A liberty was an English unit originating in the Middle Ages, traditionally defined as an area in which regalian right was revoked and where the land was held by a mesne lord (i.e. an area The term "liberty" was used in Ireland after the Norman conquest. Liberty of Leinster; later divided into the liberties of Wexford, Kilkenny, .
Table of contents
I come now to enquire into our second Particular proposed, viz. Whether Ireland might be properly said to be conquered by King Henry the Second, or by any other Prince in any succeeding Rebellion. I know Conquestus signifies a peaceable Acquisition, as well as an hostile Subjugating of an Enemy. But I believe the People of England would take it very ill to be thought a conquered Nation in the Sense that some impose it on Ireland: Whereas Henry the Second received not the least Opposition in Ireland, all came in peaceably, and had large Concessions made them of the like Laws and Liberties with the People of England, which they gladly accepted, as we shall see hereafter.
The Rebellions in England have been frequent; in the Contests between the Houses of York and Lancaster, one Side or other must needs be rebellious. This Pretence therefore of Conquest from Rebellions, has so little Colour in it, that I shall not insist longer on it: And in this Particular I conceive, that if the Aggressor, or Insulter, invades a Nation unjustly, he can never thereby have a Right over the conquered: This I suppose will be readily granted by all Men: If a Villain with a Pistol at my Breast, makes me convey my Estate to him, no one will say that this gives him any Right: Let us then suppose a just Invader, one that has Right on his Side, to attack a Nation in an hostile Manner; and that those who oppose him are in the Wrong: Let us then see what Power he gets, and over whom.
In like manner, supposing Hen. So that if I, or any Body else, claim the like Freedoms with the Natural Born Subjects of England, as being descended from them, it will be impossible to prove the contrary. I conclude therefore, that a just Conqueror gets no Power, but only over those who have actually assisted in that Unjust Force that is used against him. All that gives Title in a just Conquest, is the Opposers using brutal Force, and quitting the Law of Reason, and using the Law of Violence; whereby the Conqueror is entitled to use him as a Beast; that is, kill him, or enslave him.
Secondly, Let us consider what Power that is which a Rightful Conqueror has over the subdued Opposers: And this we shall find extends little farther than over the Lives of the conquered; I say little farther than over their Lives; for how far it extends to their Estates, and that it extends not at all to deprive their Posterity of the Freedoms and Immunities to which all Mankind have a Right, I shall shew presently. That the just Conqueror has an absolute Power over the Lives and Liberties of the conquered, appears from hence, because the conquered, by putting themselves in a State of War, by using an unjust Force, have thereby forfeited their Lives.
But as for forfeiting their Edition: But we are now enquiring what the Consequence will be, between two contesting Nations. Which brings me to consider how far a just Conqueror has Power over the Posterity and Estates of the conquered. As to the Posterity, they not having joined or assisted in the forcible Opposition of the Conquerors just Arms, can lose no Benefit thereby.
A Father hath not in himself a Power over the Life or Liberty of his Child, so that no Act of his can possibly forfeit it. If therefore the Posterity of the conquered, are not to suffer for the unjust Opposition given to the Victor by their Ancestors, we shall find little Place for any Power of the Conquerors over the Estates of the subdued.
His Goods, which Nature that willeth the Preservation of all Mankind as far as possible hath made to belong to his Children to sustain them, do still continue to belong to his Children. It must be confessed that the Practice of the World is otherwise, and we commonly see the Conqueror whether just or unjust by the Force he has over the conquered, compels them with a Sword at their Breast to stoop to his Conditions, and submit to such a Government as he pleases to afford them. But we enquire not now what is the Practice, but what Right there is to do so.
If it be said the conquered submit by their own Consent; then this allows Consent necessary to give the Conqueror a Title to Rule over them. But then we may enquire, whether Promises extorted by Force without Right, can be thought Consent, and how far they are obligatory; and I humbly conceive they bind not at all. He that forces my Horse from me, ought presently to restore him, and I have still a Right to retake him: So he that has forced a Promise from me, ought presently to restore it, that is, quit me of the Obligation of it, or I may chuse whether I will perform it or not: For the Law of Nature obliges us only by the Rules she prescribes, and therefore cannot Edition: From what has been said, I presume it pretty clearly appears, that an unjust Conquest gives no Title at all; that a just Conquest gives Power only over the Lives and Liberties of the actual Opposers, but not over their Posterity and Estates, otherwise than as before is mentioned; and not at all over those that did not concur in the Opposition.
They that desire a more full Disquisition of this Matter, may find it at large in an incomparable Treatise, concerning the True original Extent and End of civil Government, Chap. This Discourse is said to be written by my excellent Friend, John Locke, Esq; Whether it be so or not, I know not; this I am sure, whoever is the Author, the greatest Genius in Christendom need not disown it.
JSTOR: Access Check
And here I believe no Man of common Sense or Justice will deny it; none that had ever considered the Law of Nature and Nations, can possibly hesitate on this Matter; the very proposing it strikes the Sense and common Notions of all Men so forcibly, that it needs no farther Proof. I shall therefore insist no longer on it, but hasten to consider how far this is the Case of Ireland: And that brings me naturally to the fourth Particular proposed, viz.
