How effectively did Irish Catholic and Nationalist leaders advance their cause in the years 1801-1921?

Authors Avatar

Christopher Alton 13PMC

How effectively did Irish Catholic and Nationalist leaders advance their cause in the years 1801-1921?

The Irish Catholic and Nationalist leaders were able to advance their cause to varying degrees of success in the years 1801-1921. The measure of how effective each leader was depended largely on his current situation and the results of his predecessor. The later Nationalist leaders were clearly able to build upon the work of those before them, therefore giving them more chance of effectively advancing their causes.

Daniel O’Connell was the first of the nationalist leaders. He aimed to achieve Catholic Emancipation and created the Catholic Association in 1823. This was extremely effective as he mobilized the Catholic majority. The Church then provided the framework for O’Connell to build his new movement around. This was effective as it gave his movement the strength it needed to survive. At this point he had achieved a genuine mass protest forcing the British Prime minister, Wellington, to the conclusion that Emancipation was inevitable. The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts in 1828 which removed restrictions on nonconformists was clearly a major step forward; it reinforced the view that Wellington was willing to cooperate. R.F. Foster stated that ‘the exclusion of Catholics from formal power had not succeeded in restricting their social power’, O’Connell was able to exploit this social pressure to advance his cause. In 1828, O’Connell ran to become the member of Parliament for County Claire. His previous actions and formation of the Catholic Association became extremely useful at this point, clearly demonstrating effective leadership, as with the vote of its members O’Connell was able to win. This created a major crisis, O’Connell stated that ‘they must now crush us, or conciliate us’. At this point it would appear that O’Connell had been relatively effective in advancing his cause, he had paved the way for emancipation and forced major beneficial changes in British policy.

However, O’Connell was soon to realize that continuing to effectively move toward emancipation would be increasingly difficult. Robert Peel, the home secretary, was able to offer a solution that would concede to the Catholics while at the same time undermining O’Connell. This was achieved by the 1829 ‘Catholic Relief Act’ which withdrew many of the laws suppressing the Catholics and led to the electorate in Ireland shrinking from 216,000 to 37,000. O’Connell was now in a much weaker position. This completely diminished the power of the Catholic Association. O’Connell had achieved Emancipation clearly advancing his cause; yet he was no longer in a position to take any further action. However, due to the uproar O’Connell had raised, Ireland was to remain central to British Politics throughout the 1830’s and 1840’s. O’Connell, although less powerful, was still able to lend his support to reform ideas that appealed, for example, he guarded the Irish Church Temporalities Act of 1833 leading to ten Anglican Bishoprics being abolished in Ireland. This advanced O’Connell’s cause as it reduced the financial burden on the Irish to support an alien Church, leading to a more Nationalist Ireland.

In 1840 O’Connell began his battle to achieve a repeal of the Act of Union; however, he lacked the support of the Whigs. Nonetheless, O’Connell was once again able to harness the power of the Catholic Church, who provided the backing needed. He was also able to gain the support of a group referring to themselves as ‘Young Ireland’ while continuing to maintain the support of the peasantry. Unfortunately for O’Connell the Tories returned to power in 1841, with Peel as Prime minister, he was not willing to back down to O’Connell again. This is reinforced by the historian Patrick O’Farrell, who stated ‘having been forced to give ground on the Emancipation issue, English attitudes hardened against any further concessions’. It is clear that at this point O’Connell was struggling to gain the repeal of the Act of Union due to the new attitude of the British; he was therefore not advancing his cause effectively. Following these difficulties came the proposal in 1843 of a ‘monster meeting’ at Clontarf, designed to intimidate the British. This was quickly banned by Peel and O’Connell decided it was best to concede rather than risking violence. However, this destroyed his alliance with ‘Young Ireland’, who were disappointed with his conservatism. He was then arrested in 1844, which disabled his movement.

Join now!

It would seem that O’Connell was effective in many ways in advancing his cause, for example he did successfully achieve Emancipation. However, he did experience shortfalls, such as losing the support of more radical elements such as ‘Young Ireland’. His initial actions were extremely effective, by harnessing the power of the Catholic Church O’Connell was able to get the movement underway, a task which clearly took great determination. The failure over the Clontarf meeting began the downward spiral for O’Connell, his rejection of physical force left him with very few options. His arrest in 1844 broke his movement. Overall ...

This is a preview of the whole essay