• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The Significance of the Irish Convention, 1917

Extracts from this document...


The Irish Convention. Holly Anderson. "The Irish Convention, 1917, had no real significance." Discuss. The Irish Convention was aimed at addressing the Home Rule question and other constitutional problems by involving all Irish parties in the hope of reaching a solution through means of compromise. Held in Trinity College Dublin, the delegates attending consisted of 26 Ulster Unionists, 9 Southern Unionists, 6 Labour representatives, 2 Liberals, and a Nationalist majority of 52. Of these Nationalists, however, none were members of the Sinn Fein Party, and so there was a lack of complete participation from all of the Irish parties and therefore, an insufficient representation of Irish political opinion. This would prove to be one of the crucial reasons why the Convention inevitably failed to accomplish it's original goals, but there were several other reasons why the idea was faced with problems from the start. The Ulster Unionists failed to partake in the Convention constructively and conflict was ripe between the party and the Southern Unionists. Seemingly unresolvable disputes over fiscal issues reinforced the Ulster Unionists' desire for partition. Although it failed to reach any real decisions on the answer to the Irish question, it did result in new problems for the parties involved. ...read more.


As the Ulster Unionists wanted Westminster to deal with Ireland's taxation, and the Nationalists wanted Irish parliament to be able to have their own control, Redmond and conservative Nationalists were keen to accept Midleton's Liberal Convention Policy. It allowed an Irish parliament to control internal taxation, but gave control of custom duties over to Westminster. Initially it seemed like a settlement was finally on the horizon, but more extreme Nationalists, such as Devil and Bishop O'Donnell, rejected the idea and Redmond was forced to withdraw his support. The Nationalists were becoming divided and humiliated in defeat and Redmond decided that he could no longer be of service to the Convention. But he wasn't the only party leader facing a conflict within his own party. Unfortunately for Midleton, not all Southern Unionist members agreed with the idea of abandoning their plans of a Home Rule opposition. Outside of the Convention on 20th February, a group of Southern Unionists met in the Shelbourne Hotel in Dublin, deciding they would not give up the fight for the Union. Forming a new Unionist party called the Southern Unionist Committee, or the 'Callers,' they tried to have the Executive Committee of the Irish Unionist Alliance to stop Midleton's policy, but to no avail. ...read more.


L. Lyons argues that "the convention had two important consequences; firstly it forced Nationalists to realise that Ulster Unionists were not bluffing in their rejection of HR, and secondly it increased Sinn Fein's advantage over the Irish Parliamentary Party." [2.] The Irish Parliamentary party were once again undermined because of their failure to apply Home Rule with immediate affect. Redmond's support for Midleton's policy had cause the initial split in the party, leaving it weakened and an easy opponent for the rising Sinn Fein party. Sinn Fein made a smart political move in avoiding the conference, as their absence was perhaps more valuable to them in the long run than their participation would have been. The Irish Conference may not have worked through the Irish question and constitutional problems it had intended to solve, but it's clear that it did have some real significance. The conference further weakened and helped to destroy the Irish Parliamentary Party, after taking one final chance on a last concession, Redmond had failed once more and died 'knowing that he had failed to deliver Home Rule.' (Rees) The relationship between the Southern Unionists and the Ulster Unionists had been severely weakened and a partition in Ireland was made more likely. [1.] The Unresolved Question - Nicholas Mansergh [2.] Ireland Since the Famine - S. F. L. Lyons ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Other Historical Periods section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Other Historical Periods essays

  1. In this essay, I shall use primary sources to measure the short term significance ...

    Lewis and Clark carried out their instructions to the letter. They came back with detailed knowledge of geography, botany, zoology, cartography and ethnography which had an immediate short term significance in the increase of knowledge. They lay claim to the lands they crossed and established their sovereignty over Indian tribes.

  2. Who was more important in bringing about the end of Apartheid and minority rule ...

    President De Klerk had the insight and courage to take the decision to change the apartheid state but it was really as much one forced on him by circumstances as one he wanted to take. He surprised South Africa when he set out his proposals for change in inauguration speech on 2nd February 1990.

  1. Discuss the course and consequences of the Arab Israeli Conflict

    giving further reinforcement to the fact that "the question" had indeed, been answered. Herzl absolutely denied the existence of an Arab population, for if there were 'no populace' living in Palestine, could the Jewish people not just simply move in?

  2. How and why did the Bolsheviks gain power in 1917?

    The Tsarist government's attitude, despite the Dumas willingness for reform, rejected any form of change to the system; and refused to establish a democratic state, keeping with the autocratic system. The Bolsheviks saw, and it can be agreed on that, while standing his ground on his autocratic rule; the Tsar

  1. What was the short term significance of the Amritsar Massacre?

    An assembly of people was fired upon by Dyer's troops, killing 379 and injuring more than 1200. Such act of brutal repression alone was enough to "riddle" moral pretence for British rule into transparency6; but what made the problem worse was that Dyer seemed very proud of what he did,

  2. How successfully did the Labour governments of 1945-51 solve the social problems of the ...

    It soon became clear, however, that the original acts were insufficient: in 1949, 48% of pensioners applied for National Assistance. "This dependency of National Insurance benefits on means-tested assistance" compromised "the principle of universality and of benefits paid as of right," and so limits the success of the Labour government.

  1. How effective was the leadership provided by prominent individual nationalists in Malaya?

    Peasants were absent. It was a group obviously not made for them in mind, with regular scholarly discussions held on the problems the Malay race faced. His book, Surveying the Homeland, was not written with the peasant in mind, and served as more of a rallying call for the aristocracy and those with higher education.

  2. Consider David Starkey(TM)s and Francis Pryor(TM)s respective versions of the nature and extent of ...

    around 367. This is known as the Barbarian conspiracy as during this time, Britain came under attack from all sides - the Saxons from the East, the Picts from the North and the Irish from the West. Around 383 a group of fortifications were built along the Yorkshire coast.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work