We are told by Matth. The Title of which Modus runs thus:. And the Sense of it agrees for the most part with the Modus Tenendi Parl. And the late reverend and learned Dr. There seems to me but two Objections of any Moment raised by Mr. Pryn against these Modi. The one relates both to the English and Irish Modus; the other chiefly strikes at the Irish. He says the Name Parliament, so often found in these Modi, was not a Name for the great Council of England known so early as these Modi pretend to.
I confess I am not prepared to disprove this Antiquary in this particular: But to me it seems reasonable enough to imagine, Edition: To this I can only answer, that Henry II. If therefore England had then Sherffs, we need not wonder to find them named in the Irish Modus, though they were not as yet established amongst us, for they were designed to be appointed soon after, and before the Modus could be put regularly in execution: It was exemplified by Inspeximus under the great Seal of Ireland, and the Exemplification was sometimes Edition: The Tenor of which Exemplification runs thus:.
Then the Exemplification concludes:. Now we can hardly think it credible says the Bishop of Meath that an Exemplification could have been made so solemnly of it by King Henry the Fourth, and that it should refer to a Modus transmitted into Ireland by King Henry the Second, and affirm that it was produced before the Lord Lieutenant and Council at Trym, if no such thing had been done: This were to call in question the Truth of all former Records and Transactions, and make the Exemplification contain an egregious Falshood in the Body of it.
Can any Concession in the World be more plain and free than this?
Navigation menu
We have heard of late much Talk in England of an original Edition: From all which it is manifest, that there were no Laws imposed on the People of Ireland by any Authority of the Parliament of England, nor any Laws introduced into that Kingdom by Henry the Second, but by the Consent and Allowance of the People of Ireland.
Let us now see by what farther Degrees the Government of Ireland grew up conformable to that of England. And here, before we proceed any farther, we shall observe, That by this Donation of the Kingdom of Ireland to King John, Ireland was most eminently set apart again, as a separate and distinct Kingdom by itself from the Kingdom of England; and did so continue, until the Kingdom of England descended and came unto King John, after the Death of his Brother Richard the First, King of England, which was about twenty-two Edition: Kings of England, ever stiled themselves, during their Lives, Kings or Lords of Ireland; for the Dominion and Regality of Ireland was wholly and separately vested in King John; being absolutely granted unto him without any Reservation.
Certainly no such Thing could have been then pretended: Therefore if any such Subordination there be, it must arise from something that followed after the Descent of England to King John; for by that Descent, England might as properly be subordinate to Ireland, as the Converse; Ireland being vested in the royal Person of King John twenty-two Years before his Accession to the Crown of England, and being a more ancient Kingdom than the Kingdom of England.
But how far this operates, I shall enquire more fully hereafter; I shall only at present observe, that I conceive little more is effected by these Statutes, than that Ireland shall not be aliened or separated from the King of England, who cannot hereby dispose of it otherwise than in legal Succession along with England; and that whoever is King of England, is ipso facto King of Ireland, and the Subjects of Ireland are obliged to obey him as their liege Lord. He, about the twelfth Year of his Reign of England, went again into Ireland, viz. Paris tells us, p.
But ours is eight Years older than that which he granted to England; it not Edition: Apud Bristol Duodecimo die Novembr. Regni nostri Anno Primo. Earl Marshal his Governor, because he had then no Seal of his own. The Record, as recited by Mr. But we know the Liberties of Englishmen are founded on that universal Law of Nature that ought to prevail throughout the whole Edition: And here, before I proceed farther, I shall take notice, that in the late raised Controversy, Whether the House of Commons were an essential Part of the Parliament before the 49th Year of Henry the Third: And if that be admitted, and that their the Irish Commune Concilium, or Parliament, had its Platform from ours the English as I think it will not be denied by any that have considered the History and Records touching that Land Ireland we shall find the ensuing Records, Ann.
I have been the more particular in transcribing this Passage out of Mr. Petyt, to shew that we have as antient and express an Authority for our present Constitution of Parliaments in Ireland, as can be shewn in England. And I believe it will not be thought adviseable in these latter Days to break in upon old settled Constitutions: No one knows how fatal the Consequences of that may be.
To return therefore where we digressed. The Record I have taken out of Mr. By what foregoes, I presume it plainly appears, that by three several Establishments under the three first Kings of Ireland, of the Norman Race, the Laws and Liberties of the People of England were granted to the People of Ireland. Henry the Second first introduced the Laws of England into Ireland, in a public Assembly of the Irish at Lismore, and allowed them the Freedom of Parliaments to be held in Ireland as they were held in England.
Henry the Third, in the first Year of his Reign, gave Ireland a Magna Charta; and in the twelfth Year of his Reign did provide, that all the Laws of England should be observed in Ireland; and that the Charter granted to the Irish by his Father, King John, under his Seal, when he was in that Kingdom, should be kept inviolably. And from the Days of these three Kings, have England and Ireland been both governed by the like Forms of Government, under one and the same supreme Head, the King of England; yet so, as both Kingdoms remained separate and distinct in their several Jurisdictions under that one Head, as are the Kingdoms of England and Scotland at this Day, without any Subordination of the one to the other.
If now we enquire, What were those Laws of England that became thus established Edition: Surely we must first reckon the great Law of Parliaments, which England so justly challenges, and all Mankind have a Right to. That this was a main Branch of the English Law established in this Kingdom, and the very Foundation of our future Legislature, appears manifest from Parliaments being so early convoked in Ireland, as the fore-mentioned Precedents express.
