The evolution of colonial institution

Traditional histories of parliament, whether Irish or otherwise, have generally treated them as political events. This book considers the seventeenth-century Irish Parliament as an ongoing element within the state. It considers the role of parliament within the context of an overall state apparatus of governance and charts its development over time. While parliament developed in conjunction with the Irish state, local politicians, and local institutions, it was also a colonial institution, taking direction from Westminster on how to operate. Whether by design or by chance, it resembles the Westminster model of parliamentary procedure, but it also had specifically Irish traits in how it dispatched its business. This book describes a developing institution chiefly through the work that it undertook. Most will be well aware of parliament’s work on legislation and the creation of law and also representation of communities and locations, but it spent large amounts of time hearing petitions and undertaking judicial work. It undertook these ever-increasing responsibilities with a growing group of parliamentary officers, who had a wide variety of powers and responsibilities. Naturally this led to a sophisticated set of procedures and privileges in undertaking this work in order to increase its efficiency and productivity. This book discusses topics and describes processes that are still very much a cornerstone for today’s parliamentary democracy in Ireland and will resonate in Irish institutional culture and elsewhere in the common law world.

Editor: Julian Hoppit

In 1660 the four nations of the British Isles were governed by one imperial crown but by three parliaments. The abolition of the Scottish and Irish Parliaments in 1707 and 1800 created a United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland centred upon the Westminster legislature. This book takes state formation. A number of important points emerge, however, the book deals with three. The first and most obvious point is that the unions were limited in scope and were palpably not incorporating . The second point is that, depending upon the issue, parliament required or encouraged not only different arguments but different voices. The final conclusion to emerge from these essays is that utility of 'national identity' as a way of understanding how people in the period conceived of themselves and their relationship to the state is not as clear and certain as might be first thought. National identity was one amongst a number of geo-political communities people might belong to, albeit a very important one. Inasmuch as the Westminster parliament provided a forum in which debates about how to legislate for three kingdoms took place, in its own way it helped to reinforce awareness of that difference. Liverpool petitions allow us to explore the intersection between policy debate and imperial identity during a pivotal era in the evolution of the British Empire. After 1832, virtual representation, though it survived in many different ways, became associated in the colonial context with nabobs and planters, the very demons of 'old Corruption'.

Ireland as a case study

The role of national parliaments in the European Union (EU) has developed considerably over time. This book focuses on one parliament as a case study in this regard: the national parliament of Ireland, the Oireachtas. The basic structure of that parliament is modelled on that of the United Kingdom. Like the United Kingdom, Ireland joined the then European Communities on 1 January 1973. Within a relatively short period from the date of Ireland's joining the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973, it became clear that major structural change to the Communities would be needed if the EEC were ever to fulfil its potential. The book examines the initial adaptations of its parliament to European integration and how Ireland's domestic parliamentary accommodation of membership slowly changed over time. It focuses on the considerable impact on domestic parliamentary arrangements of the recent banking and foreign debt crises and of the Treaty of Lisbon. An assessment of the role of the Oireachtas in European law and policy during the lifetimes of the 30th Dail (2007-11) and the 31st Dail (2011-16) follows. The book discusses the formation of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on European Union Affairs, which held its first meeting in private on 19 July 2016, and its first public meeting on 7 September. However, Ireland's position as a "slow adaptor" to European integration has meant that the Oireachtas has had more ground to make up than many other legislatures.

