Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:05:39.856Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Foxite Whigs, Irish legislative independence and the Act of Union, 1785–1806

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Douglas Kanter
Douglas Kanter*
Affiliation:
Florida Atlantic University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The establishment of Irish legislative independence in 1782–3, once regarded as a watershed in Irish constitutional history, has more recently and quite properly been reduced to an achievement of modest proportions. According to the new historiographical orthodoxy, Irish legislative independence was an aberration in a period of increasing British political control, and one that actually encouraged the British ruling class to pursue the political assimilation of Ireland into Britain by means of a union. Historians now have a tolerably clear picture of the process by which William Pitt and the British executive gradually became convinced that an incorporating union provided the best solution to the constitutional anomalies and sectarian difficulties posed by the government of Ireland in the 1780s and 1790s.

Type
Research Article
Information
Irish Historical Studies , Volume 36 , Issue 143 , May 2009 , pp. 332 - 348
Copyright
Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kelly, James, ‘The origins of the Act of Union: an examination of unionist opinion in Britain and Ireland, 1650–1800’ in I.H.S., xxv, no. 99 (1987), pp 236-63Google Scholar; idem, Prelude to union: Anglo-Irish politics in the 1780s (Cork, 1992), pp 32–75.

2 In addition to the works by Kelly, cited above, see also Bartlett, Thomas, The fall and rise of the Irish nation: the Catholic question, 1690–1830 (Savage, Maryland, 1992), pp 127-8, 169–72Google Scholar; Geoghegan, Patrick M., The Irish Act of Union: a study in high politics, 1797–1801 (New York, 1999), pp 1–7.Google Scholar

3 Though ‘Foxite’ is most frequently used to describe the opposition Whigs after 1792, the term was already in use by 1784; see Mitchell, L. G., Charles James Fox and the disintegration of the Whig party, 1782–1794 (London, 1971), p. 246.Google Scholar

4 Kelly, Prelude to union, pp 35–51.

5 Cobbett, William, Parliamentary history of England from … 1066 to … 1803 (36 vols, London, 1806-20), xxiii, 337-41 (22 Jan. 1783)Google Scholar, 730–1 (11 Apr. 1783).

6 Ibid., xxv, 674, 686 (24 May 1785).

7 Ibid., 744–5 (30 May 1785).

8 Ibid., 969 (25 July 1785). Earlier in the debate, however, Fox had briefly, and contradictorily, ‘mentioned the circumstance of an union as extremely desirable’. In this, he may have simply been following the lead of his parliamentary ally, Lord North, who advocated legislative union during the debates. See ibid., 660 (19 May 1785); quoted in Powell, Martyn J., ‘Charles James Fox and Ireland’ in I.H.S., xxxiii, no. 130 (2002), p. 186.Google Scholar

9 See the speeches of SirFitzpatrick, R., Erskine, J., Beauchamp, Viscount, and Courtenay, J.; Cobbett, Parl, hist., xxv, 698-9, 727–9, 729–35, 738–43 (24 May 1785).Google Scholar

10 Edmund Burke [?] to Sir John Tydd, 13 May 1785 (Grattan, Henry, Memoirs of the life and times of the Rt. Hon. Henry Grattan by his son Henry Grattan (5 vols, London, 1839-46), iii, 250-2Google Scholar. The attribution of this letter to Burke has recently been disputed; see The correspondence of Edmund Burke, ed. Copeland, T. W. (9 vols, Chicago, 1958-70), v, viiGoogle Scholar. Whether or not the letter was written by Burke, however, it provides an astute analysis of the strategy of the Portland Whigs during the debate on the commercial propositions.