For so we may argue the Parliaments of England to be of later Date than pretended, when we find the first printed Acts in Keeble to be no older than the 9th of Henry the Third. Whereas it is most certain, that Parliaments have been held in England some Ages before that. After this great Law of Parliaments, we may reckon the common Law of England; whether it relates to regulating and settling of Property, and Estates in Goods or Land, or to the judiciary and executive Parts of the Edition: These surely were all established in this Country by the three first Kings of Ireland, of the Norman Race.
Let us now consider the State of the Statute Laws of England under these three Kings and their Predecessors; for by the Irish voluntary Submission to, and Acceptance of the Laws and Government of England, we must repute them to have submitted themselves to these likewise, till a regular Legislature was established amongst them, in pursuance of that Submission and voluntary Acceptance. And here we shall find, that in those Times, viz. But these were only so many Confirmations of Edition: The Laws of Henry II. As we find at large in Chron.
Anno Regis Johannes The same Historian gives us also at large both Charta Libertatum, and Charta de Foresta, which are not extant in the Rolls of those Times, nor to be found in any till the 28th of Edward I. And by the several Establishments which we have formerly mentioned of the Laws of England to be of Force in Ireland: First, in the 13th of Henry II.
Secondly, in the 12th of King John. Thirdly, in the 12th of Henry III. All those Laws and Customs of England, which by those several Charters were declared and confirmed to be the Laws of England, were established to be of Force in Ireland. And thus Ireland came to be governed by one and the same Common Law with England; and those Laws continue as Part of the municipal and fundamental Laws of both Kingdoms to this Day. It now remains that we enquire, how the Statute Laws and Acts of Parliament made in England since the 9th of Henry the Third, came to be of Force in Ireland and whether all, or any of them, and which are in force here, and when, and how they came to be so.
And in the 10 th of Henry the Fourth, it was enacted in this Kingdom of Ireland, That the Statutes made in England should not be of Force in this Kingdom, unless they were allowed and published in this Kingdom by Parliament. And the like Statute was made again in the 29th of Henry the Sixth. Thus far the Note. If we consider the frequent Troubles and Distractions in Ireland, we shall not wonder that these, and many other Rolls and Records Edition: For, from the third Year of Edward the Second, which was Ann.
Perhaps it may be said that if there were such Statutes of Ireland as the said Acts of the 10th of Henry the Fourth, and the 29th of Henry the Sixth; as they shew, that the Parliaments of Ireland did think that English Acts of Parliament could not bind Ireland; yet they shew likewise, that even in those Days the Parliaments of England did claim this Superiority; or else, to what purpose were the said Acts made, uuless in denial of that Claim?
History of Ireland (1801–1923)
There is nothing so common, Edition: And if bare pretence will give a Title, no Man is secure: And it will be yet worse, if when another so pretends, and I insist on my Right, my just Claim shall be turned to my Prejudice, and to the Disparagement of my Title. Or at least some of them may be scrupulous, and desirous of full Security in this Point; and on their Account, and for their Satisfaction, such Acts as aforesaid, may be devised and enacted in Ireland.
But then, God forbid that these Acts should afterwards be laid hold of to a clear other Intent than what they were framed for; and instead of declaring and securing our Rights, should give an handle of Contest, by shewing that our Rights have been questioned of ancient Time. In conclusion of all, if this Superiority of the Parliament of England have been doubted a great while ago, so it has been as great a while ago strenuously opposed, and absolutely denied by the Parliaments of Ireland.
And by the way, I shall take Notice, that from whencesoever this ancient Pretence of Edition: For we have not one single Instance of an English Act of Parliament expressly claiming this Right of binding us: But we have several Instances of Irish Acts of Parliament expressly denying this Subordination, as appears by what foregoes. And in the 32d Year of Henry the Sixth, Cap.
And that from hence forth the said Act, and all other Statutes and Acts made by Authority of Parliament within the Realm of England, be ratified and confirmed, and adjudged by the Authority of this Parliament in their Force and Strength, from the said sixth Day of March. We shall hereafter Edition: Thus we see by what Steps and Degrees, all the Statutes which were made in England from the Time of Magna Charta, to the 10th of Henry the Seventh, which did concern the common public Weal, were received, confirmed, allowed, and authorized to be of force in Ireland; all which was done by Assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons in the Parliament of Ireland assembled, and no otherwise.
We shall next enquire, whether there are not other Acts of the English Parliament, both before and since the 10th of Henry the Seventh, which were and are of force in Ireland, though not allowed of by Parliament in this Kingdom. And we shall find, that by the Opinion of our best Lawyers, there are divers such; but then they are only such as are declaratory of the ancient common Law of England, and not introductive of new Law: As to those English Statutes since the 10th of Henry the Seventh, that are introductive of a new Law, it was never made a Question whether they should bind Ireland, without being allowed in Parliament here; until of very late Years this Doubt began to be moved; and how it has been carried on and promoted, shall appear more fully hereafter.
I say, until of very late Years; for the ancient Precedents which we have to the contrary are very numerous. Amongst many, we shall mention the following particulars:. This Act was not received in Ireland until it was enacted by a Parliament held here in the 33d of Henry the 8th, c. In the 21st of Henry the Eighth, c. But this was not of force in Ireland until enacted here in the 33d of Henry the Eighth, c.
