No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 October 2020
This article contributes to current debates about the role of religion in governance in the late eighteenth century British Atlantic world by examining the Pitt ministry's policies regarding Catholic subjects in England, Quebec, and Ireland in an early modern context. Starting with an overview of early modern attempts to find a compromise between Catholic subjects and their Protestant rulers, this article shows how the Pitt ministry reused these earlier approaches in its efforts to respond to Catholic subjects during of the age of revolution. Focusing on the English Catholic Relief Act of 1791, the Canada Constitutional Act, and the ministry's unimplemented plans for Catholic emancipation, the article argues that these policies were all shaped in part around the idea that Catholic subjects could be allowed greater freedoms, and even access to political influence in some cases, if their faith was contained through Gallican-style restrictions. These restrictions varied from requiring new oaths to attempting to establish the government's right to select Catholic bishops. Each policy resulted in notably different outcomes based on the location and potential power of the Catholic subjects that they affected. The common goal, however, was to attenuate the Catholics’ connection to the papacy and increase government influence over the Catholic Church in British territory while also upholding the ultimate supremacy of the Anglican Church.
1 Pitt rejected the term “Catholic Emancipation.” As he explained, “I have never understood the situation of the Catholics to be such . . . that any relief from it could be correctly so described.” Notes on a speech by Pitt, 1801, Adams manuscripts, Add. MS 98036/1/23, fols. 133(14)–34(15), British Library, London.
2 William Pitt to George III, 31 January 1801, Pitt Papers, Add. 6958, fol. 2836, Cambridge University Library.
3 George III to Pitt, 1 February 1801, Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2837.
4 Clark, J. C. D., “England's Ancien Regime as a Confessional State,” Albion 21, no. 3 (1989): 450–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 Peter Doll, Revolution, Religion, and National Identity: Imperial Anglicanism in British North America, 1745–1795 (London, 2000); see also Linda Colley, Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707–1837 (New Haven, 1992); Carla Gardina Pestana, Protestant Empire: Religion and the Making of the British Atlantic World (Philadelphia, 2009); and Stewart J. Brown, Providence and Empire: Religion, Politics and Society in the United Kingdom, 1815–1914 (Harlow, 2008), 10.
6 Harland-Jacobs, Jessica, “Incorporating the King's New Subjects: Accommodation and Anti-Catholicism in the British Empire, 1763–1815,” Journal of Religious History 39, no. 2 (2015): 203–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 206.
7 Harland-Jacobs, “Incorporating the King's New Subjects,” at 208 and 222–23; see also Peter. J. Marshall, The Making and Unmaking of Empires: Britain, India, and America, c. 1750–1783 (Oxford, 2005).
8 Muller, Hannah Weiss, “Bonds of Belonging: Subjecthood and the British Empire,” Journal of British Studies 53, no. 1 (2014): 29–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 56; see also Hannah Weiss Muller, Subjects and Sovereign: Bonds of Belonging in the Eighteenth-Century British Empire (New York, 2017).
9 Stefania Tutino, Law and Conscience: Catholicism in Early Modern England, 1570–1625 (Burlington, 2007); Jeffrey R. Collins, The Allegiance of Thomas Hobbes (Oxford, 2007); see also Ethan Shagan, “Introduction: English Catholic History in Context,” in Catholics and the “Protestant Nation”: Religious Politics and Identity in Early Modern England, ed. Ethan Shagan (Manchester, 2005), 1–21, at 2.
10 See Donovan, Robert Kent, “The Military Origins of the Roman Catholic Relief Programme of 1778,” Historical Journal 28, no. 1 (1985): 79–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Marshall, The Making and Unmaking, 186–87; Colin Haydon, Anti-Catholicism in Eighteenth Century England, c. 1714–80: A Political and Social Study (Manchester, 1993).
11 S. Karly Kehoe, Creating a Scottish Church: Catholicism, Gender and Ethnicity in Nineteenth-Century Scotland (Manchester, 2010), 3.
12 William J. Bouwsma, “Gallicanism and the Nature of Christendom,” in Renaissance: Studies in Honor of Hans Baron, ed. Anthony Molho and John Tedeschi (Dekalb, 1971): 811–30, at 817 and 821; see also Jacqueline Rose, Godly Kingship in Restoration England: The Politics of the Royal Supremacy, 1660–1688 (Cambridge, 2011), 230–31.
