The Disfranchising Act, an act of parliament of the Parliament of Ireland, is debated in 1727 and receives royal assent on May 6, 1728. One of a series of Penal Laws, it prohibits all Roman Catholics from voting in parliamentary elections. Its full title is “An Act for the further regulating the Election of Members of Parliament, and preventing the irregular Proceedings of Sheriffs and other Officers in electing and returning such Members” and its citation is 1 Geo. 2. c. 9 (I).
In the eighteenth century, elections are held at irregular intervals and at the beginning of a new reign. The Act follows the death of George I on June 11, 1727, but does not take effect until after the election of 1727, coming into force in 1728.
The Act is repealed by the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1793, which receives royal assent on April 9, 1793, allowing the franchise in Ireland to all men holding a property with a rental value of at least two pounds annually.
Ó Súilleabháin is deeply involved in Daniel O’Connell‘s Catholic emancipation movement and in relief work among the poor of County Kilkenny. He is also an avid bird watcher and a collector of manuscripts in the Irish language. His diary, published later as Cín Lae Amhlaoibh, is kept between 1827 and 1835. It remains one of the most important sources for 19th-century Irish life and one of the few surviving works from the perspective of the Roman Catholic lower and middle classes. (A translation has been published in English and an abridged and annotated edition in Irish, both edited by Tomás de Bhaldraithe.) He also composes verse and stories.
Ó Súilleabháin is born in Killarney, County Kerry. He comes to live at Callan, County Kilkenny, when he is nine years old, joining his father, Donncha Ó Súilleabháin. Father and son establish themselves as teachers in the surrounding towns. They begin by teaching under the hedges, but eventually a cabin is built as a school. He takes over the post of teacher there when his father dies in 1808. He remains a resident of Callan until his death. At the time, County Kilkenny is one of the most strongly Irish-speaking areas in Leinster.
As a teacher, Ó Súilleabháin is well versed in mathematics and Latin, and likely teaches English to a high standard. His diary shows him to have a deep interest in the natural world, and there are daily references to the weather.
Though Ó Súilleabháin is clearly a master of English, his diary is mostly in Irish, with occasional business-related entries in English, likely so that such transactions can be verified by others. He mostly eschews the archaisms favoured by other writers in Irish, writing in a fluent, flexible, colloquial style which could encompass both concision and literary elaboration. His diary shows him to be deeply involved in the life of the poor but to also be well acquainted with local notables. He is fond of occasional revelry and a good meal.
Ó Súilleabháin has an impressive collection of Irish language manuscripts, both prose and verse, which are supplemented by books. As a businessman, he deals in linen, corn and meal, and often has to make long trips to Dublin, Clonmel and Waterford.
Ó Súilleabháin marries a woman named Máire Ní Dhulachanta, not often mentioned in his diary. They have six or seven children, four of whom survive into adulthood. Her death, however, causes him great grief, and he never remarries.
Ó Súilleabháin dies on November 20, 1838, in Callan and is buried in the family plot in St. Brigid’s graveyard.
Amhlaoibh’s original manuscript is currently in the possession of the Royal Irish Academy. An edition of the complete manuscript is published as Cinnlae Amhlaoibh Uí Shúileabháin by M. McGrath in 1936-37 and an abridged and annotated edition, Cín Lae Amhlaoibh, by Tomás de Bhaldraithe in 1970–1973. A translation, The Diary of an Irish Countryman, is published by de Bhaldraithe (Mercier Press) in 1979.
(Pictured: The Seal of Milesius, the official seal of the Ó Súilleabháin Clann of Munster)
In 1904, King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra travel to Ireland for a semi-official eight-day visit, arriving in Kingstown (now Dún Laoghaire) on April 26. They are accompanied by their daughter, Princess Victoria.
They travel by rail to Naas via the Great Southern and Western Railway Company. They are seated in a luxuriously upholstered carriage, the engine decorated with flags and streamers. The visit triggers a frenzy of preparation among the elite and merchants of Naas. Leading citizens from diverse backgrounds, including Protestants, Catholics, Loyalists, and Home Rulers, come together to welcome the royal visitors. The town is adorned with bunting, banners, and arches bearing royal and loyalist symbols, creating an extravagant showpiece of imperial loyalty.