An Act was made in England, Ann. But this Act was not received in Ireland until enacted here, An. Anno 27 Henry the Eighth, c. The Statute for transfering Uses into Possession was made in England; but not admited in Ireland until In like manner, the English Statute 33 Henry the Eighth, c. And so that of England, 14 Car. The Statute against wilful Perjury, made in England 5 Eliz. And another Act against Forgery, 5 Eliz. In England an Act was made the 27th of Eliz.
For abridging of Proclamations on Fines, by Chap. Concerning killing a Robber, by Chap. There are six English Statutes likewise passed in the Time of King Charles the Second, upon, and soon after the Restoration, some of which were not passed into Laws in Ireland until a Year, two or three, afterwards: And in the first Year of William and Mary, Ses. But was not enacted here in Ireland until the 7th Year of King William, c. And this was thought requisite to be done upon mature Consideration thereon Edition: Such as are amongst others, the Act for disarming Papists. The Act of Recognition.
The Act for taking away Clergy from some Offenders. The Act against Clandestine Mortgages. The Act against Cursing and Swearing. I shall now consider the Objections and Difficulties that are moved on this Head, drawn from Precedents and Passages in our Law-Books, that may seem to prove the contrary.
Which shews as some alledge that even in those Days it was held by some, that an Act of Parliament in England might bind Ireland before it be consented to in Parliament here. But I conceive this Gloss is raised meerly for want of expressing the Reason of the said Doubt in the Irish Statute of the 8th Edition: By the Statute of Westminster the Second, c.
This Statute of Westminster the Second, was made of Force in Ireland, by an Act passed here the 13th of Edward the Second, as we have seen before, page 68, Afterwards, by the English Statute of the 6th of Richard the Second, c. Whether this latter English Statute of the 6th of Richard the Second, c. And for settling this Doubt the said Statute of the 8th of Edward the Fourth, c. For the English Statute of the 6th of Richard the Second, c. For the said Irish Statute of the the 8th of Edward the Fourth, c. First therefore, as to such English Statutes as seem to comprehend Ireland, and to bind Edition: Yet the Act in Ireland, 2 Elizabeth, c.
Justice Jefferyson, in the Edition: Dopping, late Bishop of Meath; Dr. King, the present Bishop of Londonderry; and Dr. Wiseman, late Bishop of Dormore. If it be said, that Scotland is an ancient, separate, and distinct Kingdom from England; I say, so is Ireland: But then it is to be considered, that there was a Possibility, or even a Probability, that Ireland might have continued separate from the Crown of England even to this very Day, if Richard the First had left behind him a numerous Progeny.
Secondly, as to such English Statutes as particularly name Ireland, and are therefore said to be of force in this Kingdom, though Edition: For as to those of later Date, it is these we complain of, as bearing hard on the Liberties of this Country, and the Rights of our Parliaments, and therefore these ought not to be produced as Arguments against us. I presume, if I can shew that the ancient Precedents that are produced do not conclude against us; it will follow, that the modern Instances given ought not to conclude against us; that is to say plainly, these ought not to have been made as they are, as wanting Foundation both from Authority and Reason.
The ancient Precedents of English Statutes particularly naming Ireland, and said to be made in England with a Design of binding Ireland, are chiefly these three:. These Statutes, especially the two first, being made for Ireland, as their Titles import, Edition: But if we enquire farther into this Matter, we shall find this Conclusion not fairly deduced.
And the Close of it commands, that the aforesaid Customs that be used within our Realm of England in this Case, be proclaimed throughout our Dominion of Ireland, and be there observed. Teste me ipso apud Westminst. And shews no more, that therefore the Parliament of England may bind Ireland, than it would have proved, that the Commonwealth of Rome was subject to Greece, if, after Rome had received the Law of the twelve Tables, they had sent to Greece to know what the Law was in some special Case.
But that this has ever been otherwise, and that the Lords Justices, and other Officers here have purchased Lands in Ireland at their own Will and Pleasure, needs no Proof to those who have the least Knowledge of this Country. Nor does it appear by any Inquisition, Office, or other Record, Edition: But it is very improbable that only this single Ordinance should appear, if any such Parliament were called together. Thirdly, as to the Staple Act, 2 Henry the Sixth, c. The Case, as we find it in the Year-Books of Mich. Richard the Third, fol. The Merchants of Waterford having shipped off some Wool, and consigned it to Sluice in Flanders, the Ship, by Stress of Weather, put into Callis, where Sir Thomas Thwaits, Treasurer of Callis, seized the said Wool as forfeited, half to himself, and half to the King, by the said Statute; hereupon a Suit was commenced between the said Merchants and the said Treasurer, which was brought before all the Judges of England into the Exchequer-Chamber: The first Point only relates to our present Purpose; and herein we find in the aforesaid Year-Book of 2 Richard the Third, fol.
Hussey, the Chief Justice, said, That the Statutes made in England shall bind those of Ireland, which was not much gainsaid by the other Judges, notwithstanding that some of them were of a contrary Opinion the last Term in his Absence. That Brook, in abridging this Case of the first of Henry the Seventh, fol. For within the Land of Ireland they are all positive, that the Authority of the Parliament of England will not affect us.