13 During this period, the British often used the term “Canada” to refer to the territory that had been French Canada before 1763. I also refer to French Canadians as “Canadiens.”
14 Peter J. Marshall, Reformation England, 1480–1642, 2nd ed. (New York, 2012), 192–94; Arnold Pritchard, Catholic Loyalism in Elizabethan England (Chapel Hill, 1979), 3, 7; Tutino, Law and Conscience, 19; Stefania Tutino, Shadows of Doubt: Language and Truth in Post-Reformation Catholic Culture (Oxford, 2014), 15–18, 21.
15 Edward Norman, Roman Catholicism in England from the Elizabethan Settlement to the Second Vatican Council (Oxford, 1985), 26–27; Pritchard, Catholic Loyalism, 128–29, 136, and 144; Tutino, Law and Conscience, 65–73; and Johann Sommerville, “Papist Political Thought and the Controversy over the Jacobean Oath of Allegiance,” in Shagan, Catholics and the “Protestant Nation,” 162–84, at 164–65.
16 David Martin Jones, Conscience and Allegiance in Seventeenth Century England: The Political Significance of Oaths and Engagements (Rochester, 1999), 43.
17 Act for the better discovering and repressing Popish recusants, 1606, 3 & 4 Jac.1, c. 4, in G. W. Prothero, Select Statutes and Other Constitutional Documents Illustrative of the Reigns of Elizabeth and James I, 4th ed. (Oxford, 1913), 256–62, at 259–60.
18 James I, Triplici nodo, triplex cuneus; Or An apologie for the Oath of allegiance [. . .] (1607), 3–4; see also M. C. Questier, “Loyalty, Religion and State Power in Early Modern England: English Romanism and the Jacobean Oath of Allegiance,” Historical Journal 40, no. 2 (1997): 311–29, at 319–22; Tutino, Law and Conscience, 133.
19 Tutino, Law and Conscience, 78–79.
20 Tutino, 169–73.
21 Tutino, 136–37; Stefania Tutino, Empire of Souls: Robert Bellarmine and the Christian Commonwealth (Oxford, 2010), 180; see also Anthony Milton, Catholic and Reformed: The Roman and Protestant Churches in English Protestant Thought, 1600–1640 (Cambridge, 1995), 223, 253.
22 Jeffrey R. Collins, “Thomas Hobbes and the Blackloist Conspiracy of 1649,” Historical Journal 45, no. 2 (2002): 305–31, at 310; see also Stefania Tutino, Thomas White and the Blackloists: Between Politics and Theology during the English Civil War (Burlington, 2008), 56–59.
23 Collins, “Thomas Hobbes and the Blackloist Conspiracy of 1649,” at 312–14; see also Collins, Allegiance of Thomas Hobbes, 113.
24 T. H., Articles proposed to the Catholiques of England [. . .] (1648), British Library, reel position Thomason / 73:E.458[9].
25 Collins, “Thomas Hobbes and the Blackloist Conspiracy of 1649,” at 313–14.
26 “Dr. Holden's Instructions,” reprinted in Blacklo's Cabal Discovered in severall of their Letters [. . .], ed. R. Pugh, 2nd ed. (1680), 32–35, at 33.
27 “Larger Instructions in Dr. Holden's hand Writing,” in Pugh, Blacklo's Cabal, 36–41, at 37, 40; see also Beverley Southgate, “Covetous of Truth”: The Life and Work of Thomas White, 1593–1676 (Dordercht, 1993), 34–36.
28 Southgate, “Covetous of Truth,” 39–40; John Miller, Popery and Politics in England, 1660–1688 (Cambridge, 1973), 45.
29 Creighton, Anne, “The Remonstrance of December 1661 and Catholic Politics in Restoration Ireland,” Irish Historical Studies 34, no. 133 (2004): 16–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 27, 29, 34–40; see also Glickman, Gabriel, “Christian Reunion, the Anglo-French Alliance and the English Catholic Imagination, 1660–72,” English Historical Review 128, no. 531 (2013): 263–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 275, 277, and 285; McKenny, Kevin, “The Restoration Land Settlement in Ireland: A Statistical Interpretation,” in Restoration Ireland: Always Settling and Never Settled, ed. Dennehy, Coleman (Burlington, 2008), 35–52Google Scholar, at 39.
