Maynooth College Act 1845

Last updated

Maynooth College Act 1845
Act of Parliament
Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom (variant 1, 1952-2022).svg
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long title An Act to amend Two Acts passed in Ireland for the better Education of Persons professing the Roman Catholic Religion, and for the better Government of the College established at Maynooth for the Education of such Persons, and also an Act passed in the Parliament of the United Kingdom for amending the said Two Acts.
Citation 8 & 9 Vict. c. 25
Dates
Royal assent 30 June 1845
Other legislation
Amends
Repealed by Statute Law (Repeals) Act 2013
Status: Repealed

The Maynooth College Act 1845 (8 & 9 Vict. c. 25) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.

St Patrick's College, Maynooth was established by the Maynooth College Act 1795 as a seminary for Ireland's Catholic priests. The British government hoped this would help conciliate the Irish to British rule. [1] In 1842 the Catholic hierarchy of Ireland requested that the grant to the College be increased. Matthew Flanagan, secretary to the Maynooth trustees, contacted the Chief Secretary for Ireland, Edward Eliot, arguing the case for increasing the grant. Eliot requested that the government should set up a committee of enquiry to investigate the College's inadequacies. [2] The Cabinet discussed the Maynooth question on 7 November 1842 but the Prime Minister, Sir Robert Peel, decided that any commission would not have the confidence of both parties and it would be impossible to word terms of references acceptable to everyone. [3] Eliot reported that the Maynooth trustees were willing to wait for a more favourable moment. [3]

In October 1843 Eliot again raised the issue against the background of Daniel O'Connell's movement for the repeal of the Union. In 1843 agitation had suddenly flared up again [4] but British public opinion at this time was generally anti-Catholic and it was not certain that it would support an increased grant to Maynooth. [5] Lord Stanley wrote to Peel, supporting the appointment of a commission because it might "render familiar ideas which at present would not even be permitted to be discussed". [5]

On 11 February 1844 Peel submitted a memorandum to the Cabinet where he predicted that the Whigs would attack the government over the state of Ireland in the debates scheduled for 13 February. Peel advocated appointing a commission to investigate the educational standards of the College and supported an increased grant. [6] On 13 February the Cabinet discussed appointing a commission but due to the divisions between Cabinet members Peel postponed a decision. [7]

On 17 February Peel despatched another memorandum to Cabinet members, stating that Ireland caused him "great anxiety" and that they should make reforms now while it was still safe to do so. Peel pointed to historical parallels to demonstrate that resisting reforms eventually led to enforced concessions on the part of the government. He also added that law and order in Ireland depended on the co-operation of the Catholics and that every concession apart from disestablishing the Church of Ireland and repealing the Union should be made to improve Anglo-Irish relations. [8] The Cabinet discussed the memorandum on 19 February without coming to a decision, with Peel remarking as he left the room: "Depend upon it, the attack upon the Church of Ireland can only be staved off by liberal concessions". [9]

Peel submitted a third memorandum at the end of February, arguing that with O'Connell's repeal movement weakened by government action and with agitation declining, now was the time to make concessions to moderate Catholics. Peel warned that another such favourable opportunity of settling the Irish question might never return. [10] The Home Secretary, Sir James Graham, spent the autumn researching the issue and submitted to the Cabinet in November a memorandum supporting raising the grant. [11] By March 1845 Graham had finalised a Bill embodying his recommendations. [12] On 3 April Peel delivered a speech in the Commons supporting the Bill. [13]

The Bill increased the annual grant to the college from £9,000 to £26,000, along with a one off grant of £30,000 for new buildings. The Board of Works was made responsible for the cost of repairs and maintenance. The Bill also introduced annual visitations. [14]

On 11 April the six-day debate on the Bill's second reading began, with liberal Conservatives, the Whigs and the Irish supporting the Bill and ultra-Protestant Conservatives and Radicals speaking against. [15] On 16 April the Radical MP John Bright criticised the Bill:

Does Irish discontent arise because the priests of Maynooth are now insufficiently clad or fed? I have always thought that it arose because one-third of the people were paupers. I can easily see how, by the granting of this sum, you might hear far less in future times of the sufferings and wrongs of the people of Ireland than you have heard heretofore. For you find that one large means of influence possessed by those who have agitated for the redress of Irish wrongs is the support which the Irish Catholic clergy have given to the various associations for carrying on political agitation. And the object of this Bill is to tame down these agitators—it is a sop given to the priests. It is hush-money, given that they may not proclaim to the whole country, to Europe and to the world, the sufferings of the population to whom they administer the rites and the consolations of religion. [16]

He claimed that the established Protestant Church of Ireland was the root cause of Irish discontent but because the government was unwilling to disestablish it their "object is to take away the sympathy of the Catholic priests from the people. The object is to make the priests in Ireland as tame as those in Suffolk and Dorsetshire. The object is that when the horizon is brightened every night by incendiary fires, no priest of the paid establishment shall ever tell of the wrongs of the people among whom he is living". [17]

After the six day debate on the Bill, it passed by a majority of 147. [18] Three Conservatives resigned in protest against the Bill: William Ewart Gladstone (President of the Board of Trade), Lord Redesdale (Conservative chief whip in the Lords) and Alex Pringle (a junior Treasury minister). The historian Norman Gash argued that the Bill shattered the morale of the Conservative Party and that the damage done to the Party by the Bill was "incalculable" because it undermined the relationship between Church and State on which it had been built in the 1830s. [19] On the vote for the second reading Conservative MPs voted 159 in favour, 147 against. On the third reading Conservatives voted 148 voted in favour, 149 against. However, four-fifths of Liberal MPs voted in favour, giving the Bill large majorities. [19]

There was a resurgence of anti-Catholicism against the Bill, with petitions hostile to the proposals and public meetings against them held across Britain. An anti-Maynooth Conference was held at Exeter Hall where a committee was set up to fight the Bill. [20] James Thursfield claimed that "the whole country overflowed with bigotry and fanaticism" against it. [21]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Robert Peel</span> English statesman (1788–1850)

Sir Robert Peel, 2nd Baronet,, was a British Conservative statesman who served twice as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, simultaneously serving as Chancellor of the Exchequer (1834–1835), and twice as Home Secretary. He is regarded as the father of modern British policing, owing to his founding of the Metropolitan Police Service. Peel was one of the founders of the modern Conservative Party.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reform Act 1832</span> UK law reforming the electoral system

The Representation of the People Act 1832 was an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom that introduced major changes to the electoral system of England and Wales. It reapportioned constituencies to address the unequal distribution of seats and expanded franchise by broadening and standardising the property qualifications to vote. Only qualifying men were able to vote; the Act introduced the first explicit statutory bar to women voting by defining a voter as a male person.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corn Laws</span> 19th-century trade restrictions on import food and grain in Great Britain

The Corn Laws were tariffs and other trade restrictions on imported food and corn enforced in the United Kingdom between 1815 and 1846. The word corn in British English denoted all cereal grains, including wheat, oats and barley. They were designed to keep corn prices high to favour domestic producers, and represented British mercantilism. The Corn Laws blocked the import of cheap corn, initially by simply forbidding importation below a set price, and later by imposing steep import duties, making it too expensive to import it from abroad, even when food supplies were short. The House of Commons passed the corn law bill on 10 March 1815, the House of Lords on 20 March and the bill received royal assent on 23 March 1815.