During their visit to Naas, the King and Queen attend the Punchestown Races, adding a touch of glamour to the occasion.
They stay in the Dublin area for a few days, attending several events and ceremonies. After finishing in Dublin, the royals board their royal train for a three-day visit to Kilkenny.
For the arrival of the King and Queen in Kilkenny, significant efforts are undertaken to ensure the city is elegantly presented. In the weeks and months prior to the visit, local businessmen convene meetings in how best to organise the occasion.
The city is heavily festooned with bunting and streamers, and the route from the railway station to Kilkenny Castle is decorated with tiny fairy lights of every colour. During the visit, Princess Victoria plants three trees on the grounds of the Castle.
The visit is well-received in Kilkenny, although sometimes expressed in primitive fashion: an old man remarks, “Sure, the King’s a man after all,” his wife correcting him, “But he’s a great man, and the lovely lady’s an angel.” Although well-supported, black flags protesting the visit are hung from some buildings along the route. (It is more than 110 years before another royal visit is made to Kilkenny when Prince Charles and Princess Camilla visit the city on May 11, 2017.)
McEnery is born on April 28, 1892, to Henry McEnery and Margaret (née Stack) at 4 Slieveawaddra, Drommartin, County Kerry. His mother and father are national teachers, and his father is also a farmer. Some of his older siblings become teachers and his brother is a Catholic priest.
McEnery marries Johannah (Hannah) Donnelly at Causeway, County Kerry, on April 13, 1918. Their only child, Henry, known as “Sunny,” is born on June 11, 1920.
McEnery joins the Irish Volunteers and is a lieutenant in the 3rd Battalion, North Kerry. As in the Volunteers, in the IRA he is a lieutenant, 3rd Battalion, in the Kerry No.1 Brigade (also of North Kerry). He is part of Timothy “Aeroplane” Lyons‘s column, which is involved in the burning of a Civic Guard station at Ballyheigue and a robbery of the Ballyduff post office. He is captured and imprisoned by the National Army and claims under interrogation that he was forced to join Lyons’s column under fear of death, accused of being a traitor. Despite giving an undertaking, he would not resume militant activity, he rejoins Lyons’s column following his release.
On April 16, McEnery takes part in the column’s ambush on a Free State raiding party at Meenoghane. The National Army’s 1st Western Division supplies reinforcements quickly and pursues the column to Clashmealcon, where the members hide in Dumfort’s Cave on the Atlantic cliffs with no possible escape. Two National Army troops are shot and killed by Lyons when trying to enter the cave. Two of the column’s men fall and drown after trying to scale the cliff at night. McEnery surrendered with Reginald Walter Stenning and Edmond Greaney. They are taken to Ballymullen Barracks in Tralee. Lyons falls from a rope and is shot while lying on the rocks below.
On April 18, McEnery and his two remaining colleagues are charged with the Ballyheigue burning, the Ballyduff robbery, stripping civic guards at Ballyheigue, attacking National troops at Clashmealcon and armed opposition to the government. They are tried and sentenced to death by Paddy Daly, OC of the National Army in Kerry. The following day, Daly asks for confirmation of the sentences, which duly arrive. McEnery is shot at 8:00 a.m. on April 25, three days before his 31st birthday. He is initially interred at the gaol. A death entry is made in the register the following month, incorrectly giving his age as 28. His body is finally released, along with those of others executed, to relatives on October 28 of the following year, when hundreds gather outside the gaol.
McEnery is buried alongside executed colleagues in the republican plot at Rahela Cemetery, Ballyduff. Hannah McEnery is granted £250 from the Irish White Cross and their son Henry £1 per week until working age. In 1932, pending new legislation, she applies for an allowance because of her dependency on McEnery and is awarded £67 and 10 shillings per annum (increased to £250 in the 1950s), and £18 per annum for their son.