30 See Gabriel Glickman, “The Church and the Catholic Community, 1660–1714,” in The Later Stuart Church, 1660–1714, ed. Grant Tapsell (Manchester, 2012), 217–42; Jones, Conscience and Allegiance, 186, 283–84; Jeffrey R. Collins, “Restoration Anti-Catholicism: A Prejudice in Motion,” in England's Wars of Religion, Revisited, ed. Glenn Burgess and Charles W. A. Prior (Burlington, 2011), 281–306, at 286; and Steven Pincus, 1688: The First Modern Revolution (New Haven, 2009), 129, 131–32.
31 Quoted in Jones, Conscience and Allegiance, 204.
32 Patrick Fagan, Divided Loyalties: The Question of the Oath for Irish Catholics in the Eighteenth Century (Dublin, 1997), 36.
33 Haydon, Anti-Catholicism, 47; Haydon, Colin, “Parliament and Popery in England, 1700–1780,” Parliamentary History 19, no. 1 (2000): 49–63Google Scholar, at 49–51; S. J. Connolly, Divided Kingdom: Ireland 1630–1800 (Oxford, 2008), 198–203 and 250–59, at 258.
34 William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, vol. 4, Of Public Wrongs (Oxford, 1769), 54, 57.
35 Ambrose Macaulay, The Catholic Church and the Campaign for Emancipation in Ireland and England (Dublin, 2016), 18; Alexander Lock, Catholicism, Identity and Politics in the Age of Enlightenment: The Life and Career of Sir Thomas Gascoigne, 1745–1810 (Woodbridge, 2016), 17–18; Ulrich Lehner, The Catholic Enlightenment: The Forgotten History of a Global Movement (New York, 2016), 3, 10, 19.
36 Doll, Revolution, Religion, 94.
37 “Proclamation of Oct. 7th, 1763,” in Documents Relating to the Constitutional History of Canada, 1759–1791, ed. Adam Shortt and Arthur Doughty, 2nd rev. ed., 2 vols. (Ottawa, 1918), 1:163–68; Harland-Jacobs, “Incorporating the King's New Subjects,” 218–23.
38 Treaty of Paris, Article IV, Shortt and Doughty, Documents, 1:113–26, at 115.
39 “Notes of Proceedings Relative to Canada,” Shelburne Papers, 168 vols., 64:459 Clements Library, University of Michigan; Fernand Ouellet, Lower Canada, 1791–1840: Social Change and Nationalism translated and adapted by Patricia Claxton (Toronto, 1980), 13.
40 Shelburne to the Board of Trade, 17 May 1767, Shelburne Papers, 64:483, Clements Library.
41 Stephen Cottrell to William de Grey, 3 September 1768, reprinted in Acts of the Privy Council of England. Colonial Series, vol. 5, ed. James Munro and Sir Almeric W. Fitzroy (London, 1912), 6.
42 Doll, Revolution, Religion, 107.
43 James Murray, “On the Subject of Religion with respect to Canada,” May 1763, Shelburne Papers, 64:563, Clements Library.
44 Robert Hay Drummond, “Heads of a Plan for the Establishment of Ecclesiastical Affairs in the Province of Quebec,” n.d., Shelburne Papers, 59:18, Clements Library.
45 Doll, Revolution, Religion, 114, 118–20; Luca Codignola, “Roman Catholic Conservatism in a New North Atlantic World, 1760–1829,” William and Mary Quarterly 64, no. 4 (2007): 717–56, at 725.
46 Doll, Revolution, Religion, 123–54; see also Philip Lawson, The Imperial Challenge: Quebec and Britain in the Age of the American Revolution (Montreal, 1990); David Milobar, “Quebec Reform, the British Constitution and the Atlantic Empire, 1774–1775,” in Parliamentary History: Parliament and the Atlantic Empire, ed. Philip Lawson (Edinburgh, 1995). For more on the Quebec Act, see also Phillip Buckner and John G. Reid, eds., Revisiting 1759: The Conquest of Canada in Historical Perspective (Toronto, 2012).