candidate, Sir John Everard, whose defeat prompted a (probably pre-arranged) walkout. 5 In 1661, there was another competition. The king’s candidate Sir William Domville only commanded minority support. Orrery and Mountrath encouraged the king to yield to the wishes of the Commons. 6 This is an important event in the history of parliamentary privilege, as it is the only time in the seventeenth century, and perhaps the first time in the history of the Irish Parliament, that the speaker of the Commons, Sir Audley Mervin, was not the king’s choice. Charles surely

in The Irish Parliament, 1613–89

Elizabethan chroniclers and parliament Chapter 6 Elizabethan chroniclers and parliament Ian W. Archer C hronicles, annalistic in form and eclectic in content, remained the dominant form of historical writing for much of Elizabeth’s reign, only displaced by the new humanist histories from the 1590s onwards. Through the prolific labours of John Stow chronicles were made available in varying formats and at different prices which broadened their audience. Chroniclers recycled material from each other, albeit with significant differences in selection and emphasis

in Writing the history of parliament in Tudor and early Stuart England
Medieval history in parliamentarian polemic, 1641–42

Jason Peacey Chapter 9 ‘That memorable parliament’: medieval history in parliamentarian polemic, 1641–42 Jason Peacey I n 1647, Edward Chamberlayne professed that ‘The most probable way to know what will be, is to observe what hath beene’, adding that ‘The historian, by running backe to ages past, and then forward to present Affaires, comparing one with the other, can give a verdict of the State, well neer Prophetick’.1 Such sentiments were unremarkable in an age drawn to politic history, and scholars have done much to analyse the work of poets and writers

in Writing the history of parliament in Tudor and early Stuart England

The enduring controversy about the nature of parliament informs nearly all debates about the momentous religious, political and governmental changes in early modern England – most significantly, the character of the Reformation and the causes of the Revolution. Meanwhile, scholars of ideas have emphasised the historicist turn that shaped the period’s political culture. Religious and intellectual imperatives from the sixteenth century onwards evoked a new interest in the evolution of parliament, shaping the ways that contemporaries interpreted, legitimised and contested Church, state and political hierarchies. For much of the last century, scholarship on parliament focused on its role in high politics, or adopted an administrative perspective. The major exception was J. G. A. Pocock’s brilliant The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (1957), which argued that competing conceptions about the antiquity of England’s parliamentary constitution – particularly its common law – were a defining element of early Stuart political mentalities and set in motion a continuing debate about the role of historical thought in early seventeenth-century England. The purpose of this volume is to explore contemporary views of parliament’s history/histories over a broader canvas. Historical culture is defined widely to encompass the study of chronicles, more overtly ‘literary’ texts, antiquarian scholarship, religious polemic, political pamphlets, and of the intricate processes that forge memory and tradition. Over half of the essays explore Tudor historical thought, showing that Stuart debates about parliament cannot be divorced from their sixteenth-century prelude. The volume restates the crucial role of institutions for the study of political culture and thought.

Polydore Vergil and the first English parliament Chapter 2 Polydore Vergil and the first English parliament Paul Cavill I n his Anglica historia (1534), the Italian humanist émigré Polydore Vergil dated England’s first parliament to the year 1116; as a consequence, so too did popular vernacular histories of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Vergil’s dating has long been the starting point for studies of the emerging interest in the antiquity of parliament found in Elizabethan and Jacobean historical thought.1 Condensing modern scholarship

in Writing the history of parliament in Tudor and early Stuart England

PARLIAMENT AND INTERNATIONAL LAW 9 Parliament and international law in the eighteenth century 1 David Armitage The study of parliament and international law in the eighteenth century illuminates crucial distinctions among nation, state and empire. For example, after 1603 but before 1707, the Scottish parliament in Edinburgh represented a nation but aroused English opposition whenever it tried to legislate as if Scotland were an independent state. Before 1801, the Irish parliament in Dublin represented only a very narrowly defined Irish nation and, prior to the

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

Noah Millstone Chapter 8 The politic history of early Stuart parliaments Noah Millstone T    he second session of the 1621 parliament ended in acrimony. Over December, communications between King James and his House of Commons became increasingly hostile, culminating in a scene of symbolic violence, as James ripped the lower House’s final protest from their Journal. What, exactly, had gone wrong? Robert Zaller and Conrad Russell, the two most prominent modern students of the session, trace the dispute to a series of misunderstandings leading to a clash of

in Writing the history of parliament in Tudor and early Stuart England