McEnery is counted as one of “the seventy-seven,” a term made popular amongst republicans after the writing of Dorothy Macardle in memory of those executed by Free State troops.
Shortly before her twelfth birthday, Hone suffers from polio (infant paralysis), suffering a fall while helping to decorate the Taney parish church for Easter. Her resulting ill health leads to her seeking treatment in Harley Street, Marylebone, Central London. She is educated by a governess, continuing her education in Switzerland, and goes on tours to Spain and Italy before moving to London in 1913. Her three sisters all marry British Army officers, and all are widowed in World War I.
Hone is extremely devout. She spends time in an Anglican Convent in 1925 at Truro in Cornwall and converts to Catholicism in 1937. This possibly influences her decision to begin working in stained glass. Initially, she works as a member of the An Túr Gloine stained glass co-operative before setting up a studio of her own in Rathfarnham.
Hone’s most important works are probably the East Window, depicting the Crucifixion, for the Chapel at Eton College, Windsor (1949–1952) and My Four Green Fields, now located in Government Buildings, Dublin. This latter work, commissioned for the Irish Government’s Pavilion, wins first prize for stained glass in the 1939 New York World’s Fair. It graces CIÉ‘s Head Office in O’Connell Street from 1960 to about 1983. The East Window of Eton College is commissioned following the destruction of the building after a bomb is dropped in 1940 on the school during World War II. She is commissioned to design the East Window in 1949, and the new window is inserted in 1952. This work is featured on an Irish postage stamp in 1969. From December 2005 to June 2006, an exhibition of her work is on display at the National Gallery of Ireland. Saint Mary’s church in Clonsilla also features her stained glass windows.
Despite ill health, Hone continues to produce a huge number of small stained glass panels as well as oils, watercolours, and gouache landscapes. In 1953, she is represented at the Contemporary Irish Art exhibition at Aberystwyth, Wales, and at the Tate gallery in London, receiving as well an honorary LLD from Trinity College Dublin (TCD). In 1954, she is elected an honorary member of the Royal Hibernian Academy (RHA).
Unmarried, Hone dies on March 13, 1955, while entering her parish church at Rathfarnham. She is survived by two of her sisters. Over 20,000 people visit a memorial exhibition of her work at University College Dublin (UCD), Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin, in 1958.
(Pictured: Portrait of Evie Hone by Hilda van Stockum)
In April 1916, Germany offers the Irish 20,000 Mosin–Nagant 1891 rifles, ten machine guns and accompanying ammunition, but no German officers. It is a fraction of the quantity of the arms Casement had hoped for, with no military expertise on offer. The weapons leave Germany bound for Ireland on a German cargo vessel named the SS Libau, disguised as a Norwegian vessel, Aud-Norge.
Casement confides his personal papers to Dr. Charles Curry, with whom he has stayed at Riederau on the Ammersee, before leaving Germany. He departs with Robert Monteith and Sergeant Daniel Beverley (Bailey) of the Irish Brigade in a submarine, initially the SM U-20, which develops engine trouble, and then the SM U-19, shortly after the Aud sails. According to Monteith, Casement believes the Germans are toying with him from the start and providing inadequate aid that will doom a rising to failure. He wants to reach Ireland before the shipment of arms and to convince Eoin MacNeill, who he believes is still in control, to cancel the rising.
Casement sends John McGoey, a recently arrived Irish American, through Denmark to Dublin, ostensibly to advise what military aid is coming from Germany and when, but with Casement’s orders “to get the Heads in Ireland to call off the rising and merely try to land the arms and distribute them.” McGoey does not reach Dublin, nor does his message. His fate is unknown until recently. Evidently abandoning the Irish Nationalist cause, he joins the Royal Navy in 1916, survives the war, and later returns to the United States, where he dies in an accident on a building site in 1925.
About 2:00 a.m. on the morning of April 21, 1916, three days before the rising begins, Robert Monteith, Daniel Bailey (calling himself Beverly), and Casement climb into a small boat for the trip to shore at Banna Strand in Tralee Bay, County Kerry. Their boat, now in the Imperial War Museum in London, capsizes before they reach shore.