They seem at the utmost reach to extend the Jurisdiction Edition: The Question is, whether England and Ireland be two distinct Kingdoms? And whether they have each their respective Parliaments; neither of which will be denied by any Man: And if so, there can be no Subordination on either Side, each is complete in its own Jurisdiction, and ought not to interfere with the other in any Thing. Or whether they had not been Subjects to the King of France, had our Kings continued their Possession of that Country, and there kept the Seat of the Monarchy; Edition: But let this Doctrine never be mentioned amongst the Free-born Subjects of these Nations.
Thus I have done with the three principal Instances that are usually brought against us, on the Stress that is laid on English Acts of Parliament, particularly naming Ireland. There have been other Statutes or Ordinances made in England for Ireland, which may reasonably be of Force here, because they were made and assented to by our own Representatives.
These we may suppose were either Statutes made at the Request of the States of Ireland, to explain to them the Common Law of England; or if they were introductive of new Laws, yet they might well be of force in Ireland; being enacted by the Assent of our own Representatives, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons of Ireland; as the Words afore-mentioned do shew: Formerly, when Ireland was but thinly peopled, and the English Laws not fully current in all Parts of the Kingdom, it is probable, that then they could not frequently assemble with Conveniency or Safety to make Laws in their own Parliament at home; and therefore, during the Heats of Rebellions, or Confusion of the Times, they were forced to enact Laws in England.
But then this was always by their proper Representatives: For amongst the Records of the Tower of London, Rot. Edward the Third, Parl. Archbishop of Dublin, his Chancellor, requiring them to issue Writs under the great Seal of Ireland, to the several Counties: And in another Roll, the 50th of Edward the Third, Membr. If from these last mentioned Records, it be concluded that the Parliament of England may bind Ireland; it must also be allowed, that the People of Ireland ought to have their Representatives in the Parliament of England. And this I believe we should be willing enough to embrace; but this is an Happiness we can hardly hope for.
This sending of Representatives out of Ireland to the Parliament in England, on some Occasions, was found in process of Time to be very troublesome and inconvenient; and this we may presume was the Reason that, afterwards, when Times were more settled, we fell again into our old Track, and regular Course of Parliaments in our own Country; and hereupon the Laws afore-noted, page 64, were enacted, establishing that no Law made in the Parliament of England should be of Force in Ireland, till it was allowed and published in Parliament here.
I have said before, page 85, that I would only consider the more antient Precedents that are offered to prove, that Acts of England particularly naming Ireland, should bind us in this Kingdom; and indeed it were sufficient to stop here, for the Reason above alledged. However, I shall venture to come down lower, and to enquire into the modern Precedents of English Acts of Parliament alledged against us: But still with this Observation, that it is these we complain against as Innovations, and therefore they ought not to be brought in Argument against us.
I do therefore again assert, that before the Year , there was no Statue made in England introductory of a new Law that interfered with the Right which the People of Ireland have to make Laws for themselves, except only those which we have before-mentioned, and which we have discussed at large, and submit to the Readers Judgment. But how this came to pass we shall now enquire. For it is very well known, that Persons who were to have Interests and Titles in Ireland by virtue of those Acts passed in England, are cut off by the Acts of Settlement and Explanation.
And indeed there is all the Reason in the World that it should be so, and that Acts made in a Kingdom by the legal Representatives of the People, should take place of those made in another Kingdom. But however, it will be said, that by those Acts it is manifest that England did presume they had such a Right to pass Acts binding Ireland, or else they had never done it. To which I answer, that, considering the Condition Ireland was in at that Time, viz.
And the only Means could then be practised was for the Parliament of England to interpose, and do something for our Relief and Safety; these were the best Assurances could be had at that Juncture. But when the Storm was over, and the Kingdom quieted, we see new Measures were taken in a legal Parliament of our own. We shall find also, that then there were Representatives sent out of this Kingdom, who sat in the Parliament of England, which then was only the House of Commons.
We cannot therefore argue from hence, that England may bind us; for we see they allowed us Representatives, without which, they rightly concluded, they could not make Laws obligatory to us. This Act, however prejudicial to the Trade that was then carried on between Ireland and England, does not properly bind us, more than it does any other Country in the World.
When any Thing is imported and landed in England, it becomes immediately subject to the Laws thereof; so that herein we cannot be said properly to be bound. But there has never been an Occasion of executing it here; for I have not heard that a Rood of Tobacco was ever planted in this Kingdom. But however, that takes not off the Obligation of the Law: It is only want of our Consent that I urge against that. I see no more Reason for sending a Force to trample down an Acre of Tobacco in Ireland, by these Statutes, than there would be for cutting down the Woods of Shelela, where there an Act made in England against our planting or having Timber.
Thirdly, the Act for encouraging Shipping and Navigation, by express Name, mentions and binds Ireland; and by the last Clause in Edition: Fourthly, the Acts prohibiting the Exportation of Wool from Ireland to any Country except to England, do likewise strongly bind us; and by the 12 Charles the Second, c. To these three last Acts I must confess I have nothing to urge to take off their Efficacy; name us they do most certainly, and bind us so, as we do not transgress them.
