Clonmel

Economic and social profile:

A prosperous inland market town on the navigable river Suir, the greater part of Clonmel lay in the ‘old and rich Catholic area of south Tipperary’ and a small portion in County Waterford. Lying at the intersection of three great roads linking Cashel to Dungarvan, Waterford to Limerick, and Dublin to Cork, the town became the hub of the public road transport network developed by Charles Bianconi, an ardent Catholic Liberal and friend of Daniel O’Connell, who boasted many contacts in government circles.1T.J. Hughes, ‘Landholding and settlement in County Tipperary in the nineteenth century’, in W. Nolan & I. McGrath (eds.), Tipperary: History and Society (1985), 339-66 [356]; H.J. Hanham (ed.), Dod’s Electoral Facts, 1832-1853 (1971), 68; F. Espinasse, rev. P. Butterfield, ‘Bianconi, Charles [formerly Joachim Carlo Guiseppe Bianconi]’, Oxford DNB, v. 638-9. The town had substantial manufactures, including an important handloom cotton factory which employed 160 female workers.2Parliamentary Gazetteer of Ireland (1846), 1 (pt. 2), 455, 456, see A. Bielenberg, ‘The Malcolmsons of Portlaw and Clonmel’, Proc. of RIA, cvi (2006), 339-66. A very extensive export trade was also carried on in grain and other agricultural produce, principally with the Liverpool and Manchester markets. There were two large breweries, a whiskey distillery, and several large corn-mills which were ‘like the great factories or mills … in the English manufacturing districts’. The town also enjoyed a vibrant retail trade, boasting thriving butter and potato markets,3K.T. Hoppen, Elections, Politics, and Society in Ireland 1832-1885 (1984), 478; S. Lewis, Topographical Dictionary of Ireland (1837), i. 369-70; Parliamentary Gazetteer, 454-9. and was home to several newspapers, an extensive barracks, a fever hospital and dispensary, and the county gaol and lunatic asylum. It was also the election town for the county.

Electoral history:

The enfranchisement of £10 occupiers in 1832 increased the electorate from 105 to 521, of whom 493 were householders and 28 resident freemen.4PP 1833 (177), xxvii. 306. In 1833 there were 107 resident freemen in the corporation: Parliamentary Gazetteer, 457. This effectively broke the grip of the self-elected and exclusively Protestant corporation controlled by the Bagwells of Marlfield, one of the Clonmel merchant families that had acquired extensive property in the region between 1760 and 1800.5PP 1835 [23] [24] [25] [27] [28], xxvii. 1, 51, 79, 199, xxviii. 1 [671-83]; Hughes, ‘Landholding and settlement’, 344. The typical prosperous townsman was of Gaelic origin, and around 40% of electors were farmers, 26% shopkeepers, 5% engaged in commerce, and another 5% were publicans, the latter groups being particularly active in the town’s political life. Artisans made up nearly 7% of voters and about 15% were gentlemen or professionals.6Hughes, ‘Landholding and settlement’, 358. The town commission in 1837 included 8 shopkeepers, 4 publicans and 5 merchants: Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 37, 40, 56-7. In 1831 Protestants of various denominations comprised 12% of the population and, while far less homogeneous either in occupation or religious persuasion than their Catholic counterparts, composed nearly 40% of the electorate in 1835.7Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 322; N. Higgins, ‘The 1835 Clonmel election: A genealogical source’, Tipperary Historical Journal (2006), 91-7 [92, 93]. In 1834, there were 1,737 Anglicans, 44 Presbyterians, and 206 other Protestant dissenters, most of whom were Quakers, and 15,848 Catholics: Parliamentary Gazetteer, 454.