Monteith helps an exhausted Casement to safety on shore. Casement is convinced that the Rising cannot be successful without a large number of German troops, and the best he has been able to obtain is one boatload of arms. Suffering from a recurrence of the malaria that had plagued him since his days in the Congo, and too weak to travel, Monteith and Bailey leave Casement at the ruins of McKenna’s Fort, an ancient ring fort in Rahoneen, Ardfert, now renamed Casement’s Fort, and head for Tralee.
About 1:30 p.m., Casement is discovered by two Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) officers. He nearly talks his way out of being arrested, but a 12-year-old boy at the scene points out a piece of paper Casement had tossed away as the police approach. On that paper is a German code list. He is arrested on charges of high treason, sabotage and espionage against the Crown. He manages to send word to Dublin about the inadequate German assistance.
The Kerry Brigade of the Irish Volunteers might have tried to rescue Casement over the next three days, but its leadership in Dublin holds that not a shot is to be fired in Ireland before the Easter Rising is in train and therefore orders the Brigade to “do nothing.” A subsequent internal inquiry attaches “no blame whatsoever” to the local Volunteers for failing to attempt a rescue. Casement is taken to Brixton Prison and placed under special observation for fear of an attempt of suicide as there is no staff at the Tower of London to guard suicidal cases.
On the day of his execution by hanging at Pentonville Prison, August 3, 1916, Casement is received into the Catholic Church at his request. He is attended by two Catholic priests, Dean Timothy Ring and Father James Carey, from the East London parish of SS Mary and Michael. The latter, also known as James McCarroll, says of Casement that he was “a saint … we should be praying to him [Casement] instead of for him.” At the time of his death he is 51 years old.
Casement’s body is buried in quicklime in the prison cemetery at the rear of Pentonville Prison, though his last wish was to be buried at Murlough Bay on the north coast of County Antrim, in present-day Northern Ireland. Finally, in 1965, his remains are repatriated to Ireland. His remains lay in state at the Garrison Church, Arbour Hill (now Arbour Hill Prison) in Dublin for five days, close to the graves of other leaders of the 1916 Easter Rising, although he would not be buried beside them. After a state funeral, the remains are buried with full military honours in the republican plot in Glasnevin Cemetery in Dublin, alongside other Irish republicans and nationalists. The President of Ireland, Éamon de Valera, who is then in his mid-eighties and the last surviving leader of the Easter Rising, attends the ceremony, along with an estimated 30,000 others.
Seán Proinsias Ó Faoláin, short story writer of international repute and one of the most influential figures in 20th-century Irish culture, dies in Dublin on April 20, 1991. He is also a leading commentator and critic.
Ó Faoláin writes his first stories in the 1920s, eventually completing ninety stories over a period of sixty years. From 1929 to 1933 he lectures at the Catholic college, St. Mary’s College, at Strawberry Hill, London, during which period he writes his first two books. His first book, Midsummer Night Madness, is published in 1932. It is a collection of stories partly based on his Civil War experiences. He afterward returns to Ireland. He publishes four novels, seven additional volumes of short stories, six biographies, three travel books, a play, a memoir, a history book, translations and literary criticism, including one of the rare full-length studies of the short story, The Short Story (1948). He also writes a cultural history, The Irish, in 1947. His last short story volume, Foreign Affairs, is published in 1976. His Collected Stories is published in 1983.
Ó Faoláin produces critical studies of the novel and the short-story form, introduces texts of historical and literary merit, and contributes scores of articles, reviews, and uncollected stories to periodicals in Ireland, Britain, and the United States.
Ó Faoláin is a founder member and editor of the Irish literary periodical The Bell from 1940 to 1946. Under his editorship, The Bell participates in many key debates of the day. It also provides a crucial outlet for established and emerging writers during the lean war years. The list of contributors to The Bell include many of Ireland’s foremost writers, among them Patrick Kavanagh, Patrick Swift, Flann O’Brien, Frank O’Connor and Brendan Behan.