47 Quebec Act, Shortt and Doughty, Documents, 1:570–76.
48 Instructions to Governor Carleton, 1775, Shortt and Doughty, Documents, 2:594–614, at 602–5.
49 R. C. Simmons and P. D. G. Thomas, eds., Proceedings and Debates of the British Parliaments Respecting North America, 1754–1783, vol. 4 (1774) (Millwood: 1982), 468.
50 Quebec Act, Shortt and Doughty, Documents, 1:572–73; “Instructions to Governor Carleton, 1775,” Shortt and Doughty, Documents, 2:595–96; see also Gustave Lanctot, Canada and the American Revolution (London, 1967), 18.
51 There have been several studies concerning the relationship between policy in Quebec and Ireland. See Karen Stanbridge, Toleration and State Institutions: British Policy toward Catholics in Eighteenth-Century Ireland and Quebec (Lanham, 2003); and Jacqueline Hill, “Religious Toleration and the Relaxation of the Penal Laws: An Imperial Perspective, 1763–1780,” Archivium Hibernicum, no. 44 (1989): 98–109; see also Maurice Bric, “Catholicism and Empire: Ireland and Lower Canada, 1760–1830,” in Ireland and Quebec: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on History, Culture and Society, ed. Margaret Kelleher and Michael Kenneally (Dublin, 2016), 32–45.
52 Thomas Bartlett, The Fall and Rise of the Irish Nation: The Catholic Question, 1690–1830 (Savage, 1992), 90–91, 101; Haydon, Anti-Catholicism, 204.
53 The American Continental Congress cited the Quebec Act as one of their grievances in 1774. They complained that it was unconstitutional to establish Catholicism in Canada and suggested that Catholic emigrants would be used to enslave American Protestants. Carter, Michael, “A “Traitorous Religion”: Indulgences and the Anti-Catholic Imagination in Eighteenth-Century New England,” Catholic Historical Review 99, no. 1 (2013): 52–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 76.
54 See Robert Kent Donovan, No Popery and Radicalism: Opposition to Roman Catholic Relief in Scotland, 1778–1782 (New York, 1987); see also Christine Johnson, Developments in the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1983), 29–32. Scottish Catholics did not receive a relief act until 1793.
55 O'Flaherty, Eamon, “Ecclesiastical Politics and the Dismantling of the Penal Laws in Ireland, 1774–82,” Irish Historical Studies 26, no. 101 (1988): 33–50Google Scholar, at 47–48.
56 Fagan, Divided Loyalties, 143–56.
57 Catholic Relief Act, 1778, Geo. 3, c. 60, Warwickshire County Record Office, Warwick, (hereafter Warwickshire); see also Dáire Keogh, The French Disease: The Catholic Church and Irish Radicalism, 1790–1800 (Dublin, 1993), 15–24; C. D. A. Leighton, Catholicism in a Protestant Kingdom: A Study of the Irish Ancien Régime (New York, 1994), 145–50.
58 Macaulay, Catholic Church, 48–49.
59 William Pitt, The Speech of the Right Hon. William Pitt, in the House of Commons, on Tuesday the Second of March 1790, Respecting the Repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts (London, 1790), 37.
60 Maya Jasanoff, Liberty's Exiles: The Loss of America and the Remaking of the British Empire (London, 2011), 12–13; see also Jerry Bannister, “Canada as Counter-Revolution: The Loyalist Order Framework in Canadian History, 1750–1840,” in Liberalism and Hegemony: Debating the Canadian Liberal Revolution, ed. Jean-Francois Constant and Michel Ducharme (Toronto, 2009), 98–146.
61 Grenville, “View of the several Points prayed for by the Petitions,” Dropmore Papers, Add. MSS 59230, fols. 108–9, 110, 119–25, British Library.
62 John Garner, The Franchise and Politics in British North America, 1755–1867 (Toronto, 1969), 134–35.
63 “Plan for a House of Assembly drawn up by the Committees of Quebec & Montreal in November 1784,” Dropmore Papers, BL Add. MSS 59230, fol. 204.
