Emancipation of the Catholics in 1801

Could it have being possible for William Pitt the Younger to have given the Catholics the Emancipation he promised with the act of Union? If that had of happened perhaps the calls for repealing the act of union would not be so heavily linked with the calls for Emancipation? Maybe the Union would be seen as a good thing in Ireland since it brought with it good change? Despite the British public's opposition to emancipation, the biggest hurdle was the king. Could he have slipped into madness early and the legislation moved from there? If not, could an earlier POD have forced the acception of emancipation due to different circumstances on the ground? Another issue would be the Tithe, would that be dispenced with quicker if Emancipation occured three decades eariler?
 
Could it have being possible for William Pitt the Younger to have given the Catholics the Emancipation he promised with the act of Union? If that had of happened perhaps the calls for repealing the act of union would not be so heavily linked with the calls for Emancipation? Maybe the Union would be seen as a good thing in Ireland since it brought with it good change? Despite the British public's opposition to emancipation, the biggest hurdle was the king. Could he have slipped into madness early and the legislation moved from there? If not, could an earlier POD have forced the acception of emancipation due to different circumstances on the ground? Another issue would be the Tithe, would that be dispenced with quicker if Emancipation occured three decades eariler?

Kvasir

Possibly but very difficult I suspect. It wasn't just the king as much of the establishment and much of the population that opposed it. An earlier attempt to give equal rights to Catholics in Britain had prompted the so called Gordon riots in the 1780's.

Also if emancipation had been achieved it would really have angered and worried the Protestants in Ireland and their supporters elsewhere. The Act of Union, contrary to later propaganda, was a good step for the Catholic population of Ireland as it achieved its purpose, of removing control of Ireland from the Protestant minority, which had been a cause of much resentment and hostility in Ireland. To a degree I think it was a compromise, in that the Protestants gave up their parliament but avoided any danger, at the time, of coming under Catholic control. You could have had a very explosive situation in Ireland, even more so that OTL if London had tried to enforce emancipation and left the Dublin Parliament in place.

Steve
 
The wearing of the green

As others have pointed out, this is probably very unlikely given the strength of public feeling and the lingering fear of Jacobites. Although the internal wars were over, there were still Jacobites in the French Army e.g Marshall Macdonald.

However the mass of the people didn't have the vote so the establishment may have tolerated enfranchisement as there were establishment catholic families who had given their allegience to the crown since the reformation i.e the Howards of Norfolk

It may well have had no effect on Irish Nationalism as only a handful of people had the vote anyway and most catholics in Ireland had been dispossed of their land long before and were oppressed economically. The enfranchisement of a handful of landed gentry would do nothing for them. When Catholic emancipation came it didn't bring about relief from the potatio famine. Catholicism was what Orwell called a form of transferred nationalism. Emancipation may have assisted Catholicism to have play a more open role and acted as a safety valve but nationalism would still have arisen although it may have followed more peaceful channels
 
The main problem is the king, but if you can get him declared man earlier then you could go to work on the Prince Regent. George III almost opened parliament in 1803 by calling them all peacocks, so its a possibility

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Top