A recurring thread in Ó Faoláin’s work is the idea that national identities are historically produced and culturally hybrid; an additional thesis is that Irish history should be conceived in international terms, and that it should be read, in particular, in the context of social and intellectual developments across Europe.
Ó Faoláin marries Eileen Gould, a children’s book writer who publishes several books of Irish folk tales, in 1929. They have two children: Julia (1932–2020), who becomes a Booker-nominated novelist and short story writer, and Stephen (b. 1938).
Ó Faoláin dies in Dublin at the age of 91 on April 20, 1991.
Ó Faoláin is a controversial figure in his own lifetime and two of his books are banned for “indecency” in Ireland — his debut collection of short stories and his second novel, Bird Alone (1936). His legacy has proven divisive. If some consider him a social liberal cosmopolitan who challenges “proscriptive” definitions of Irish culture, others see him as a chauvinistic snob who paradoxically restricts the development of Irish writing. Proto-revisionist or nascent postcolonial, O’Faoláin has been considered both, sometimes within the same critical survey. Either way, his work is central to the evolution of a post–Literary Revival aesthetic, and his voice is one of the most prominent, and eloquent, in the fight against censorship in Ireland.
(Pictured: Portrait of Seán Ó Faoláin by Howard Coster, 1930s, National Portrait Gallery)
MacMahon, who is educated at home, is also literary. From the 1890s she begins contributing to periodicals such as the New Ireland Review, for which she writes on local history. Her first novel, A New Note, appears in 1894 and over the next thirty-five years she is prolific, publishing over twenty novels as well as making numerous contributions to magazines, and several to BBC radio programmes. She is unmarried and writing is her main source of income, but during World War I she works as a civil servant in various government departments including War, Trade, and the newly created Intelligence department. Afterward she lives in Brockenhurst, Hampshire, England, and converts at some stage to Catholicism.
MacMahon’s novels are romances. Typical of them is An Honorable Estate (1898), which features an English heiress marrying an impoverished Irish clergyman in a fit of pique, only to fall in love with him. They are undemanding but entertaining and occasionally ironic, with clever social commentary. Irish Book Lover, a quarterly review of Irish literature and bibliography, commends The Job (1914) for its insightful and sympathetic characterisation. It is an account of a baronet‘s struggle to improve his Irish estate despite the fecklessness of the inhabitants. Ireland is a frequent setting for her stories. Her view of it verges on the sentimental, and she often features eccentric but ultimately good-hearted country people.
However, MacMahon’s last book, Wind of Dawn (1927), is a more profound, interesting study. Set during the Irish War of Independence and the truce, it looks at the complexities within Irish society and the differences in attitude between the Anglo- and native Irish. Rich in characters, it features a naive English girl in love with Ireland, a papist-hating domestic servant, and an ascendancy grande dame who finds England monotonous but is adamant that her children will be educated there and will not acquire a brogue. Unlike MacMahon’s other books, it is not a romance and ends in tragedy and then acceptance for the coming change of regime. It reads like a lesser novel by Elizabeth Bowen and resembles in theme and argument, though not in quality, The Last September (1929), which it predates. Unfortunately, she is not inspired to go further in this line. She writes no more and retires on a government civil pension.
By the time of her death on April 19, 1956, MacMahon has fallen into complete obscurity, and surprisingly, given the quantity and relative merit of her work, she has no entry to date in any of the numerous anthologies of Irish or women writers.
O’Connell had rejected a suggestion from “friends of emancipation,” and from the English Roman Catholic bishop, John Milner, that the fear of Catholic advancement might be allayed if the Crown were accorded the same right exercised by continental monarchs: a veto on the confirmation of Catholic bishops. O’Connell insists that Irish Catholics would rather “remain forever without emancipation” than allow the government “to interfere” with the appointment of their senior clergy. Instead, he relies on their confidence in the independence of the priesthood from Ascendancy landowners and magistrates to build his Catholic Association into a mass political movement. On the basis of a “Catholic rent” of a penny a month (typically paid through the local priest), the Association mobilises not only the Catholic middle class, but also poorer tenant farmers and tradesmen. Their investment enables O’Connell to mount “monster” rallies that stay the hands of authorities and embolden larger enfranchised tenants to vote for pro-emancipation candidates in defiance of their landlords.