11 Fox to the duke of Portland, 1 Feb. 1789 (B.L., Fox papers, Add. MS 47561, f. 101); Fox to Richard Fitzpatrick, 17 Feb. 1789 (Memorials and correspondence of Charles James Fox, ed. Russell, Lord John (5 vols, London, 1853-7), ii, 301)Google Scholar. See also Herman, Neil, ‘Henry Grattan, the Regency crisis, and the emergence of a Whig party in Ireland, 1788–9’ in I.H.S., xxxii, no. 128 (2001), pp 481-2.Google Scholar

12 Grattan, Grattan, iii, 432–8, includes the membership list for 1789–90, as well as the ‘Resolutions and Declarations’ of the organisation. For Fox’s familial connections, see Mitchell, L. G., Charles James Fox (Oxford, 1992), p. 144CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For Grey’s relation to the Irish Whigs through marriage from 1794, see Smith, E. A., Lord Grey, 1764–1845 (Oxford, 1990), p. 72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 In the absence of a definitive modern biography of Moira, see Thorne, Roland, ‘Hasting, Francis Rawdon’ in Mathew, H. C. G. and Harrison, Brian (eds), Oxford dictionary of national biography (60 vols, Oxford, 2004), xxv, 744-5.Google Scholar

14 Dickson, William to Fox, , 9 Mar. 1795 (B.L., Fox papers, Add. MS 47569, f. 59).Google Scholar

15 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxi, 1496–1501, 1521–30 (8 May 1795)Google Scholar, 1531–6, 1541–8 (19 May 1795), xxxiii, 20–2 (3 Mar. 1797).

16 For Grattan’s discreet role, see Fox to Grattan, 7 Apr. 1797 (Grattan, , Grattan, iv, 314-16Google Scholar).

17 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxiii, 142, 153–4 (23 Mar. 1797).Google Scholar

18 Ibid., 1487–8 (14 June 1798), 1490–2 (15 June 1798), 1513–15 (22 June 1798), 1517–18, 1519–23 (27 June 1798).

19 Ibid., xxxiv, 209–10 (23 Jan. 1799), 340–3 (7 Feb. 1799).

20 Ibid., 706–8 (19 Mar. 1799); see also Jupp, Peter, ‘Britain and the union, 1797–1801’ in R. Hist. Soc. Trans., 6th ser., no. 10 (2000), p. 205.Google Scholar

21 Fox, to Fitzpatrick, , 1798 (Memorials and correspondence, ed. Russell, iii, 281); Fox to Lord Holland, 15 Jan. 1799 (ibid., 150–1).Google Scholar

22 Morning Chronicle, 6 Mar. 1799.

23 Ibid., 8 May 1799.

24 Cobbett, Parl, hist., xxxv, 57–72, 81–2, 153–6 (21 Apr. 1800), 179–80 (8 May 1800); Morning Chronicle, 7 May 1800.

25 Grattan to Fox, 26 Jan. 1797 (B.L., Fox papers, Add. MS 47569, f. 97); Fox to Grattan, 4 Feb. 1799 (Grattati, Grattait, iv, 435–6); Fox to Fitzpatrick, 3 Apr. 1800 (Memorials and correspondence, ed. Russell, iii, 295–6).

26 Jupp, ‘Britain and the union’, p. 205.

27 Thome, R. G. (ed.), The House of Commons, 1790–1820 (5 vols, London, 1986), i, 153-4.Google Scholar

28 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxiv, 321 (31 Jan. 1799), 332Google Scholar (7 Feb. 1799), 387 (7 Feb. 1799), 444 (11 Feb. 1799), 512 (14 Feb. 1799), xxxv, 85 (21 Apr. 1800), 117–18 (25 Apr. 1800), 150 (1 May 1800). This average excludes tellers. I have omitted from my calculations the division on the sixth article of union, relating to British-Irish commerce, which attracted significant opposition from British independents uneasy about the prospect of freer trade. Because no list exists for this division, which occurred on 29 April 1800, it is impossible to determine how many of the fifty-eight M.P.s who registered their dissent were Foxite Whigs. Only one M.P. associated with the Foxites - French Laurence - spoke on the sixth article, suggesting that most of those who went into the lobby against the ministry were not members of the party. For a discussion of British responses to the union’s commercial arrangements, see Bolton, G. C., ‘Some British reactions to the Irish Act of Union’ in Econ. Hist. Rev., new ser., xviii, no. 2 (1965), pp 367-75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 They were: the earl of Derby, Earl Fitzwilliam, the earl of Moira, the earl of Thanet, the marquess of Lansdowne, Lord Holland and Lord King.

