 28, 1778, SP 63/459, PRO.

36. Charlemont's observations on this entire business are suspect. His statement that Grattan took a leading part in support of the Catholic relief act of 1778 is untrue. Historical Manuscripts Commission Twelfth Report: Appendix, Part X (Charlemont Mss., London, 1891), I, 46–47.Google Scholar

37. Historical Manuscripts Commission Fifteenth Report: Appendix Part I (Dartmouth Mss., London, 1896), III, 241.Google Scholar

38. Ibid., p. 242.

39. Hansard, XIX, 1777–78, 1141.

40. Guttridge, George H., The Correspondence of Edmund Burke (Chicago, 1961), III, 449.Google Scholar

41. Sayles, G. O., “Contemporary Sketches of the Members of the Irish Parliament in 1782,” Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy (Dublin, 1954), 56,Google Scholar C, 246.

42. ID, May 22, 1778, 2–3; see also Gardiner's letter to Burke written in late August. Fitzwilliam, op. cit., II, 233–237.

43. ID, May 22, 1778, p. 12.

44. Ibid., pp. 7–9.

45. Historical Manuscripts Commission Report on the Manuscripts in various collections. Eyre-Mateham Mss, and Knox Mss., (London, 1909), VI, 235.Google Scholar Hereafter cited as HMC Var Coll.

46. Guttridge, op. cit., III, 450.

47. The “gavelling clause” deprived Irish Catholics of all rights of free testamentary disposition of landed property. HMC Var CoIl., VI, 235.

48. ID, May 25, 1778, pp. 17–24.

49. Ibid., pp. 24–28.

50. Ibid., p. 28.

51. Ibid., pp. 28–29.

52. Ibid., p. 33.

53. Ibid., pp. 34–35.

54. Ibid., pp. 37–38.

55. Ibid., pp. 53–60.

56. Ibid., pp. 41–42.

57. Ibid., p. 51.

58. Ibid., pp. 67–68.

59. ID, June 1, 1778, pp. 71–72.

60. Weyinouth to Buekinghamshire, May 31, 1778, SP 63/460, PRO.

61. ID, June 5, 1778, pp. 236–237.

62. Ibid., p. 237.

63. Ibid., p. 238.

64. Ibid., p. 242.

65. ID, June 15, 1778, p. 1.

66. Idem.

67. Ibid., p. 17.

68. Ibid., pp. 29–34, 59.

69. Ibid., p. 59.

70. Ibid., p. 60.

71. Ibid., p. 63.

72. Johnston had been defeated for the relatively open “pot walloping” borough of Newry. He was forced to purchase a seat at Kilbeggan. Sayles, op. cit., p. 269.

73. ID, June 15, 1778, pp. 64–76, 78.

74. Ibid., pp. 79–88.

75. Ibid. pp. 98–102.

76. Ibid., pp. 115–117.

77. ID, June 16, 1778, pp. 236–237.

78. Ibid., pp. 189ff; 221.

79. Ibid., pp. 283–293.

80. Ibid., pp. 301–308.

81. Ibid., p. 310.

82. ID, June 18, 1778, pp. 14–25.

83. Ibid., p. 26.

84. Ibid., pp. 38–39.

85. Ibid., pp. 45, 79.

86. Ibid., p. 50.

87. Ibid., pp. 191–192.

88. Ibid., pp. 192–193.

89. Ibid., p. 199.

90. Ibid., p. 295.

91. Ibid., p. 305.

92. Ibid., p. 324.

93. Grattan, Henry, Memoirs of the life and times of the Rt. Hon. Henry Grattan (London, 1839–1846), I, 329–332.Google Scholar

94. Ibid., pp. 332–333.

95. Fitzwilliam, op. cit., II, 29.

96. Weymouth to Buekiughamshire, June 24, 1778, SP 67/16, PRO.

97. ID, July 27, 1778, p. 24.

98. Fitzwilliam, op. cit., II, 231.

99. ID, August 4, 1778, p. 139.

100. Ibid., pp. 141–142.

101. Ibid., pp. 151–152.

102. Ibid., pp. 156–159.

103. Ibid., pp. 159–163.

104. Ibid., p. 173.

105. Ibid., pp. 213–234.

106. Ibid., pp. 247–260.

107. Ibid., p. 261.

108. Ibid., pp. 263–270.

109. Ibid., p. 274.

110. Idem.

111. Ibid., p. 284.

112. Ibid., p. 294.

113. Ibid., pp. 320–328.

114. Ibid., p. 330.

115. Ibid., p. 334.

116. Ibid., pp. 342–343.

117. Ibid., p. 343.

118. Ibid., p. 344.

119. ID, August 5, 1778, p. 346.

120. Ibid., p. 347.

121. Historical Manuscripts Commission Report on the Manuscripts of the Marquess of Lothian (London, 1905), p. 334.Google Scholar

122. Fitzwilliam, op. cit., II, 233, 239.

123. Ibid., pp. 239–240.

124. ID, August 5, 1778, pp. 347–348.

125. Faulkner's Dublin Journal, 11 17–19, 1778.Google Scholar

126. Idem.