But how rightfully they do this is the Matter in question. And on this Account we may venture to assert, that these are at least Innovations on us, as not being warranted by any former Precedents. And shall Proceedings only of thirty-seven Years standing, be urged against a Nation to deprive them of the Rights and Liberties, which they enjoyed for five hundred Years before, and which were invaded without and against their Consent, and from that Day to this have been constantly complained Edition: I am now arrived at our present Days, under the happy Government of his Majesty King William the Third; and I am sorry to reflect, that since the late Revolution in these Kingdoms, when the Subjects of England have more strenuously than ever asserted their own Rights, and the Liberty of Parliaments, it has pleased them to bear harder on their poor Neighbours than has ever yet been done in many Ages foregoing.
I am sure what was then done by that wise and just Body of Senators was perfectly out of good Will and Kindness to us, under those Miseries which our afflicted Country of Ireland then suffered. But I fear some Men have since that, made use of what was then done, to other Purposes than at first intended. Let us now see what that was, and consider the Circumstances under which it was done.
The Protestant Clergy of Ireland being thus banished from their Benifices, many of them accepted such small ecclesiastical Promotions in England, as the Benevolence of well-disposed Persons presented them with. But this being directly contrary to a Statute in this Kingdom, in the 17th and 18th of Charles the Second, cap. The Protestant Irish Clergy thought they could not be too secure in avoiding the Penalty of the last-mentioned Act, and therefore applied themselves to the Parliament of England, and obtained an Act in the first Year of King William and Queen Mary, c.
Afterwards, in the same Year, and same Session, chap. When the banished Laity of Ireland observed the Clergy thus careful to secure their Properties, and provide for the worst, as well as they could in that Juncture, when no other Means could be taken by a regular Parliament in Ireland, they thought it likewise adviseable for them to do something in relation to their Concerns. Thus the Laity thought themselves secure. And we cannot wonder, that during the Heat of a bloody War in this Kingdom, when it was impossible to secure our Estates and Properties by a regular Parliament of our own, we should have Recourse to this Means, as the only one which then could be had.
We concluded with ourselves; that when we had obtained these Acts from the Parliament in England, we had gone a great Way in securing the like Acts to be passed in a regular Parliament in Ireland, whenever it shall please God to re-establish us in our own Country: And that, by obtaining their Assent to Acts of Parliament in Favour of the Irish Protestants, they had in a manner pre-engaged their Assent to the like Bills, when they should hereafter come before them as Privy Counsellors, in order to be regularly transmitted to the Parliament of Ireland, there to be passed into Laws of that Kingdom.
But instead of all this, to meet with another Construction of what was done Edition: And by this it is alledged we have given up our Right, if any we had, and have for ever acknowledged our Subordination to the Parliament of England. But let us a little consider the Force of this Argument. I readily grant, that this and the other fore-mentioned Acts in England since the Revolution, when they were made, were looked upon highly in our Favour, and for our Benefit; and to them as such, we have conformed ourselves.
But then, in all Justice and Equity, our Submission herein is to be deemed purely voluntary, and not at all proceeding from the Right we conclude thereby in the Legislators. If a Man, who has no Jurisdiction over me, command me to do a thing that is pleasing to me, and I do it; Edition: If I voluntarily give my Money to a Man when I please, and think it convenient for me; this does not authorise him at any Time to command my Money from me when he pleases. If it be said, this allows Subjects to obey, only whilst it is convenient for them; I pray it may be considered, whether any Men obey longer, unless they be forced to it; and whether they will not free themselves from this Force as soon as they can.
Il is impossible to hinder Men from defiring to free themselves from Uneasiness, it is a Principal of Nature, and cannot be eradicated. If submitting to an Inconvenience, be a less Evil than endeavouring to throw it off, Men will submit. But if the Inconvenience grow upon them, and be greater than the Hazard of getting rid of it, Men will offer at putting it by, let the Statesman or Divine say what they can.
But I shall yet go a little further, and venture to assert, that the Right of being subject only to such Laws to which Men give their own Consent, is so inherent to all Mankind, and founded on such immutable Laws of Nature and Reason, that it is not to be aliened, or given up, by any Body of Men whatsoever: And therefore for a Company of Men to say, Let us unite ourselves into a Society, and let us be absolutely governed by such Laws, as such a Legislator, without ever consulting us, shall devise for us: For to say, we will be governed by those Laws, whether they be good or hurtful to us, is absurd in itself: Moreover, I desire it may be considered, whether the general Application of the chief Part of the Irish Protestants, that were at that Time in London, to the Parliament at Westminster, for obtaining these Laws, may not be taken for their Consent, and on that Account, and no other, these Acts may acquire their binding Force.
I know very well, this cannot be looked upon as a regular and formal Consent, such as might be requisite at another more favourable Juncture: An opt-out provision for the Northern Ireland region resulted in its decision to remain part of the UK, while the remainder became the Irish Free State. Ireland opened the 19th century still reeling from the after-effects of the Irish Rebellion of Prisoners were still being deported to Australia and sporadic violence continued in County Wicklow. There was another abortive rebellion led by Robert Emmet in The Act of Union, which constitutionally made Ireland part of the British state, can largely be seen as an attempt to redress some of the grievances behind the rising [1] and to prevent it from destabilising Britain or providing a base for foreign invasion.
After one failed attempt, the passage of the act in the Irish parliament was finally achieved, albeit, as with the Acts of Union that united Scotland and England , with the mass bribery of members of both houses, who were awarded British peerages and other "encouragements". In this period, the administration of Ireland consisted of authorities appointed by the central British government.
