Background Information

Number of voters: about 7000 in 1815

Constituency business
Date Candidate Votes
1801 MERVYN ARCHDALL I
JOHN WILLOUGHBY COLE, Visct. Cole
19 July 1802 JOHN WILLOUGHBY COLE, Visct. Cole
MERVYN ARCHDALL II
17 June 1803 HON. GALBRAITH LOWRY COLE vice Cole, become a peer of Ireland
17 Nov. 1806 HON. GALBRAITH LOWRY COLE
1,416
MERVYN ARCHDALL II
1,260
Henry Brooke
623
Richard Brooke
413
27 May 1807 HON. GALBRAITH LOWRY COLE
949
MERVYN ARCHDALL II
513
Henry Brooke
447
9 Nov. 1812 HON. GALBRAITH LOWRY COLE
3,432
MERVYN ARCHDALL II
2,066
Henry Brooke
1,852
2 July 1818 SIR GALBRAITH LOWRY COLE
MERVYN ARCHDALL II
Main Article

Fermanagh was a largely agricultural county, populated almost equally by Catholics and Protestants. Elections were traditionally dominated by the most substantial landowners Lord Enniskillen (Cole), the Archdalls and the Brookes of Brookeborough. In fact, an Archdall and a Cole had represented the county continuously since 1731 and 1783 respectively, and a Brooke between those dates. Not surprisingly, the main feature of elections after the Union was the three attempts of Henry Brooke to recapture a county seat. The other landlords, notably the Marquess of Ely, Lord Belmore and Sir James Caldwell, counted for little.1Wakefield, Account of Ireland, i. 259.

Henry Brooke made his first effective bid in 1806 when he and his relation Richard Brooke stood against Generals Archdall and Cole, who had united to thwart him in 1802. The Castle adopted a policy of neutrality and Brooke had therefore to rely largely upon the following claims on his behalf:

He possesses an enlightened mind and liberal sentiments. He is a good and a resident landlord, and spends an ample fortune in the bosom of his tenantry ... He has the most flourishing estate in the county; the tenants have good houses, are well clad; there are few who cannot ride a good horse to market, and many whom he is not ashamed to have at his table. A few such landlords would be serviceable in Ireland.

They were insufficient to defeat his rivals’ tenant strength and Archdall could be outspoken against government on the hustings.2M. L. Cole and S. Gwynn, Mems. of Sir Lowry Cole, 25; Spencer mss, Irish list, May 1806; Dublin Evening Post, 11 Nov. 1806.

This contest was repeated in 1807 and 1812. On both occasions, the Castle did little or nothing and Lord Ely’s support of Brooke proved unavailing. In fact the only significant event was the decision of the returning officer in 1807 that freeholders were entitled to vote after 12 lunar rather than calendar months from the date of their registration. Brooke claimed that this created 295 of his opponents.3Wellington mss, Archdall to Wellesley, 12 May, reply 15 May; Dublin Corresp. 27 May 1807; Add. 40204, f. 7. In 1818 Cole and Archdall were unopposed, the former strenuously denying throughout that there was any coalition between them. This was probably correct, though both gave a general support to administration and strongly opposed Catholic relief.4Dublin Corresp. 3 July 1818.

Author
Notes
  • 1. Wakefield, Account of Ireland, i. 259.
  • 2. M. L. Cole and S. Gwynn, Mems. of Sir Lowry Cole, 25; Spencer mss, Irish list, May 1806; Dublin Evening Post, 11 Nov. 1806.
  • 3. Wellington mss, Archdall to Wellesley, 12 May, reply 15 May; Dublin Corresp. 27 May 1807; Add. 40204, f. 7.
  • 4. Dublin Corresp. 3 July 1818.