The Independent Irish Party (IIP) was the designation chosen by the 48 Members of the United Kingdom Parliament returned from Ireland with the endorsement of the Tenant Right League in the 1852 general election. The League had secured their promise to offer an independent opposition to the dominant landlord interest, and to advance an agrarian reform programme popularly summarised as the "three F's": fair rent, fixed tenure and free sale.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Russell, 1st Earl Russell</span> Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, 1846–1852 and 1865–1866

John Russell, 1st Earl Russell,, known by his courtesy title Lord John Russell before 1861, was a British Whig and Liberal statesman who served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1846 to 1852 and again from 1865 to 1866.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Bright</span> British Radical and Liberal statesman (1811–1889)

John Bright was a British Radical and Liberal statesman, one of the greatest orators of his generation and a promoter of free trade policies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1852 United Kingdom general election</span>

The 1852 United Kingdom general election was a watershed in the formation of the modern political parties of Britain. Following 1852, the Tory/Conservative party became, more completely, the party of the rural aristocracy, while the Whig/Liberal party became the party of the rising urban bourgeoisie in Britain. The results of the election were extremely close in terms of the numbers of seats won by the two main parties.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1841 United Kingdom general election</span>

In the 1841 United Kingdom general election, there was a big swing as Sir Robert Peel's Conservatives took control of the House of Commons. Melbourne's Whigs had seen their support in the Commons erode over the previous years. Whilst Melbourne enjoyed the firm support of the young Queen Victoria, his ministry had seen increasing defeats in the Commons, culminating in the defeat of the government's budget in May 1841 by 36 votes, and by 1 vote in a 4 June 1841 vote of no confidence put forward by Peel. According to precedent, Melbourne's defeat required his resignation. However, the cabinet decided to ask for a dissolution, which was opposed by Melbourne personally, but he came to accept the wishes of the ministers. Melbourne requested the Queen dissolve Parliament, leading to an election. The Queen thus prorogued Parliament on 22 June.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">St Patrick's Pontifical University, Maynooth</span> Catholic college and pontifical university in County Kildare, Ireland

St Patrick's Pontifical University, Maynooth, is a pontifical Catholic university in the town of Maynooth near Dublin, Ireland. The college and national seminary on its grounds are often referred to as Maynooth College.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829, also known as the Catholic Emancipation Act 1829, removed the sacramental tests that barred Roman Catholics in the United Kingdom from Parliament and from higher offices of the judiciary and state. It was the culmination of a fifty-year process of Catholic emancipation which had offered Catholics successive measures of "relief" from the civil and political disabilities imposed by Penal Laws in both Great Britain and in Ireland in the seventeenth, and early eighteenth, centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Catholic Association</span> 19th century campaign for Catholic emancipation in Great Britain

The Catholic Association was an Irish Roman Catholic political organization set up by Daniel O'Connell in the early nineteenth century to campaign for Catholic emancipation within Great Britain. It was one of the first mass-membership political movements in Europe. It organized large-scale public protests in Ireland. Home Secretary Robert Peel was alarmed and warned an associate of his in 1824, "We cannot tamely sit by while the danger is hourly increasing, while a power co-ordinate with that of the government is rising by its side, nay, daily counteracting its views." The Duke of Wellington, Britain's prime minister and its most famous war hero, told Peely, "If we cannot get rid of the Catholic Association, we must look to civil war in Ireland sooner or later." To stop the momentum of the Catholic Association it was necessary to pass Catholic Emancipation, and so Wellington and Peel turned enough Tory votes to win. Passage demonstrated that the veto power long held by the Ultra-Tories faction of reactionary Tories no longer was operational, and significant reforms were now possible.

The Maynooth Grant was a cash grant from the British government to a Catholic seminary in Ireland. In 1845, the Conservative Prime Minister, Sir Robert Peel, sought to improve the relationship between Catholic Ireland and Protestant Britain by increasing the annual grant from the British government to St Patrick's College, Maynooth, a Catholic seminary in Ireland in dilapidated condition. It aroused a major political controversy in the 1840s, reflecting the anti-Irish and anti-Catholic feelings of many British Protestants.

John Leslie Foster, FRS was an Irish barrister, judge and Tory Member of Parliament (MP) in the United Kingdom Parliament. In 1830 he was appointed a Baron of the Court of Exchequer of Ireland.