Almost equally important was the Under Secretary for Ireland , who headed up the civil service in Ireland. As the century went on, the British Parliament took over from the monarch as the executive as well as legislative branch of government. For this reason, in Ireland, the Chief Secretary became more important than the Lord Lieutenant, who became of more symbolic than real importance. The British Administration in Ireland — known by metonymy as " Dublin Castle " — remained largely dominated by the Anglo-Irish establishment until its removal from Dublin in Part of the Union's attraction for many Irish Catholics and Dissenters was the promised abolition of the remaining Penal Laws then in force which discriminated against them , and the granting of Catholic Emancipation.
Arthur Wellesley, the Anglo-Irish soldier and statesman and First Duke of Wellington , was at the peak of his enormous prestige as the victor of the Napoleonic Wars. As Prime Minister he used his considerable political power and influence to steer the enabling legislation through the UK Parliament. As head of the Repeal Association , O'Connell mounted an unsuccessful campaign for the repeal of the Act of Union and the restoration of Irish self-government.
O'Connell's tactics were largely peaceful, using mass rallies to show the popular support for his campaign. While O'Connell failed to gain repeal of the Union, his efforts led to reforms in matters such as local government and the Poor Laws. However, these advancements were followed by the first Reform Act , a principal condition of which was the removal of the poorer freeholders from the franchise , on the grounds that the qualifying income had not been amended for years and that consequently many of those who were qualified were not truly independent as secret ballots were not yet in force.
Significant electoral reform acts would enlarge the franchise throughout the UK in the ensuing century. Despite O'Connell's peaceful methods, there was also a good deal of sporadic violence and rural unrest in the country in the first half of the 19th century. In Ulster , there were repeated outbreaks of sectarian violence, such as the riot at Dolly's Brae , between Catholics and the nascent Orange Order. Elsewhere, tensions between the rapidly growing rural population on one side and their landlords and the state on the other, gave rise to much agrarian violence and social unrest.
- DAS DRITTE AUGE (German Edition)?
- Handbook of Lead-Free Solder Technology for Microelectronic Assemblies (Mechanical Engineering).
- Liberty Counsel shocks to land National.
- History of Ireland (–) - Wikipedia.
- Diana’s journey to lesbianism (Short Sex Story Book 1)?
- Quick Review of Topics in Trigonometry: Trigonometric Functions & Equations (Quick Review Notes).
Secret peasant societies such as the Whiteboys and the Ribbonmen used sabotage and violence to intimidate landlords into better treatment of their tenants. The most sustained outbreak of violence was the Tithe War of the s, over the obligation of the mostly Catholic peasantry to pay tithes to the Protestant Church of Ireland. Ireland underwent major highs and lows economically during the 19th century; from economic booms during the Napoleonic Wars and in the late 20th century when it experienced a surge in economic growth unmatched until the ' Celtic Tiger ' boom of the s , to severe economic downturns and a series of famines, the last threatening in The worst of these was the Great Irish Famine — , in which about one million people died and another million emigrated.
The economic problems of most Irish people were in part the result of the small size of their landholdings and a large increase in the population in the years before the famine. Enclosures of land since the start of the 19th century had also exacerbated the problem, and the extensive grazing of cattle had contributed to the decrease in size in the plots of land available to tenants to raise their crops. In the new Whig government from , Charles Trevelyan became assistant secretary to the Treasury, and largely responsible for the British Government's response to the famine in Ireland.
When potato blight hit the island in , much of the rural population was left without food. Unfortunately at this time, the then Prime Minister Lord John Russell adhered to a strict laissez-faire economic policy, which maintained that further state intervention would have the whole country dependent on hand-outs, and that what was needed was for economic viability to be encouraged. Emigration was not uncommon in Ireland in the years preceding the Famine.
Between —, Ireland had already established itself as the major supplier of overseas labour to Great Britain and North America. In , the Irish Republican Brotherhood IRB, also known as the Fenians was founded as a secret society dedicated to armed rebellion against the British. A related organisation formed in New York was known as Clan na Gael , which several times organised raids into the British Province of Canada. While the Fenians had a considerable presence in rural Ireland, the Fenian Rising launched in was a fiasco.
Moreover, wider support for Irish republicanism , in the face of harsh laws against sedition , was minimal in the period. Some members of the Repeal Association, called the Young Irelanders , formed the Irish Confederation and tried to launch a rebellion against British rule in This coincided with the worst years of the famine and was contained by British military action.
William Smith O'Brien , leader of the Confederates, failed to capture a party of police barricaded in Widow McCormack's house , who were holding her children as hostages, marking the effective end of the revolt. Originally sentenced to death, this sentence was later commuted to transportation to Van Diemen's Land , where they joined John Mitchel. In the wake of the famine, many thousands of Irish peasant farmers and labourers either died or left the country.
Those who remained waged a long campaign for better rights for tenant farmers and ultimately for land re-distribution. This period, known as the " Land War " in Ireland, had a nationalist as well as a social element. The reason for this was that the land-owning class in Ireland, since the period of the 17th century Plantations of Ireland , had been composed of Protestant settlers, originally from England, who had a British identity.
Members of the Irish Republican Brotherhood , such as Michael Davitt , were prominent among the leadership of this movement. When they saw its potential for popular mobilisation, nationalist leaders such as Charles Stewart Parnell also became involved. The most effective tactic of the Land League was the boycott the word originates in Ireland in this period , where unpopular landlords were ostracised by the local community.