Given the likely expense of a contest at the 1832 general election, the sitting anti-Reformer, Eyre Coote, retired in favour of his cousin, John Bagwell.8HP Commons, 1832-68, iv. 738. In spite of suffering a cholera epidemic, Clonmel was the site of frantic political activity during the summer, with weekly anti-tithe meetings being held in the neighbourhood during June and July, and a meeting of the County Independent Club taking place on 6 August.9Tipperary Free Press, 4, 7, 11, 14 July, 8 Aug. 1832. An expectation amongst the popular electors that William Butler, the brother of Lord Galmoy, would liberate the town ‘from the high church and tory thraldom’ was soon disappointed.10Freeman’s Journal, 8 Sept. 1832, quoting Waterford Chronicle. However, on 7 October, Richard Lalor Sheil appeared to assist in the establishment of ‘a baronial and householders’ club’ in the town and galvanise support for his ‘old and honest friend’, Dominick Ronayne.11M.R. O’Connell (ed.), O’Connell Correspondence, iv. 457; Freeman’s Journal, 12 Oct. 1832, quoting Tipperary Free Press. It was also reported that some electors had called upon Thomas Moore, ‘the bard of “Erin”’, to come forward: Freeman’s Journal, 11 Sept. 1832. The following week Charles Bianconi announced Daniel O’Connell’s endorsement of Ronayne, who was then leading the local agitation against tithes, tolls, and the payment of ministers’ money.12W.P. Burke, History of Clonmel (1907), 322. Unequivocally pledged to repeal and the abolition of tithes, Ronayne also advocated the extinction of vestry cess, boasting that he had not paid church rates for nine years. He also called for the ‘repeal of the odious law of libel’, a fundamental revision of the grand jury laws, and the global abolition of the slave trade. While in favour of the ballot and triennial parliaments, arguing that ‘six years of sinning and one of penance will never do’, he rejected further reform as an alternative to repeal.13Freeman’s Journal, 20 Oct., 7 Dec. 1832. When Bagwell, who had just come of age as the patron of Clonmel, came forward in the Conservative interest, the different trades of the town agreed to co-operate to secure the independence of the borough. The support given to Ronayne by this hastily assembled ‘Trades’ Union’ was accepted by O’Connell as ‘an admirable illustration of an arrangement necessary to be made to encounter the foe’. Ronayne’s candidacy was endorsed at the county meeting of electors at Cashel on 2 December, and a week later O’Connell visited Clonmel to support his man, denouncing the Bagwell family as ‘the descendants of those creatures who came over here with Oliver Cromwell’. He also castigated ‘those envenomed bigoted Quakers’ who had provided them with electoral support. Ronayne was presented as the foe of ‘Protestant ascendancy’, who had stood by O’Connell’s side in adversity, and proved ‘the friend of the poor man’.14The Times, 8 Dec. 1832; Freeman’s Journal, 14 Dec. 1832. Less than 7% of the post-reform electorate were Quakers: Higgins, ‘The 1835 Clonmel election’, 93. In the first contested election at Clonmel since the Union, Ronayne defeated Bagwell by a clear margin.15Freeman’s Journal, 17 Dec. 1832. A petition complaining that the revising barrister had admitted between 70 and 80 inhabitants of cellars on the strength of their own claims that their properties were worth at least £10 was got up, but after the committee decided to accept ‘only such evidence as was taken or rejected by the registering barrister’ at the time, reluctantly withdrawn.16See A.E. Cockburn & W. Carpenter Rowe, Cases of Controverted Elections Determined in the Eleventh Parliament of the United Kingdom (1833), i. 452-61; Freeman’s Journal, 17, 21, 23, 25, 27 Apr. 1833; Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 7.

The period after the 1832 election saw the popular party advance still further. In October 1833 the commission on Irish corporations investigated the extent of Bagwell’s influence over the borough, with Ronayne presenting the case for reform. At the subsequent registry session, 24 of the 32 persons registered ‘were in the popular interest’, and the revising barrister’s refusal to admit one applicant as a freeman was expected to disqualify ‘the batches of freemen’ admitted by the corporation since the reform bill, ‘in the vain hope of overwhelming the popular interest’ in the borough.17Freeman’s Journal, 15 Oct. 1833, 1 Nov. 1833.

