Act of Union 1800

What if Catholic Emancipation was actually implemented as part of the Act of Union (1800)? Would the emancipation early enough be able to keep Ireland within the United Kingdom or would it still separate?
 

Falkenburg

Monthly Donor
If...

That would be a particularly big 'IF'.

IIRC it was Crown opposition that killed Emancipation when the Act of Union came into effect.

For that to be different would entail a marked shift in the political balance in 'England'. The ramifications of that could make for an interesting Alternative.

Perhaps as a consequence of the American Revolution the balance had been altered? (Stronger Parliament/ Weaker Crown)

A more progressive United Kingdom (for its' time) wouldn't neccessarily be what we might conceive to be a 'Democracy' but it might well have a jump start on the road..

Intriguing possibilities.:cool:

Falkenburg
 
I am asking for another time line that I am working. One though that I have had is King George III was a bit off his rocker, and that the regency could have been started earlier.... The Regent (George IV) was thought for a time to be more inclined towards Catholics (he did have a relationship with one for a time, even if he did later publicly speak out against emancipation) and would have been willing to grant assent.
 
Very likely, as many Irish Catholics were quite enthusiastic about the idea of the Union if they were to be emancipated. Many of them felt bitterly disillusioned when Catholic emancipation was not made part of the Act of Union.

However, I don't think Catholic emancipation instantly is necessary to save the Union. It wasn't until about 1916 onwards OTL that most Irish people wanted complete independence from Britain.
 

Falkenburg

Monthly Donor
A Cancer at the Heart of the Empire

'Instantly' may not be essential.

However, it is the broken promise that does the damage.
It was the dashing of hope that alienated many from the project of Union.
This 'betrayal' gave the cry of Perfidious Albion a regrettable plausibility.

The deliberate exclusion of the majority of Irelands' population inflicted a fatal wound to any chances of building a genuine partnership between the Nations.

I certainly wouldn't claim that the Irish people would have been exemplars of progressive citizenship were such a Union to have taken shape. In reality I would expect they would have been just like any other 'Briton' (which was kind of the point of the exercise in the first place).

Instead, justifiably or not, the Irish became seen as a constant 'fifth column' within the State. Successive administrations put 'Security Considerations' before any sense of justice.

Each further repressive action merely fuelled further antipathy.
Some of the brightest and best minds of their time proved incapable of breaking this destructive cycle.

The history of Britain and Ireland, while no more tragic than that of any other two neighbours of similiar disparity, resonants because of the global socio-political influence of the protagonists.

Conversely, were there to be a plausible Alternative constructed its' repercussions could be profound, not just for Britain (and Her Empire) but for the wider world.

Regards,

Falkenburg
 
Top