30 Grey, to Holland, , n.d. [1799] (Durham University Library, Grey MSS, GRE/ B35/13).Google Scholar

31 The earl of Moira to the Prince of Wales, 19 Oct. 1798 (The correspondence of George, Prince of Wales, 1770–1812, ed. Aspinall, A. (8 vols, London, 1963-71), iii, 481-2)Google Scholar; the marquess of Lansdowne to Holland, 20 Dec. 1798 (B.L., Holland House papers, Add. MS 51682, f. 49).

32 Cooke, Edward to Pitt, , 7 Jan. 1799 (T.N.A. P.R.O., Chatham papers, 30/8/327, f. 163).Google Scholar

33 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxv, 151-2 (5 May 1800).Google Scholar

34 Fox, to Grey, , 1800 (B.L., Fox papers, Add. MS 47565, f. 22).Google Scholar

35 They were: Adair, A., Barclay, G., Biddulph, R., Bird, W. W., Bouverie, E., Bouverie, W. H., Burdett, F., Combe, H. C., Hobhouse, B., Cavendish, Lord G., Cooke, B., Copley, L., Courtenay, J., Dension, W. J., Dundas, C., Dundas, L., Fitzpatrick, R., Green, J., Grey, C., Harrison, J., Howard, H., Laurence, F., Jefferys, N., Jekyll, J., Lemon, W., Lloyd, J. M., Milner, W., Mostyn, T., North, D., Plumer, W., Richardson, J., Ridley, M. W., Russell, Lord J., Russell, W., Shakespeare, A., Sheridan, R. B., Shum, G., Smith, W., John, A. St., Stanley, Lord E., Tierney, G., Tufton, H., Vyner, R. and Walpole, G.. This list includes not only committed followers of Fox but also dependants of Fitzwilliam, Lansdowne and the Prince of Wales, as well as the radical Francis Burdett and a few nominal independents who habitually voted with the opposition. Throughout this article, the political affiliation of M.P.s has been established with reference to Thorne (ed.), The House of Commons.Google Scholar

36 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxiv, 212–13 (23 Jan. 1799), 298 (31 Jan. 1799).Google Scholar

37 Ibid., xxxiv, 311, 314 (31 Jan. 1799), 413–14 (11 Feb. 1799), 471–2 (14 Feb. 1799), 675–80 (19 Mar. 1799); Fox to Holland, 19 Jan. 1799 (Memorials and correspondence, ed. Russell, iii, 150).

38 Morning Chronicle, 8, 10, 20, 24–27 Dec. 1798, 14, 23 Jan. 1799.

39 Bolton, G. C., The passing of the Irish Act of Union: a study in parliamentary politics (Oxford, 1966), pp 130-56Google Scholar; Smyth, Jim, ‘The Act of Union and “public opinion”’ in Smyth, Jim (ed.), Revolution, counter-revolution, and union: Ireland in the 1790s (Cambridge, 2000), pp 158-9.Google Scholar

40 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxiv, 213–14 (23 Jan. 1799), 293Google Scholar (31 Jan. 1799), 321–2 (7 Feb. 1799), 823–4 (11 Apr. 1799); Fox to Grattan, 4 Feb. 1799 (Grattan, Grattan, iv, 435–6).

41 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxv, 71-2,144,197 (21 Apr. 1800).Google Scholar

42 Ibid., xxxiv, 391 (11 Feb. 1799), 670–1 (19 Mar. 1799), xxxv, 70 (21 Apr. 1800), 162–3 (30 Apr. 1800), 169–70 (30 Apr. 1800).

43 Wilkinson, David, ‘“How did they pass the union?”: secret service expenditure in Ireland, 1799–1804’ in History, lxxxii, no. 266 (1997), pp 223-51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

44 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxiv, 294-6, 298, 308 (31 Jan. 1799)Google Scholar, 331 (7 Feb. 1799).

