Analyse the Reasons Behind the Successes and Failures of Irish
Unionism and Irish Nationalism between 1800 and 1900- Essay
The Irish nationalists and the Irish Unionists both achieved significant
success during the 19th Century. For example, O’Connell achieved Catholic
Emancipation in 1829 whilst the Unionists achieved their ultimate goal of
preventing repeal of the 1801 Act of Union. However, the main reason behind
this success was often the weaknesses or support of the British government.
For example, Grattan attempted to achieve Catholic Emancipation with
his group of “Patriots” in the House of Commons. However, he failed in both
1821 and 1826, leading O’Connell to comment “Twenty years have passed
away and still we are slaves”. This failure was primarily due to strong
opposition from the British government, especially opposition from King
George III and King George IV (who opposed because of their position as
head of the Church of England). It can be argued that Grattan had success in
inspiring O’Connell, but failed to achieve his goals in his own right.
Emmet was also severely inhibited by the British government with his
rebellion in 1803, failing in his ultimate goal to achieve an Irish republic. This
can be linked to the power of the British government, who successfully
crushed the rebellion. This resulted in 50 days, as well as a further 22
executions in September 1803 (including Emmet).
However, it should be noted that Emmet was not a total failure. He
created a series of martyrs who were particularly inspirational for Young
Ireland in 1848. Moreover, it may be argued that other factors were more
important than the opposition of the British government at this time. For
example, Emmet’s hesitant leadership meant that the plans for the rebellion
were changed at short-notice. Originally, the plan was to attack Dublin Castle.
However, Emmet changed this to occupying two streets. This created an
, instability that contributed to defeat. Moreover, Emmet was obstructed by the
opposition of the Catholic Church. On the morning that the rebellion was
planned to happen, Archbishop Troy of Dublin preached against Emmet and
urged the public not to support the rebellion. As a result, Emmet lacked public
support, and only approximately 300 men rebelled in 1803. As a result, defeat
seemed inevitable.
The first instance of major Irish nationalist success came with O’Connell
achieving Catholic Emancipation in 1829. This, too, was heavily influenced by
the role of the British government. Firstly, the British government was divided
and weakened during this period, which O’Connell exploited to gain his
“bloodless revolution” (O’Connell) with the 1829 Roman Catholic
Emancipation Act. Lord Liverpool resigned in February 1827, kickstarting the
Emancipation Crisis. He was replaced by the pro-Emancipation Canning.
However, the anti-Emancipation Wellington became Prime Minister (PM) in
January 1829 after Canning’s death. The Canningites refused to join
Wellington’s cabinet, and the resulting divisions made it possible for
O’Connells Emancipation Campaign to achieve success. Moreover, it should
be acknowledged that support for Emancipation had grown significantly in the
British government since Grattan’s failure in 1821. For example, Russell (a
Whig) repealed the Test and Corporations Acts in 1828, making the
Emancipation Question impossible to ignore. The 1829 Act was met with
minimal opposition in the House of Commons, and was passed through the
House of Lords with a 2:1 majority. Additionally, the Emancipation Act was not
a full success, and this can be attributed to the enduring dominance of the
British government. For example, the Act increased the voting qualification
from 40 shillings to £10 / household, reducing the Irish electorate to a sixth of
its original size. This preserved British power in the House of Commons.
However, the 1829 Act was still mainly a success and this success can
not fully be attributed to the British government. O’Connell himself was an
Unionism and Irish Nationalism between 1800 and 1900- Essay
The Irish nationalists and the Irish Unionists both achieved significant
success during the 19th Century. For example, O’Connell achieved Catholic
Emancipation in 1829 whilst the Unionists achieved their ultimate goal of
preventing repeal of the 1801 Act of Union. However, the main reason behind
this success was often the weaknesses or support of the British government.
For example, Grattan attempted to achieve Catholic Emancipation with
his group of “Patriots” in the House of Commons. However, he failed in both
1821 and 1826, leading O’Connell to comment “Twenty years have passed
away and still we are slaves”. This failure was primarily due to strong
opposition from the British government, especially opposition from King
George III and King George IV (who opposed because of their position as
head of the Church of England). It can be argued that Grattan had success in
inspiring O’Connell, but failed to achieve his goals in his own right.
Emmet was also severely inhibited by the British government with his
rebellion in 1803, failing in his ultimate goal to achieve an Irish republic. This
can be linked to the power of the British government, who successfully
crushed the rebellion. This resulted in 50 days, as well as a further 22
executions in September 1803 (including Emmet).
However, it should be noted that Emmet was not a total failure. He
created a series of martyrs who were particularly inspirational for Young
Ireland in 1848. Moreover, it may be argued that other factors were more
important than the opposition of the British government at this time. For
example, Emmet’s hesitant leadership meant that the plans for the rebellion
were changed at short-notice. Originally, the plan was to attack Dublin Castle.
However, Emmet changed this to occupying two streets. This created an
, instability that contributed to defeat. Moreover, Emmet was obstructed by the
opposition of the Catholic Church. On the morning that the rebellion was
planned to happen, Archbishop Troy of Dublin preached against Emmet and
urged the public not to support the rebellion. As a result, Emmet lacked public
support, and only approximately 300 men rebelled in 1803. As a result, defeat
seemed inevitable.
The first instance of major Irish nationalist success came with O’Connell
achieving Catholic Emancipation in 1829. This, too, was heavily influenced by
the role of the British government. Firstly, the British government was divided
and weakened during this period, which O’Connell exploited to gain his
“bloodless revolution” (O’Connell) with the 1829 Roman Catholic
Emancipation Act. Lord Liverpool resigned in February 1827, kickstarting the
Emancipation Crisis. He was replaced by the pro-Emancipation Canning.
However, the anti-Emancipation Wellington became Prime Minister (PM) in
January 1829 after Canning’s death. The Canningites refused to join
Wellington’s cabinet, and the resulting divisions made it possible for
O’Connells Emancipation Campaign to achieve success. Moreover, it should
be acknowledged that support for Emancipation had grown significantly in the
British government since Grattan’s failure in 1821. For example, Russell (a
Whig) repealed the Test and Corporations Acts in 1828, making the
Emancipation Question impossible to ignore. The 1829 Act was met with
minimal opposition in the House of Commons, and was passed through the
House of Lords with a 2:1 majority. Additionally, the Emancipation Act was not
a full success, and this can be attributed to the enduring dominance of the
British government. For example, the Act increased the voting qualification
from 40 shillings to £10 / household, reducing the Irish electorate to a sixth of
its original size. This preserved British power in the House of Commons.
However, the 1829 Act was still mainly a success and this success can
not fully be attributed to the British government. O’Connell himself was an