64 William Pitt, Speech to the House of Commons, 16 May 1788, Parliamentary Register; or the History of the Proceedings and Debates of the House of Commons, vol. 23 (London, 1787–88), 693.
65 For more on the creation of the Constitutional Act of 1791, see Milobar, David, “Conservative Ideology, Metropolitan Government, and the Reform of Quebec, 1782–1791,” International History Review 12, no. 1 (1990): 45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pierre Tousignant, “La Genèse et l'Avènement de la Constitution de 1791” (PhD diss., University of Montreal, 1971); Frank Murray Greenwood, The Legacies of Fear: Law and Politics in Quebec in the Era of the French Revolution (Toronto, 1993), 35–55.
66 The National Archives (hereafter TNA), CO 42/20, Precis of Dispatches received from Lord Dorchester, 1788, fol. 96; see also Peter J. Marshall, “British North America, 1760–1815,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. Peter J. Marshall (Oxford, 1998), 372–93, at 386.
67 Grenville, “View of the several Points,” Dropmore Papers, BL Add. MSS 59230, fols. 101–2.
68 Grenville to the Archbishop of Canterbury, 31 January 1791, Dropmore Papers, BL Add. MSS 59231, fols. 163–64.
69 “Instructions to Lord Dorchester as Governor of Lower Canada,” 16 September 1791, in Documents Relating to the Constitutional History of Canada, 1791–1818, eds. Arthur Doughty and Duncan McArthur (Ottawa, 1914), 13–32, at 13–17; TNA, CO 43/10, George III, Commission of Lord Dorchester, fols. 119–21, 133–34; TNA, CO 42/88, Considerations on the Government of Lower Canada, fol. 222.
70 Doll, Revolution, Religion, 246.
71 Doll, 245, 253–56; see also Michael Gauvreau, “The Dividends of Empire: Church Establishments and Contested British Identities in the Canadas and Maritimes, 1780–1850,” in Transatlantic Subjects: Ideas, Institutions, and Social Experience in Post-Revolutionary British North America, ed. Nancy Christie (Montreal, 2008), 199–250.
72 Lucien Lemieux, Historie du catholicisme Quebecois: Les XVIIIe et XIXe siecles, vol. 1: Les annees difficiles (1760–1839) (Montreal, 1989), 3–37; Greenwood, Legacies of Fear, 18–19; TNA, CO 42/22, Monk to Nepean, 13 March 1793, fol. 68; Francis G. Morrisey, “La Situation Juridique de l’Église Catholique au Bas-Canada de 1791 à 1840,” Sessions d’étude—Société canadienne d'histoire de l’Église catholique, no. 39 (1972): 65–89, at 83.
73 Lucien Lemieux, L'Etablissement de la Premiere Province Ecclesiastique au Canada, 1783–1844 (Montreal, 1968), 23–24.
74 Tousignant, “La Genèse et l'Avènement,” 277, 285; Terence Fay, A History of Canadian Catholics: Gallicanism, Romanism, and Canadianism (Montreal, 2002), 37–38; Greenwood, Legacies of Fear, 72–73; Codignola, “Roman Catholic Conservatism,” 720–21, 725.
75 Fernand Ouellet, Lower Canada, 23–27; Gilles Paquet and Jean-Pierre Wallot, “Nouvelle-France/Québec/Canada: A World of Limited Identities,” in Colonial Identity in the Atlantic World, 1500–1800, ed. Nicholas Canny and Anthony Pagden (Princeton, 1987), 95–114, at 105.
76 Michel Ducharme, The Idea of Liberty in Canada during the Age of Atlantic Revolutions, 1776–1838, translated by Peter Feldstein (Montreal, 2014), 47.
77 Danielle Laudy, “Les Politiques Coloniales Britanniques et le Maintien de l'Ancien Régime au Bas-Canada (1791–1832),” Histoire, Économie et Société 14, no. 1 (1995): 71–88, at 79–80; Philip Girard, “Liberty, Order, and Pluralism: The Canadian Experience,” in Exclusionary Empire: English Liberty Overseas, 1600–1900, ed. Jack P. Greene (Cambridge, 2010), 160–90; see also Donald Fyson, “The Canadiens and British Institutions of Local Governance in Quebec from the Conquest to the Rebellions,” in Transatlantic Subjects: Ideas, Institutions, and Social Experience in Post-Revolutionary British North America, ed. Nancy Christie (Montreal, 2008), 45–82.
