Cash4Coursework has been rebranded ‘FreeCoursework.info’ - Visit us to download coursework for free and to earn money from your old coursework!
View this page at Freecoursework.info
Successes and Failures in Irish Constitutional Nationalism, 1800-1900. - page 1
Keywords: ireland constitutional nationalism 1800 1900 19th century success failure henry grattan daniel o'connell isaac butt charles stewart parnell catholic emancipation home rule repeal of the act of union
By exploiit on 19/06/2010
Level: A Level (Year 13)
Page Number: 1 of 12 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Irish constitutional nationalism was undoubtedly more progressive and most successful during the period 1800-1850. Success began to dwindle between 1850 and 1900, although it is difficult to say that constitutional nationalism experienced only failure during this time. The following essay will look at earlier figures in constitutional nationalism in order to highlight the level of success and limited failure experienced in the first half of the century, focusing primarily on the catholic emancipation campaigns of both Henry Grattan and Daniel O’Connell, as well as at O’Connell’s repeal movements. After doing this, the essay will explore the later campaigns in constitutional nationalism between 1850 and 1900. The successes and failures of the Irish Tenant League, the Land League and both Isaac Butt and Charles Parnell’s Home Government Association/Home Rule Party will be considered, and a conclusion will be delivered as to whether or not the above statement is true.
The 19th century first experienced constitutional nationalism through Henry Grattan, an MP representing Dublin from 1806-1820, and his campaign for catholic emancipation. The campaign would work peacefully through the houses of parliament in order to achieve reduction and removal of the restrictions placed on Catholics, including the repeal of the last of the Penal Laws, and to address the “uniform exclusion [of Catholics] from representative government” (Alvin Jackson). Of course, Grattan was understanding that the Tory government of Lord Liverpool was greatly opposed to emancipation, and so was forced to compromise his aims; he would do this by proposing a veto alongside emancipation, thus allowing the government overall authority in regards to Episcopal appointments. Likewise, William Plunkett, a contemporary of Grattan, also included the veto when contesting for emancipation (although his was separated into two separate bills), demonstrating a clear link in constitutional understanding. Neither Grattan nor Plunkett managed to obtain emancipation through their campaign, an obvious failure in the early constitutional nationalist movement, but it is important to note the progress made by both men. Grattan’s initial bill in 1808 was rejected early in the House of Commons, as was his second in 1813. However, he did push a motion forward in order to address catholic grievances in 1812, which was successfully accepted. As well as this, Plunkett’s 1821 proposal for emancipation passed through the House of Commons and, although it proved unsuccessful in the House of Lords, it was proof that the campaign was gaining support and progressing further with each attempt.
Last 5 comments…
There have been no comments posted for this article, but you need to register if you want to be the first!