O’Connell’s campaign reaches its climax when he himself stands for parliament. In July 1828, he defeats a nominee for a position in the British cabinet, William Vesey-FitzGerald, in a County Clare by-election, 2057 votes to 982. This makes a direct issue of the parliamentary Oath of Supremacy by which, as a Catholic, he will be denied his seat in the Commons.
As Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Wellington’s brother, Richard Wellesley, had attempted to placate Catholic opinion, notably by dismissal of the long-serving Attorney-General for Ireland, William Saurin, whose rigid Ascendancy views and policy made him bitterly unpopular, and by applying a policy of prohibitions and coercion against not only the Catholic Ribbonmen but also the Protestant Orangemen. But now both Wellington and his Home Secretary, Robert Peel, are convinced that unless concessions are made, a confrontation is inevitable. Peel concludes, “though emancipation was a great danger, civil strife was a greater danger.” Fearing insurrection in Ireland, he drafts the Relief Bill and guides it through the House of Commons. To overcome the vehement opposition of both the King and of the House of Lords, Wellington threatens to resign, potentially opening the way for a new Whig majority with designs not only for Catholic emancipation but also for parliamentary reform. The King initially accepts Wellington’s resignation and the King’s brother, Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, attempts to put together a government united against Catholic emancipation. Though such a government would have considerable support in the House of Lords, it would have little support in the Commons and Ernest abandons his attempt. The King recalls Wellington. The bill passes the Lords and becomes law.
The key, defining, provision of the Acts is its repeal of “certain oaths and certain declarations, commonly called the declarations against transubstantiation and the invocation of saints and the sacrifice of the mass, as practised in the Church of Rome,” which had been required “as qualifications for sitting and voting in parliament and for the enjoyment of certain offices, franchises, and civil rights.” For the Oath of Supremacy, the act substitutes a pledge to bear “true allegiance” to the King, to recognise the Hanoverian succession, to reject any claim to “temporal or civil jurisdiction” within the United Kingdom by “the Pope of Rome” or “any other foreign prince … or potentate,” and to “abjure any intention to subvert the present [Anglican] church establishment.”
This last abjuration in the new Oath of Allegiance is underscored by a provision forbidding the assumption by the Roman Church of episcopal titles, derived from “any city, town or place,” already used by the United Church of England and Ireland. (With other sectarian impositions of the Act, such as restrictions on admittance to Catholic religious orders and on Catholic-church processions, this is repealed with the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1926.)
The one major security required to pass the Act is the Parliamentary Elections (Ireland) Act 1829. Receiving its royal assent on the same day as the relief bill, the act disenfranchises Ireland’s forty-shilling freeholders, by raising the property threshold for the county vote to the British ten-pound standard. As a result, “emancipation” is accompanied by a more than five-fold decrease in the Irish electorate, from 216,000 voters to just 37,000. That the majority of the tenant farmers who had voted for O’Connell in the Clare by-election are disenfranchised as a result of his apparent victory at Westminster is not made immediately apparent, as O’Connell is permitted in July 1829 to stand unopposed for the Clare seat that his refusal to take the Oath of Supremacy had denied him the year before.
In 1985, J. C. D. Clark depicts England before 1828 as a nation in which the vast majority of the people still believed in the divine right of kings, and the legitimacy of a hereditary nobility, and in the rights and privileges of the Anglican Church. In Clark’s interpretation, the system remained virtually intact until it suddenly collapsed in 1828, because Catholic emancipation undermined its central symbolic prop, the Anglican supremacy. He argues that the consequences were enormous: “The shattering of a whole social order. … What was lost at that point … was not merely a constitutional arrangement, but the intellectual ascendancy of a worldview, the cultural hegemony of the old elite.”