45 Ibid., xxxv, 60, 81, 82–3 (21 Apr. 1800), xxxv, 88–101 (25 Apr. 1800).

46 McDowell, R. B., Ireland in the age of imperialism and revolution, 1770–1801 (Oxford, 1979), pp 59, 612–13Google Scholar; Ehrman, John, The younger Pitt: the consuming struggle (Stanford, 1996), p. 362.Google Scholar

47 Cornwallis to Portland, 1 Dec. 1798, 15 Dec. 1798, 18 Jan. 1800 (Correspondence of Charles, first Marquis Cornwallis, ed. Ross, Charles (3 vols, London, 1859), ii, 458-9, iii, 19, 165–6)Google Scholar; Castlereagh to Portland, 20 Jan. 1800 (ibid., iii, 167); Cornwallis to Portland, 21 Jan. 1800, 27 Jan. 1800 (ibid., 168, 173).

48 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxiv, 295-6 (31 Jan. 1799)Google Scholar, xxxv, 59 (21 Apr. 1800); Morning Chronicle, 8 May 1799.

49 Locke, John, Second treatise of government, ed. Macpherson, C. B. (Indianapolis, 1980), pp 74-5, 109, 116–17 (emphasis in original).Google Scholar

50 Stanhope, Earl, An address to the nations of Great Britain and Ireland, on the projected union (Dublin, 1799), pp 3, 8Google Scholar; Fox, to Holland, , 23 Feb. 1799, 26 Feb. 1799 (Memorials and correspondence, ed. Russell, iii, 156–60, 161).Google Scholar

51 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxiv, 377 (7 Feb. 1799)Google Scholar, 474–5 (14 Feb. 1799).

52 Morning Chronicle, 7 May 1800.

53 Cobbett, , Parl. hist., xxxv, 891-2 (2 Feb. 1801).Google Scholar

54 Ibid., xxxv, 1008–10, 1031 (12 Mar. 1801), 1238, 1245–6 (23 Mar. 1801).

55 Ibid., xxxv, 1156 (25 Mar. 1801); Fox had, in 1800, made a brief deprecatory allusion to the union during a debate on the war with France; see ibid., xxxiv, 1386 (3 Feb. 1800).

56 Ibid., xxxvi, 952 (23 Nov. 1802).

57 Grey, to Fox, , 3 Aug. 1803 (Durham University Library, Grey MSS, GRE/B16/49A).Google Scholar

58 Grey to Fox, 3 Dec. 1803 (ibid., GRE/B16/59A); Fox to Grey, 24 Dec. 1803 (ibid., GRE/B16/61).

59 Ehrman, The consuming struggle, pp 495–533; Geoghegan, The Irish Act of Union, pp 149–84.

60 Fedorak, Charles John, Henry Addington, Prime Minister, 1801–1804: peace, war, and parliamentary politics (Akron, Ohio, 2002), pp 70-4Google Scholar. The number of Grenvillites has been supplied by Thorne (ed.), The House of Commons, i, 159.

61 Smith, Lord Grey, pp 88–9; Mitchell, Charles James Fox, pp 199–200; Fedorak, Addington, pp 75–8.

62 Ehrman, The consuming struggle, pp 604–6.

63 Ibid., p. 620.

64 Fox to the earl of Lauderdale, 19 Feb. 1801 (Memorials and correspondence, ed. Russell, iii, 325–6).Google Scholar

65 Fox to Grey, 1801 (ibid., 329).

66 Grenville, to Castlereagh, , 1 June 1801 (Memoirs and correspondence of Viscount Castlereagh, ed. the marquess of Londonderry (12 vols, London, 1848–53), iv, 89)Google Scholar; narrative, Lord Grenville’s, 1803 (Memoirs of the courts and Cabinets of George the Third, ed. the duke of Buckingham and Chandos (4 vols, London, 1853), iii, 285-6).Google Scholar

67 Fox, to Grey, , 27 Nov. 1803 (Memorials and correspondence, ed. Russell, iii, 434–5).Google Scholar

68 Jupp, Peter, Lord Grenville, 1759–1834 (Oxford, 1985), pp 326-9Google Scholar; Mitchell, Fox, pp 207–8; Ehrman, The consuming struggle, pp 613–19; Fedorak, Addington, pp 183–5.

69 For Grenville’s role in framing the union, see Jupp, Grenville, pp 262–80.

70 Cobbett, , Parl, hist., xxxv, 871-2 (2 Feb. 1801).Google Scholar

71 In any case, he made no further comments critical of the union in parliament or in his surviving political correspondence after taking office in 1804.