78 John Bossy, The English Catholic Community, 1570-1850 (New York, 1976), 330.
79 Peter J. Marshall and Geoffrey Scott, “Introduction: The Catholic Gentry in English Society,” in Catholic Gentry in English Society: The Throckmortons of Coughton from Reformation to Emancipation, ed. Peter J. Marshall and Geoffrey Scott (Farnham, 2009), 1–30, at 22.
80 Marshall and Scott, “Introduction,” at 26; Margaret Turnham, Catholic Faith and Practice in England, 1779–1992: The Role of Revivalism and Renewal (Woodbridge, 2015), 20.
81 Marshall and Scott, “Introduction,” at 25.
82 Handwritten Draft of a Bill, undated, folder 1/1, Warwickshire.
83 The committee sent the questions to Louvain, Douay, the Sorbonne, Valladolid, Alcala, and Salamanca. Macaulay, Catholic Church, 76n16.
84 J. B. De Maziere and J. F. Vanoverbeke, “Queries,” Gate Box, folder 2, Warwickshire.
85 Letter to Charles Butler, 3 March 1789, Bishop Talbot Papers, fol. 137, Archives of the Archdiocese of Westminster, London; Henry Clifford to Lord Clifford, 24 March 1789, 2667/25/2/3, Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, Chippenham; Eamon Duffy, “Ecclesiastical Democracy Detected: Part II (1787–1796),” Recusant History 10, no. 6. (October 1970), 309–31, at 313.
86 Charles Butler, Historical Memoirs respecting the English, Irish and Scottish Catholics, from the Reformation to the Present Time, vol. 2 (London, 1819), 113–18.
87 Bernard Ward, The Dawn of the Catholic Revival in England, 1781–1803, vol. 1 (London, 1909), 165.
88 Catholic Committee to the Catholics of England, 25 November 1789, Gate Box, folder 2, Warwickshire.
89 Pitt, Speech of the Right Hon. William Pitt, 11–12. Emphasis in the original.
90 Encyclical Letter to all the faithful, October 21, 1789, Gate Box [2] Warwickshire; Butler to Throckmorton, 31 March 1789, 2667/25/2/3, Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre, Chippenham; Macaulay, Catholic Church, 82; Catholic Relief Act, 1778, Geo. 3, c. 60, Warwickshire. Although the 1778 act claimed to repeal several parts of “An Act for the further preventing the Growth of Popery,” it also specified that Catholics had to swear the oath to benefit from it, making it unclear if the older law was truly repealed.
91 Catholic Committee, “To the Catholics of England” (London, 1789), 3–4.
92 Catholic Committee, To the Right Reverend Father in God, John, Bishop of Centuria, Vicar Apostolic of the Southern District of England [. . .] (London, 1791), 21.
93 Charles Plowden, Observations on the Oath proposed to the English Roman Catholics (London, 1791), 7.
94 John Mitford, Speech to the House of Commons, 1 March 1791, in Cobbett's Parliamentary History of England: From the Norman Conquest, in 1066 to the Year 1803, ed. W. Cobbett and John Wright, 36 vols. (London, 1806–1820), 28:col. 1365.
95 Thomas Weld to Arundell, 7 March 1791, 2667/25/2/6, Wiltshire and Swindon History Centre.
96 William Pitt, Speech to the House of Commons, 1 March 1791, in Cobbett and Wright, Parliamentary History, 28:col. 1373.
97 Unsigned letter from Lincoln's Inn, 30 July 1791, Gate Box, folder 3, Warwickshire.
98 Duffy, “Ecclesiastical Democracy Detected: Part 2,” 320.
99 Stephen Conway, “Christians, Catholics, Protestants: The Religious Links of Britain and Ireland with Continental Europe, c. 1689–1800,” English Historical Review 124, no. 509 (2009): 833–62, at 856; Macaulay, Catholic Church, 57.
