Search results

Were they too good for them?

, which cumulatively dismantled most of the penal laws, came almost entirely from successive British governments, anxious about Britain’s standing in the world or fearful of the consequences of Catholic disaffection in Ireland. Left to themselves, it is hard to see Irish (Protestant) politicians making any attempt to set in train the progressive undoing of the penal laws. It was in 1746 that an exasperated lord lieutenant, The penal laws against Irish Catholics 157 Lord Chesterfield, complained that Irish Protestants were ‘in general still in the year 1689 and have

in Irish Catholic identities
Clerical responses to the British campaign

’Alton accompanied Archbishop Gilmartin to Ballinrobe RIC barracks to offer his condolences, ‘describing the victims as men of excellent character’.47 However, when the required ministrations implied endorsement of the British government it proved more difficult to obtain clerical cooperation. In April 1921 a new lord lieutenant was appointed in the person of Viscount Fitzalan of Derwent, the first Catholic to accede to that position since the seventeenth century. Fitzalan had received permission from the Holy See to establish a chapel in the viceregal lodge. Fitzalan wrote to

in Freedom and the Fifth Commandment

in this period, first brought together by Professor McDowell nearly forty years ago, suggests that two processes were at work.4 The first led to greater uniformity in government by absorbing or integrating Irish departments into the British equivalents, while the other emphasised separateness by establishing new administrative bodies that were designed to suit Irish needs. Both of these processes can be observed at the highest level of the Irish administration – that occupied in 1800 by the Lord Lieutenant and the Chief Secretary on behalf of the British 147 PETER

in Parliaments, nations and identities in Britain and Ireland, 1660–1850

. The Ascendancy was very much a Protestant garrison, and the Irish political system, very similar in structure to that of Britain, was an Anglican preserve. Ireland was perceived in Britain as an imperial problem, but it was one complicated by many political and personal links that spanned the Irish Sea. Ireland was ruled by a Lord-Lieutenant, always a British peer, in the name of George III, who therefore took a personal interest in appointments. The Viceroy formed part of the ministry in London, and a change there almost always entailed a replacement in Dublin. The

in George III
Abstract only
Mills and acts

’ Law is as much about the office of the lord lieutenant, the king, and the respective privy councils of Ireland and England and their committees as it is about parliament. This chapter will refer to Poynings’ Law only when necessary to explain the role of parliament in the passing, and occasionally in contributing to the drafting, of law in Ireland. Another issue this chapter will not consider in its entirety is the creation of law. There were many ways to create law in Ireland and, on occasion, the Irish Parliament had no input. The lord lieutenant created acts of

in The Irish Parliament, 1613–89
Abstract only

, told his lord lieutenant, Lord St John, how difficult it was ‘to persuade men to any forwardness in these martial causes’.5 Yet evidence has not been found to support Smith’s case that separate factions of supporters of the court on the one hand and defenders of the county on the other developed; or if they did (as may have been the case in Norfolk), lines of communication between the camps remained open, and both could cooperate in business.6 Nor does it appear that local officials who sought to meet the demands of the centre found their local reputations suffering

in War and politics in the Elizabethan counties
Abstract only

in spreading both the revolutionary ideology and organizational structure of the Defenders and the Society of United Irishmen to the west of Ireland.’19 Galway and Mayo 113 Indeed, the radical organizations’ recruitment efforts amongst the indigenous population were dramatically assisted by the deplorable appearance of the new arrivals. Compounding the visual effect were the harrowing accounts of Orange atrocities told by the northern refugees. The Lord Lieutenant, Camden, pointed to the danger posed by this latter phenomenon in a communication to his Chief

in In the wake of the great rebellion

translated into a more powerful remit in Ireland and was exhibited in his title of lord lieutenant, an office exercised by just two others in the sixteenth century: Surrey in the early 1520s and the second earl of Essex at the height of the Nine Years War.68 What was more, as Brady has clearly demonstrated, Sussex came to the vice-regal office with distinct ideas concerning how he intended to govern Ireland, an agenda of sorts, which he refined into a systematic programme by the early 1560s.69 This was in stark contrast to the other mid-Tudor governors. Brabazon, for

in Debating Tudor policy in sixteenth-century Ireland

loyalty’, although they suffered a severe shortage of officers. Similarly, the corps of the staunch loyalist and Orangeman Robert Cornwall could ‘be fully relied on’. More cryptically, the governor observed of Kavanagh’s Borris corps: ‘[I]t is not necessary for me to say anything respecting them.’28 In December, the Borris corps came under the scrutiny of the Lord Lieutenant. Earl Hardwicke called on the yeomen of County Carlow ‘to use their utmost efforts to discover and apprehend Corcoran’. This request was directly forwarded to Kavanagh by William Wickham, who added

in In the wake of the great rebellion

, but more free from bias and sectarianism than many other local newspapers at the time. Local power The Parsons family, earls of Rosse, were immensely dominant in the King’s County, now County Offaly. ‘The machinery of justice and county administration was largely under the patronage and influence of the earls of Rosse from the 1820s until the county councils were established in 1899.’3 At one time or another they held all the powerful positions of the day, in or for the county, such as MP, Lord Lieutenant, Custos Rotulorum (keeper of the rolls), High Sheriff, and

in William Parsons, 3rd Earl of Rosse