In Ireland, the penal laws were a series of legal disabilities imposed in the seventeenth, and early eighteenth, centuries on the kingdom's Roman Catholic majority and, to a lesser degree, on Protestant "Dissenters". Enacted by the Irish Parliament, they secured the Protestant Ascendancy by further concentrating property and public office in the hands of those who, as communicants of the established Church of Ireland, subscribed to the Oath of Supremacy. The Oath acknowledged the British monarch as the "supreme governor" of matters both spiritual and temporal, and abjured "all foreign jurisdictions [and] powers"—by implication both the Pope in Rome and the Stuart "Pretender" in the court of the King of France.

The Tenant Right League was a federation of local societies formed in Ireland in the wake of the Great Famine to check the power of landlords and advance the rights of tenant farmers. An initiative of northern unionists and southern nationalists, it articulated a common programme of agrarian reform. In the wake of the League's success in helping return 48 pledged MPs to the Westminster Parliament in 1852, the promised unity of "North and South" dissolved. An attempt was made to revive the all-Ireland effort in 1874, but struggle for rights to the land was to continue through to the end of the century on lines that reflected the regional and sectarian division over Ireland's continued place in the United Kingdom.

The Roman Catholic Relief Bills were a series of measures introduced over time in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries before the Parliaments of Great Britain and the United Kingdom to remove the restrictions and prohibitions imposed on British and Irish Catholics during the English Reformation. These restrictions had been introduced to enforce the separation of the English church from the Catholic Church which began in 1529 under Henry VIII.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard More O'Ferrall</span> Irish-born British politician (1979–1880)

Richard More O'Ferrall was an Irish politician, a high level British government official and a Governor of Malta. Born to a noble Irish Catholic family at Balyna, he was the eldest son and heir of Ambrose More O'Ferrall, Lord of Laois and Prince of Annally. Educated at Stonyhurst College, More O'Ferrall entered politics young, becoming Member of Parliament for Kildare in 1830. In 1839, More O'Ferrall married Matilda, daughter of The 3rd Viscount Southwell, KP. After holding many senior roles, he was appointed Governor of Malta in 1847, a post he held until 1851. He was known to be a very honourable man and was made a deputy lieutenant and a justice of the peace as well as a Member of the Privy Council of the United Kingdom. He stepped down as a Member of Parliament for Kildare in 1865. More O'Ferrall was widely respected, both in Ireland and Great Britain and has been praised for his achievements while Governor of Malta.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Factories Act 1847</span> 1847 United Kingdom Act of Parliament

The Factories Act 1847, also known as the Ten Hours Act was a United Kingdom Act of Parliament which restricted the working hours of women and young persons (13–18) in textile mills to 10 hours per day. The practicalities of running a textile mill were such that the Act should have effectively set the same limit on the working hours of adult male mill-workers.

Anti-Maynooth Conference was a conference hosted in London in May 1845 by Conservatives, evangelical Anglicans and the Protestant Association to campaign against the Maynooth Grant and British State funding of the Roman Catholic Maynooth College. Opponents of the Maynooth Bill formed a committee and held a conference in the Rotunda, in Dublin.

References

  1. ↑ Beckett (1981), pp. 256–257.
  2. ↑ Gash (1972), pp. 400–401.
  3. 1 2 Gash (1972), p. 401.
  4. ↑ Kitson Clark (1936), p. 124.
  5. 1 2 Gash (1972), p. 414.
  6. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 416.
  7. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 417.
  8. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 418.
  9. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 419.
  10. ↑ Gash (1972), pp. 419–420.
  11. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 456.
  12. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 472.
  13. ↑ HC Deb 03 April 1845 vol 79 cc16-39
  14. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 473.
  15. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 474.
  16. ↑ Trevelyan (1913), p. 161.
  17. ↑ Trevelyan (1913), p. 162.
  18. ↑ Gash (1972), p. 475.
  19. 1 2 Gash (1972), p. 477.
  20. ↑ Gash (1972), pp. 472–473.
  21. ↑ Thursfield (1891), p. 214.

Bibliography

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.