Ronayne and Bagwell both offered again at the 1835 general election. The sitting member’s entry into the town on New Year’s Day was greeted by ‘an orderly assembly of at least 10,000 persons’, after which he denounced the ‘vile Tory faction’ which had recently taken office. O’Connell believed that Ronayne was ‘quite safe in Clonmel’, but visited the town to speak on his behalf a few days later.18The Times, 2 Dec. 1834; Freeman’s Journal, 2 Jan. 1835; D. O’Connell to wife, 12 Jan. 1835, O’Connell Correspondence, v. 255-6. With Bagwell drawing some support from Catholic voters, Richard Sheil was drafted in to deliver what opponents described as ‘an inflammatory and venomous harangue’, in which he warned his co-religionists against accepting inducements to vote against Ronayne.19Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 38; Morning Chronicle, 19 Jan 1835; Morning Post, 24 Jan. 1835. For some years the town had been the scene of sporadic violence and faction fights, and the election was fiercely contested.20For an account of a serious faction fight in the town on Christmas Day 1833, see The Times, 2 Jan. 1834. The Conservative press observed that ‘no species of intimidation which refined and ruffianly ingenuity could invent’ was overlooked in the quest for votes.21Morning Post, 24 Jan. 1835, quoting Clonmel Advertiser. Ronayne was nominated by John Hackett, the proprietor of the influential Tipperary Free Press, and, having accused Bagwell’s party of bribery, won the show of hands. Bagwell was nominated by two local landowners and his supporters required military escorts to the poll, one of them, it was reported, having been ‘crushed to death on leaving the poll-booth’.22Freeman’s Journal, 16 Jan. 1835; Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 393. After the local mill-owner D. Malcolmson cast his vote for Bagwell he was ‘attacked by an infuriated mob, and covered all over with filth and mire’: Morning Post, 24 Jan. 1835. When the election terminated ‘amidst the most violent uproar and confusion’, Ronayne had been returned by just 10 votes.23Morning Post, 24 Jan. 1835. All but three of the Protestant voters went with Bagwell, along with 16% of Catholics: Higgins, ‘The 1835 Clonmel election’, 93. Bagwell was expected to petition against the result on grounds of perjury and priestly interference. However, amidst counter-claims of landlord intimidation, and accusations from both sides of blacklisting and exclusive dealing, no appeal was forthcoming.24Morning Chronicle, 3, 11 Feb. 1835, 27 Jan. 1836. For an investigation of these accusations, see PP 1835 (547) viii. 1 [310-39, 369-74, 546-57]; The Times, 12 Nov. 1835.

Rumours that Ronayne would be given the chairmanship of the county’s grand jury, and perhaps retire from the representation, raised the possibility that O’Connell would offer assistance to Bagwell in return for his support in the House.25Morning Post, 12 Oct. 1835, quoting Dublin Mail. No such agreement had been reached, however, when in January 1836 Ronayne unexpectedly died. The ensuing by-election took place in the shadow of the Lichfield House treaty, and accusations of ‘seat-jobbing’ were made in the Conservative press. It was reported that three names had been suggested by the independent electors and that O’Connell would ‘nominate the man with the longest purse’.26Standard, 2 Feb. 1836; Morning Post, 27 Jan. 1836. The election was regarded as a crucial one for O’Connell, who was anxious to muster as much parliamentary support as possible. By now, Bagwell was viewed as ‘a soi-disant Liberal’, having used the previous election to conciliate Liberal voters by promising to vote for the commutation of tithes. Having lost that election largely on the question of repeal, there now appeared to be few substantial differences between Bagwell and any ‘popular candidate’. The Liberals of Clonmel, however, were said to ‘dread returning him’, regarding his Whiggish professions as ‘too vague and undefined to be calculated on’, and feared, given the bitterness of the previous elections, he might retaliate against O’Connell for having opposed him.27Morning Chronicle, 27 Jan. 1836; The Times, 1 Feb. 1836.

With the town ‘one vast scene of angry discussion’, in which ‘every corner’ was ‘transformed into a rostrum, and every human … a disputant’, a requisition was sent to London calling upon Stephen Spring Rice, the 21 year-old son of the chancellor of the exchequer, to stand.28Standard, 30 Jan. 1836, quoting Clonmel Advertiser; Morning Post, 1 Feb. 1836. Conservatives suspected that the chancellor’s vehement opposition to repeal would not prevent him and O’Connell from ‘playing into each other’s hands’ on the question of municipal reform in order to secure Clonmel ‘for Master Stephen’.29Standard, 2 Feb. 1836, quoting Clonmel Advertiser; Caledonian Mercury, 4 Feb. 1836. Bagwell had ‘positively declined to come forward’, unless ‘called upon by the general body of the constituency as a moderate reformer’, and the Conservatives therefore looked to Richard Pennefather, the son of Baron Pennefather, as their candidate.30Standard, 9 Feb. 1836, quoting Clonmel Advertiser; The Times, 1 Feb. 1836. It was also rumoured that Feargus O’Connor would to return to Ireland ‘to offer himself to the radicals of Clonmel’: Standard, 8 Feb. 1836. However, being wholly unconnected with the town, Rice proved reluctant to ‘pit his dandyism and boyhood against the butter merchants of Clonmel’. This cleared the field for a Catholic Liberal, and a deputation from the town therefore approached Nicholas Ball, a prominent Dublin lawyer.31Thomas Spring Rice to D. O’Connell, 31 Jan. 1836, O’Connell Correspondence, v. 354: Standard, 9 Feb. 1836, quoting Clonmel Advertiser; Examiner, 14 Feb. 1836. He quickly gathered the support ‘of the Clonmel Radicals’, being nominated by John Hackett, but also appealed to moderates by declaring himself ‘a Reformer in the strictest sense of the word’, being in favour of tithe and municipal reform, yet remaining ‘a staunch supporter of the present ministry’.32Morning Post, 15, 25 Feb. 1836; North Wales Chronicle, 1 Mar. 1836. His unopposed return was hailed by the English liberal press as ‘the best practical instance of the union of the Liberal party in Ireland’, and the ‘first fruit and promise of entire and complete success to the cause of reform’ there.33Examiner, 21 Feb. 1836.