Clark’s interpretation has been widely debated in the scholarly literature, and almost every historian who has examined the issue has highlighted the substantial amount of continuity before and after the period of 1828 through 1832.
Eric J. Evans in 1996 emphasises that the political importance of emancipation was that it split the anti-reformers beyond repair and diminished their ability to block future reform laws, especially the great Reform Act of 1832. Paradoxically, Wellington’s success in forcing through emancipation led many Ultra-Tories to demand reform of Parliament after seeing that the votes of the rotten boroughs had given the government its majority. Thus, it was an ultra-Tory, George Spencer-Churchill, Marquess of Blandford, who in February 1830 introduced the first major reform bill, calling for the transfer of rotten borough seats to the counties and large towns, the disfranchisement of non-resident voters, the preventing of Crown officeholders from sitting in Parliament, the payment of a salary to MPs, and the general franchise for men who owned property. The ultras believed that a widely based electorate could be relied upon to rally around anti-Catholicism.
In Ireland, emancipation is generally regarded as having come too late to influence the Catholic-majority view of the union. After a delay of thirty years, an opportunity to integrate Catholics through their re-emerging propertied and professional classes as a minority within the United Kingdom may have passed. In 1830, O’Connell invites Protestants to join in a campaign to repeal the Act of Union and restore the Kingdom of Ireland under the Constitution of 1782. At the same, the terms under which he is able to secure the final measure of relief may have weakened his repeal campaign.
George Ensor, a leading Protestant member of the Catholic Association in Ulster, protests that while “relief” bought at the price of “casting” forty-shilling freeholders, both Catholic and Protestant, “into the abyss,” might allow a few Catholic barristers to attain a higher grade in their profession, and a few Catholic gentlemen to be returned to Parliament, the “indifference” demonstrated to parliamentary reform will prove “disastrous” for the country.
Seeking, perhaps, to rationalise the sacrifice of his freeholders, O’Connell writes privately in March 1829 that the new ten-pound franchise might actually “give more power to Catholics by concentrating it in more reliable and less democratically dangerous hands.” The Young IrelanderJohn Mitchel believes that the intent is to detach propertied Catholics from the increasingly agitated rural masses.
In a pattern that had been intensifying from the 1820s as landlords clear land to meet the growing livestock demand from England, tenants have been banding together to oppose evictions and to attack tithe and process servers.
The two leaders meet at Hillsborough Castle and begin their sessions on April 7 with a half-hour walk through the gardens before dinner. The following day they hold a press conference and further talks, including a session on the Northern Ireland peace effort.
Bush and Blair, Bush’s closest ally in confronting Saddam Hussein, come together to discuss questions made increasingly urgent by the rapid military progress American and British forces have made and to plan for a postwar Iraq. They seek to bridge their differences over how much of a role to give the United Nations in rebuilding the country and putting together a new government.
Blair has been under pressure at home and from much of Europe to support giving the United Nations a strong role in stabilizing Iraq. The White House, however, has consistently signaled that it wants the United States and Britain to play the lead role in creating a new Iraqi government.
United States Secretary of StateColin L. Powell tells reporters traveling with the president that the United States is sending officials to the region to begin assembling a group of Iraqis who will constitute an interim governing authority and will be put in place alongside the American-led military and civilian authorities. In a sign of the speed with which the maneuvering for power in post-Hussein Iraq is unfolding, Ahmed Chalabi, the leader of the main Iraqi exile opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress (INC), is reported to be heading to Baghdad from southern Iraq.
“The hostilities phase is coming to a conclusion,” Powell says. “It’s time for all of us to think about the post-hostilities phase, how we create a representative government consisting of all elements of Iraqi society.”
Powell and British officials play down the magnitude of the differences between the United States and Britain over the United Nations role. The United Nations, Powell says, will have “an endorsing role to play to the interim authority to give it legitimacy,” a formulation that appears to reserve for the United States and Britain the right to select the leaders of the temporary postwar administration. A spokesman for Blair uses similar language, referring to the United Nations’ being involved “in a way that endorses that new Iraqi authority” as a step toward establishing a full-fledged Iraqi government.