100 A Layman [Sir John Throckmorton], A Letter Addressed to the Catholic Clergy of England on the Appointment of Bishops ([London?], 1790), 9.
101 Joseph Wilks to Throckmorton, 27 September 1790, Gate Box 16, Warwickshire.
102 Samuel Horsley to John Milner, 17 January 1792, Bishop Douglass Papers, fol. 7, Archives of the Archdiocese of Westminster; see Joseph Berington, The Rights of Dissenters of the Established Church, in Relation, Principally, to English Catholics (Dublin, 1790). Some Cisalpines also supported the abolition of the Test and Corporation Acts.
103 Mitford, Speech to the House of Commons, 1 March 1791, Cobbett and Wright, Parliamentary History, 28: col. 1364; William Pitt, Speech to the House of Commons, 8 April 1791, in Cobbett and Wright, Parliamentary History, 29: cols. 116–17; Catholic Relief Act, 1791, Geo. 3, c. 32. Warwickshire.
104 Milner, 9 October 1793, Bishop Douglass Papers. vol. 45, 217, Archives of the Archdiocese of Westminster; Charles Plowden, 29 August 1793, Bishop Douglass Papers, vol. 45, 203, Archives of the Archdiocese of Westminster. Milner reported that John Reeves, head of the Reeves Association, was eager for “counteracting the Cisalpines.” Plowden claimed the Marquis of Buckingham believed the Cisalpine Joseph Berington “would make the youth all Jacobins.”
105 William Windham, Speech to the House of Commons, 21 February 1791, in Cobbett and Wright, Parliamentary History, 28:cols. 1265–66.
106 Leighton, Catholicism in a Protestant Kingdom, 30–34, 45–48; Kevin Whelan, The Tree of Liberty: Radicalism, Catholicism and the Construction of Irish Identity, 1760–1830 (Notre Dame, 1996), 107.
107 See Marianne Elliott, Partners in Revolution: The United Irishmen and France (New Haven, 1982); James Livesey, Civil Society and Empire: Ireland and Scotland in the Eighteenth-Century Atlantic World (New Haven, 2009), 91; Bartlett, Fall and Rise, 125–30; “Declaration of the Irish Catholics,” MS 5007, National Library of Ireland; Elliott, The Catholics of Ulster: A History (New York, 2001), 236; see also A Member of the Catholic Society, An Appeal to the People: Or, a Political Olio [. . .] (Dublin, 1792), 120. The anonymous author praises the revolutionaries for “[shaking] the factitious powers of Rome” and restoring the French church to purity.
108 See J. E. Cookson, The British Armed Nation, 1793–1815 (Oxford, 1997); Neal Garnham, “Defending the Kingdom and Preserving the Constitution: Irish Militia Legislation, 1692–1793,” in The Eighteenth-Century Composite State: Representative Institutions in Ireland and Europe, 1689–1800, ed. D. W. Hayton, James Kelley, and John Bergin (New York, 2010), 107–35.
109 Hobart to Nepean, 16 March 1793, Hardwicke Papers, Add. MSS 35933, British Library; see also Fagan, Divided Loyalties, 168–75; Bartlett, Fall and Rise, 165.
110 Iain McLean and Alistair McMillan, State of the Union (Oxford, 2005), 81.
111 See Fagan, Divided Loyalties, 168–75, 174–53.
112 Macaulay, Catholic Church, 61.
113 Elliott, Catholics of Ulster, 242; Macaulay, Catholic Church, 68.
114 Connolly, Divided Kingdom, 482; Donal Kerr, “Priests, Pikes and Patriots: The Irish Catholic Church and Political Violence from the Whiteboys to the Fenians,” in Piety and Power in Ireland, 1760–1960: Essay in Honour of Emmet Larkin, ed. Stewart Brown and David Miller (Notre Dame, 2000), 16–42, at 23; Bartlett, Fall and Rise, 240; John Bew, Castlereagh: A Life (Oxford, 2012), 11; Ruán O'Donnell, “The Union and Internal Security,” in Acts of Union: The Causes, Contexts, and Consequence of the Act of Union, ed. Dáire Keogh and Kevin Whelan (Dublin, 2001), 216–42, at 237.