By the 1837 general election Clonmel’s nominal electorate had grown to 795, with the number of available voters estimated at 526.34Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 420. Although local issues, such as the improvement of the Suir navigation, had long excited the interest of the town’s inhabitants, the politics of party continued to dominate the borough’s elections.35Parliamentary Gazetteer, 457. It was reported that ‘the Ultra-Radicals’ were seeking ‘one of their own kidney’ to oppose Ball, and that the Conservatives hoped to present another credible challenge.36Morning Post, 13 July 1837; The Times, 11 July 1837. The candidacy of Captain John Morton, ‘a resident and opulent magistrate’ and erstwhile ally of Bagwell, failed to materialise, so Richard Hely-Hutchinson, the brother of Lord Donoughmore, was brought forward instead. Ball headed the poll by a clear margin, although with only 425 votes being cast, it was suggested that some Conservative voters had held back ‘under the impression that their support would be of no avail’.37The Times, 12, 14 July 1837; Standard, 29 June 1838. Although sensing that the comparative strength of the Conservatives and Radicals had ‘never stood more close’, the former party appeared disorganised and leaderless, and so failed to use Ball’s appointment as Irish attorney-general in July 1838 to challenge the Liberals’ hold on the borough.38Standard, 29 June 1838. Ball had the backing of the Catholic clergy, led by the newly appointed parish priest, Rev. Dr. Michael Burke, who was to become ‘a politically powerful and influential figure’ in the borough until his death in 1866.39Burke tried to propose Ball but, not yet being competent to vote, ceded the duty to a local doctor. Burke was parish priest of St. Peter’s and Paul’s and Rev. John Baldwin, another politically active clergyman, administered to the parish of St. Mary’s. Both were local men and ‘of farming stock’: Freeman’s Journal, 5 Aug. 1838; A. Bielenberg, ‘The first election to the reformed Clonmel corporation (1840)’, Tipperary Historical Journal (1992), 75-80 [75]. He was re-elected without opposition, having defended the Whigs’ Irish policy and the compromises found necessary to secure reforms in the face of the Lords’ opposition.40Freeman’s Journal, 20 July 1838.

The by-election consequent upon Ball’s elevation to the Irish bench in February 1839 saw David Richard Pigot, the Catholic solicitor-general for Ireland, enter Clonmel to an enthusiastic reception.41Pigot had been regarded as the ideal candidate in 1836, but was then ‘unwilling to disturb his great professional business’ and ‘sacrifice his prospects by abruptly breaking in upon a rising reputation’: Morning Chronicle, 27 Jan. 1836. Accompanied by Burke, he promised to support Irish municipal reform and elevate Clonmel to ‘its proper station amongst the great commercial towns of Ireland’. Having warned against allowing ‘minor points of difference’ to cause ‘Liberal interests to be frittered away’, he was nominated by Fathers Burke and Baldwin and returned unopposed.42Freeman’s Journal, 19, 21, 26 Feb. 1839; Standard, 22 Feb. 1839.