Initially, primary responsibility for administering Iraq would rest with a team led by a retired United States Armylieutenant general, Jay Garner, and the interim Iraqi authority would be likely to begin assuming power after that, perhaps 90 days later, the British spokesman says.
Clearly wary of getting into another diplomatic squabble with other members of the United Nations Security Council, Powell and other administration officials have emphasized in recent days that the United States and Britain, having waged the war and paid for it with blood and money, will not be drawn into a negotiation with countries like France and Germany over the immediate postwar period.
Powell emphasizes, however, that part of his focus will now be on “healing” diplomatic wounds and granting the United Nations an important role once Iraq is stabilized.
At the United Nations, Secretary-GeneralKofi Annan says he will travel to Britain, France, Germany and Russia in the coming week to test whether the Security Council might be able to agree on a postwar plan. He announces that he has been working on post-conflict issues with a special adviser, Rafeeuddin Ahmed. He says he expects the United Nations to play an important role, whether as a political facilitator or dealing with issues like reconstruction or human rights. “Above all, the U.N. involvement does bring legitimacy, which is necessary, necessary for the country, for the region and for the peoples around the world,” Annan says.
Bush’s trip to see Blair here is the third British-American summit meeting in as many weeks. It coincides with news that American forces are attacking the presidential palaces and other symbols of the Iraqi government in the heart of Baghdad and that British soldiers have taken control of Iraq’s second-largest city, Basra.
The presence of the two leaders draws crowds of antiwar protesters and set off a local debate about whether this city, which has been trying to put behind it a history of sectarian violence, is an appropriate location for a war council.
The city authorities in Belfast have to divert traffic and clear public buildings in various locations following a series of bomb scares. The scenes are reminiscent of the conflicted time before the Northern Ireland peace agreement in 1998 put an end to organized sectarian violence that cost the lives of more than 3,600 people over three decades.
In the conversations about Iraq, Blair plays his customary role of trying to bridge trans-Atlantic differences. He hopes to placate criticism at home and ease relations with his European neighbors by pushing for a United Nations resolution authorizing an interim governing authority.
He had earlier envisaged a more prominent role for the United Nations, but he emerged from his last meeting with Bush, at Camp David on March 27, emphasizing the need for the United Nations to endorse the transition plans rather than play a central part in the plans, as he had advocated at the first summit meeting, in the Azores on March 16.
Europeans express alarm at what they see as the marginalization of the United Nations. At the same time, European critics of the war, like France, Germany and Russia, may object to Blair’s compromise proposal on grounds that it legitimizes a war they oppose. Even in Britain, the one European country where the war has majority support, there is great resistance to American domination of the postwar running of Iraq. An opinion poll in The Daily Telegraph shows that while Britons’ enthusiasm for the war has grown to a high of 60 percent and their approval of Blair’s conduct has also risen, there is only 2 percent approval of an American-controlled administration of Iraq.
Powell says the United States is only trying to lay out a plan under which military control of Iraq can give way to a mix of civilian and military control, including substantial involvement by Iraqis, and then to a full-fledged government. He says United Nations involvement might be necessary to convince banks and financial markets that they can safely and legally lend money to Iraq. Asked about peacekeeping duties, he says NATO is open to the possibility of helping to provide postwar security or assisting in the search for weapons of mass destruction.
Planning for the peace has exposed differences not only between the United States and Britain, but also within the Bush administration and between the administration and Congress.
Blair chose to hold his meeting with Bush in Northern Ireland in part so that the president can lend his support to the long-running efforts by Britain and Ireland to find a peaceful solution to the strife between Catholics and Protestants in the province. The White House, however, seems not to be paying much attention to Northern Ireland diplomacy. The schedules and credentials it distributes to reporters list the site as “Belfast, Ireland.”
(From: “Bush Meets With Blair to Discuss Postwar Iraq” by Richard W. Stevenson and Warren Hoge, The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com, April 8, 2003)
seamus dubhghaill 