Grassroots Land League members used violence against landlords and their property; [10] attempted evictions of tenant farmers regularly turned into armed confrontations. Parnell, Davitt, William O'Brien and the other leaders of the Land League were temporarily imprisoned — being held responsible for the violence. Ultimately, the land question was settled through successive Irish Land Acts by United Kingdom — beginning with the Act of William Ewart Gladstone , which first gave extensive rights to tenant farmers, then the Wyndham Land Purchase Act won by William O'Brien after the Land Conference , enabling tenant farmers purchase their plots of land from their landlords, the problems of non-existent rural housing resolved by D.
Sheehan under the Bryce Labourers Ireland Act These acts created a very large class of small property owners in the Irish countryside, and dissipated the power of the old Anglo-Irish landed class. Clancy Town Housing Act then advanced the building of urban council housing. Unrest and agitation also resulted in the successful introduction of agricultural co-operatives through the initiative of Horace Plunkett , but the most positive changes came after the introduction of the Local Government Ireland Act which put the control and running of rural affairs into local hands.
However it did not end support for independent Irish nationalism, as British Governments had hoped. See also Irish Land Commission. The Culture of Ireland underwent a massive change in the course of the 19th century. After the Famine, the Irish language went into steep decline. This process was started in the s, when the first National Schools were set up in the country. These had the advantage of encouraging literacy, but classes were provided only in English and the speaking of Irish was prohibited. However, before the s, Irish was still the majority language in the country and numerically given the rise in population may have had more speakers than ever before.
The Famine devastated the Irish speaking areas of the country, which tended also to be rural and poor. As well as causing the deaths of thousands of Irish speakers, the famine also led to sustained and widespread emigration from the Irish-speaking south and west of the country. By , for the first time in perhaps two millennia, Irish was no longer the majority language in Ireland, and continued to decline in importance. By the time of Irish independence, the Gaeltachts had shrunk to small areas along the western seaboard. In reaction, to this, Irish nationalists began a Gaelic revival in the late 19th century, hoping to revive the Irish language and Irish literature and sports.
While social organizations such as the Gaelic League and the Gaelic Athletic Association were very successful in attracting members, most of their activists were English speakers and the movement did not halt the decline of the Irish language. The form of English established in Ireland differed somewhat from British English and its variants. Blurring linguistic structures from older forms of English notably Elizabethan English and the Irish language, it is known as Hiberno-English and was strongly associated with early 20th century Celtic Revival and Irish writers like J. Some nationalists saw the celebration of Hiberno-Irish by predominantly Anglo-Irish writers as offensive " stage Irish " caricature.
Synge's play The Playboy of the Western World was marked by rioting at performances. Until the s, most Irish people elected as their Members of Parliament MPs Liberals and Conservatives who belonged to the main British political parties. The Conservatives, for example, won a majority in the general election in Ireland. A significant minority also voted for Unionists , who resisted fiercely any dilution of the Act of Union. In the s a former Conservative barrister turned nationalist campaigner, Isaac Butt , established a new moderate nationalist movement, the Home Rule League.
After his death, William Shaw and in particular a radical young Protestant landowner, Charles Stewart Parnell , turned the home rule movement, or the Irish Parliamentary Party IPP as it became known, into a major political force. It came to dominate Irish politics, to the exclusion of the previous Liberal, Conservative and Unionist parties that had existed there. The party's growing electoral strength was first shown in the general election in Ireland , when it won 63 seats two MPs later defected to the Liberals.
By the general election in Ireland it had won 86 seats including one in the heavily Irish-populated English city of Liverpool. Parnell's movement proved to be a broad one, from conservative landowners to the Land League. Parnell's movement also campaigned for the right of Ireland to govern herself as a region within the United Kingdom, in contrast to O'Connell who had wanted a complete repeal of the Act of Union. Two home rule bills in and were introduced by Liberal Prime Minister William Gladstone , but neither became law. Gladstone, says his biographer, "totally rejected the widespread English view that the Irish had no taste for justice, common sense, moderation our national prosperity and looked only to perpetual strife and dissension.
A large faction of Liberals, led by Joseph Chamberlain , formed a Unionist faction that supported the Conservative party. The Liberals were out of power and home rule proposals languished. Home Rule divided Ireland: The revived Orange Order mobilized the opposition, warning that a Dublin parliament dominated by Catholics and nationalists would discriminate against them and would impose tariffs on trade with Great Britain.
Whilst most of Ireland was primarily agricultural, north-east Ulster was the location of almost all the island's heavy industry and would have been affected by any tariff barriers imposed by a Dublin parliament. In , the scandal surrounding Parnell's divorce proceedings split the Irish party, when it became public that Parnell, popularly acclaimed as the 'Uncrowned King of Ireland', had for many years been living in a family relationship with Mrs. Katharine O'Shea , the long-separated wife of a fellow MP.
When the scandal broke, religious non-conformists in Great Britain, who were the backbone of the pro-Home Rule Liberal Party, forced its leader W. Inside Ireland, the Catholic Church turned against him. Parnell fought for control but lost. He died in But the Party and the country remained split between pro-Parnellites and anti-Parnellites , who fought each other in elections. The United Irish League founded in forced the reunification of the party to stand under John Redmond in the general election.