Soon after the election, local landowners, including Bagwell, petitioned parliament against any alteration of the corn laws.43Freeman’s Journal, 15 Mar. 1839; Parliamentary Gazetteer, 457. The new poor law union was declared on 18 March 1839. In October the townspeople addressed the new Irish viceroy, Lord Ebrington, to assert their political independence, from which, they stated, ‘neither the power of the Tories nor the insincerity of the Whigs can move us’.44Freeman’s Journal, 5 Oct. 1839, 1 July 1840; Morning Chronicle, 8 Oct. 1839. The following July, however, the town congratulated the queen on her escape from assassination, with Hackett denouncing ‘the inflammatory language used against her Majesty by itinerant fanatical mountebanks and political apostates’: Freeman’s Journal, 1 July 1840. The by-election consequent upon Pigot’s appointment as Irish attorney-general in August 1840 went uncontested. Due to the combined influence of Charles Bianconi, the Catholic clergy, and the town’s radical traders, a last minute challenge was quickly discouraged after placards appeared calling on electors to keep themselves disengaged because a repealer would start for the borough.45Standard, 22 Aug. 1840. Nominated by Baldwin and Hackett, Pigot admitted that Irish municipal reform had fallen ‘far short of what was required’, but used the threat posed to voters by Lord Stanley’s registration bill to insist once more upon Liberal unity.46The Times, 25 Aug. 1840, from the Tipperary Constitution. A visit to the town by O’Connell in October 1840 further cemented the Liberals’ solidarity.47Freeman’s Journal, 17 Oct. 1840.

In spring 1841 Thomas Reynolds was despatched to Munster to organise agitation on behalf of the Repeal Association, and visited Clonmel in May.48T.M. Ray to D. O’Connell, 21 May 1841, O’Connell Correspondence, vii. 68-9. At the same time, Conservatives were dismayed by the appointment of John Butler, a former election agent of Ronayne, as returning officer for the borough; the appointment being made in defiance of the Irish poor law commission’s recommendation that the role was best suited to the high constable of the barony.49The reason being that these officials knew the names and residences of those who paid county cess. For John Bagwell’s protest against the appointment, see The Times, 8 Apr. 1841. By the 1841 general election Clonmel was regarded as ‘the most radical borough in the county of Tipperary’,50Northern Star, 5 June 1841. yet Pigot’s address was cautious, and drew attention to the ‘strenuous struggles of party for power’ then taking place at Westminster. He warned that the selection of a new government would be of ‘deep, vast, immediate, lasting interest to Ireland’, and urged electors to sustain a Whig ministry that had ‘upon the whole, proceeded upon the plan of ruling the Nation in sympathy with the great body of the people’.51Freeman’s Journal, 1 July 1841. In the interests of the government, therefore, O’Connell stifled attempts to run a repeal candidate in Clonmel, leaving Pigot to be returned without opposition.52Morning Post, 3 June 1841, and see HP Commons 1832-68: ‘Cashel’.