115 Kevin Whelan, “The Other Within: Ireland, Britain and the Act of Union,” in Keogh and Whelan, Acts of Union, 13–33, at 18; see also Patrick Geoghegan, The Irish Act of Union: A Study in High Politics, 1798–1801 (Dublin, 2001); Douglas Kanter, The Making of British Unionism, 1740–1848: Politics, Government, and the Anglo-Irish Constitutional Relationship (Dublin, 2009); and Oliver Rafferty, The Catholic Church and the Protestant State: Nineteenth-Century Irish Realities (Dublin, 2008), 35–53.
116 See Patrick Geoghegan, “The Making of the Union,” in Keogh and Whelan, Acts of Union, 34–45; Earl of Camden's remarks, July/August 1798, Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2379.
117 S. J. Connolly, “Reconsidering the Irish Act of Union,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society no. 10 (2000): 399–408, at 404; Castlereagh to Pitt, 1 January 1801, Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2827.
118 Thomas Pelham and/or Edward Cooke, attributed, “Plan of Union, Paper A,” Pelham Papers, Add. MSS 33119, fol. 161, British Library.
119 “Pitt's comments on Paper A,” Pelham Papers, BL Add. MSS 33119, fol. 164.
120 Cooke to Castlereagh, 11 January 1801, in Memoirs and Correspondence of Viscount Castlereagh, Second Marquess of Londonderry, vol. 4, ed. Charles Vane (London, 1849), 18–20, at 19 and 20.
121 Pitt to George III, 31 January 1801, Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2836.
122 Henry Dundas to Loughborough, 12 January 1801, Melville Papers, GD 51/1/17/21, National Archives of Scotland, Edinburgh; TNA, HO 123/19, Castlereagh, “Catholics No. 1,” fols. 7–8.
123 John Thomas Troy to Patrick Plunkett, 23 May 1797 in Bernard Ward, The Eve of Catholic Emancipation: Being the History of the English Catholics During the First Thirty Years of the Nineteenth Century, vol. 1 (London, 1911), 50–51; Troy to Cardinal Borgia, 17 August 1799 in Ward, The Eve, 51–52; see also Bew, Castlereagh, 115. Unlike many Protestants, Castlereagh did not believe that the insurrection had been a Catholic plot. Instead, he saw it as a “Jacobinical conspiracy” using “popish instruments.”
124 “Summary of a Correspondence with the Right Honble Lord Hobart & Lord Viscount Castlereagh on the Subject of the Roman Catholic Clergy,” Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2557; “Pitt's comments on Plan A,” Pelham Papers, BL Add. MSS 33119, fol. 164.
125 Troy to Cardinal Borgia, 17 August 1799, quoted in Ward, The Eve, 51–52.
126 “Summary of a Correspondence,” Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2557.
127 “Summary of a Correspondence,” Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2557.
128 Leighton, Catholicism in a Protestant Kingdom, 155–56; Macaulay, Catholic Church, 20; McNally, Vincent, “John Thomas Troy, Archbishop of Dublin, and the Establishment of Saint Patrick's College, Maynooth, 1791–1795,” Catholic Historical Review 67, no. 4 (1981): 565– 88Google Scholar, at 576–78.
129 Rafferty, The Catholic Church, 51; see also Dáire Keogh, “Catholic Responses to the Act of Union,” in Keogh and Whelan, Acts of Union, 159–70.
130 “Meeting of Roman Catholic Prelates in Dublin in 1799,” Archbishop Troy Papers, 28/1/246, Dublin Diocesan Archives; Macaulay, Catholic Church, 123, 148; “Summary of a Correspondence,” Pitt Papers Add. 6958, fol. 2557, CUL.
131 Quoted in John Ehrman, The Younger Pitt: The Consuming Struggle, vol. 3 (Stanford, 1996), 503.
132 Dana Y. Rubin, Britain and Its Internal Others, 1750–1800: Under Rule of Law (Manchester, 2017), 195.
133 George III to Pitt, 1 February 1801, Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2837.
134 Pitt to George III, 31 January 1801, Pitt Papers, CUL Add. 6958, fol. 2836.
135 Notes on a speech by Pitt, 1801, Adams manuscripts, BL Add. MSS 98036/1/23, fol. 134 (15).