72 Anonymous to ‘Dear Sir’ (B.L., Fox Papers, Add. MS 47569, f. 139); Grattan to Francis Plowden (ibid., f. 147).

73 Hansard 1, i, 797 (7 Mar. 1804).

74 Ibid., ii, 87 (11 Apr. 1804).

75 Jupp, Grenville, pp 332–4; Ehrman, The consuming struggle, pp 653–62.

76 Hansard 1, iv, 847 (13 May 1805).

77 The earl of Lauderdale, , Hints to the manufacturers of Great Britain on the consequences of the Irish union: and on the system since pursued, of borrowing in England, for the service of Ireland (Edinburgh, 1805).Google Scholar

78 Fox, to Lauderdale, , n.d. [1805] (B.L., Fox papers, Add. MS 47564, f. 233).Google Scholar

79 Addington had been raised to the peerage in 1805 as Viscount Sidmouth, but in the interest of clarity I have referred to him by his surname.

80 Grenville, to George, III, 31 Jan. 1806Google Scholar (H.M.C., The manuscripts of J. B. Fortescue … preserved at Dropmore (10 vols, London, 1892-1927), viii, 1)Google Scholar; Spencer to Grenville, [10] Feb. 1806 (ibid., 24); Thomas Grenville to Grenville, Mar. 1806 (ibid., 58).

81 Hansard 1, vi, 126–7 (3 Feb. 1806).

82 Diary entry, 13 Feb. 1806 (The diary and correspondence of Charles Abbot, Lord Colchester, ed. Colchester, Lord (3 vols, London, 1861), ii, 39)Google Scholar. For the Dublin repeal movement of 1806, see Hill, Jacqueline, From patriots to unionists: Dublin civic politics and Irish Protestant patriotism, 1660–1840 (Oxford, 1997), p. 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

83 Long, Charles to Hardwicke, Lord, 15 Feb. [1806] (B.L., Hardwicke papers, Add. MS 35716, f. 187).Google Scholar

84 Hansard 1, vi, 174 (18 Feb. 1806).

85 Smith, Lord Grey, p. 84.

86 Spencer to the duke of Bedford, 6 Mar. 1806, enclosing ‘Heads for Consideration to make the Subject of instructions to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland on the general outline of the Measures of Government in that part of the United Kingdom’ (B.L., Althorp papers, Add. MS 75901). The memorandum is docketed ‘Copy to Mr. Fox’. The Althorp papers have not, at the time of writing, been calendared.

87 Fox’s note, dated 10 Mar. 1806, is attached to Spencer’s paper.Google Scholar

88 Long, to Hardwicke, , 17 Mar. [1806] (B.L., Hardwicke papers, Add. MS 35716, ff 199–200).Google Scholar

89 Spencer, to Bedford, , 21 Mar. 1806 (B.L., Althorp papers, Add. MS 75905). Spencer had referred to the union patronage obligations in an early draft of the memorandum that he provided to Bedford on 6 March, but not in the final version. See B.L., Althorp papers, Add. MS 75903 for the draft, which is not titled, signed or dated.Google Scholar

90 Bedford to Spencer, 22 Mar. 1806 (ibid., Add. MS 75906).

91 Elliot to Spencer, 26 Mar. 1806, 7 Apr. 1806 (ibid., Add. MS 75903).

92 Spencer to Elliot, 2 Apr. 1806 (ibid., Add. MS 75905).

93 Bedford, to Holland, , 15 Aug. 1806 (B.L., Holland House papers, Add. MS 51661, ff 20–1).Google Scholar

94 Grey, to Ponsonby, George, 31 Dec. 1806 (Durham University Library, Grey MSS, GRE/B47/11/6A/3). The report to which Grey was responding proved to be unfounded. Between April 1806 and November 1807, Grey adopted the courtesy title of Viscount Howick, but in the interest of clarity, I have referred to him by his surname.Google Scholar

95 The dismissal of the ministry has been described in detail by Jupp, Grenville, pp 399–410, and Smith, Lord Grey, pp 118–28.