The repeal movement in county Tipperary did not, however, show signs of abating. Significant public meetings were held in Clonmel in the autumn of 1841, and an address on the issue was presented to O’Connell the following February.53Freeman’s Journal, 28 Sept., 19 Nov. 1841, 18 Feb. 1842. The town also witnessed a meeting on Irish manufacturing that April, and the election of the reformed corporation in October 1842 saw 24 ‘ardent O’Connellites’ elected, with Bianconi becoming a councillor and Hackett elected as mayor.54Bielenberg, ‘Clonmel Corporation’, 75; Freeman’s Journal, 29 Apr. 1842; P. Butterfield & M. McElroy, ‘Bianconi, Charles’, Dictionary of Irish Biography, i. 518-20. Under the Irish Municipal Act, the town was divided into three wards, each of which elected 2 aldermen and 6 councillors: Parliamentary Gazetteer, 458. By March 1843, however, the corporation had not adopted the repeal petition, and it required a stinging rebuke from O’Connell to initiate a revival of the agitation.55Freeman’s Journal, 14 Apr., 5 May 1843; M. Cronin, ‘“Of One Mind”?: O’Connellite Crowds in the 1830s and 1840s’, in P.J. Jupp & E. Magennis, Crowds in Ireland c. 1720-1920 (2000), 139-72 [150]. Over the next two years, Bianconi, O’Connell’s closest ally in the town, served as mayor as public controversy emerged over plans for a railway line to the town, and the payment of Protestant ministers’ money.56Freeman’s Journal, 11 Oct. 1845, 10 Apr. 1846. Bianconi’s son married a granddaughter of O’Connell, and his surviving daughter married Morgan John O’Connell, a nephew of the Liberator: F. Espinasse, ‘Bianconi, Charles’, DNB, ii. 461-2. For the issue of ministers’ money, see HP Commons 1832-68: ‘Kinsale’. A question over the representation also arose, and the by-election of September 1846 exposed differences within the Repeal Association over the selection of a suitable candidate. In November 1845 Clonmel’s repealers had planned to secure Daniel O’Connell junior as their candidate in the likely event of Pigot’s elevation to the Irish bench.57Freeman’s Journal, 13 Nov. 1845. In late June 1846, however, as Pigot finally prepared to vacate, O’Connell was brought forward for Dundalk and his father therefore instructed Bianconi to suggest a replacement. On 6 July, William Smith O’Brien visited the town, declaring that ‘No candidate but a Repealer has a chance here’.58Freeman’s Journal, 10 July 1846. This effectively ended attempts to render Pigot’s fellow Liberal law officer, James Monahan, acceptable to the constituency, despite O’Connell having worked on his behalf, albeit half-heartedly, ‘in an under channel’.59J.D. Fitzgerald, rev. S. Agnew, ‘Monahan, James Henry’, Oxford DNB, xxxviii. 537; Daily News, 3 Sept. 1846. On 8 July O’Connell also conceded that it was ‘utterly impossible to do anything’ for another Liberal barrister, Richard Moore, QC: D. O’Connell to D.R. Pigot, 8 July 1846, O’Connell correspondence, viii. 70-2. However, after unexpected clerical resistance to his son’s candidacy son at Dundalk, hopes revived that he might still be brought forward for Clonmel.60D. O’Connell to W.S. O’Brien, 30 June, 18 July 1846, O’Connell correspondence, viii. 61-2; Freeman’s Journal, 9 July 1846. Burke duly informed O’Connell that the ‘chief electors’ still wanted to adopt his son as their candidate, and Bianconi hastily arranged a public meeting to affirm the choice.61Rev. M. Burke to D. O’Connell, 10 July 1846, C. Bianconi to D. O’Connell, 12 July 1846, O’Connell correspondence, viii. 61-2, 67-8; Freeman’s Journal, 20 July 1846. O’Connell, however, decided that unless his son stood for Dundalk a defeat would be inevitable, and Burke therefore asked him to quietly recommend a replacement.62Rev. M. Burke to D. O’Connell, c. 24 July 1846, O’Connell Correspondence, viii. 74. Amongst those to suggest themselves was Sir James Caleb Anderson of Buttevant Castle, the patron of Fermoy, County Cork: Anderson to D. O’Connell, 7 Aug. 1846, O’Connell Correspondence, viii. 80-1. O’Connell suggested the names of Cecil Lawless, the younger son of Lord Cloncurry, who had only recently joined the Repeal Association, and Augustus John O’Neill, of Bunowen Castle, a Galway landowner and Conservative convert to repeal.63J.A. O’Neill to D. O’Connell, 8 Aug. 1846, O’Connell Correspondence, viii. 81. O’Neill had sat for Hull in 1826-30: HP Commons, 1820-32, vi. 572-4. The electors were required to select ‘a supporter of the government as well as a repealer’, and Bianconi also offered himself, until persuaded by O’Connell to stand aside.64Standard, 2 Sept. 1846; Freeman’s Journal, 10 Sept. 1846. As a naturalised subject, Bianconi did not have the right to sit in parliament, and O’Connell feared that ‘we should be laughed at if you were returned’: D. O’Connell to C. Bianconi, 1 Sept. 1846, O’Connell Correspondence, viii. 94-5. Much to O’Neill’s disappointment, the electors accepted O’Connell’s preference for Lawless.65O’Neill made his feelings clear before the Reform Association on 12 October, and again in his address to the electors of Dublin: T.M. Ray to D. O’Connell, 12 Oct. 1846, O’Connell Correspondence, viii. 124-5; Freeman’s Journal, 23 Oct. 1846; Standard, 23 Oct. 1846. In his address to electors of 23 September, Lawless acknowledged the differences of opinion over his candidacy, but emphasised the advantages of repeal for both Ireland and Great Britain.66Morning Post, 7 Sept. 1846; Standard, 7 Sept. 1846; Daily News, 21 Oct. 1846; Freeman’s Journal, 29 Sept. 1846. Lawless believed that self-government would place the Irish on an equal footing with their fellow subjects of the empire, and ‘instead of causing separation would knit more closely those ties which it is in the common interest of all to maintain’: Freeman’s Journal, 13 Aug. 1847.

With anti-repeal electors said to be ‘few and far between’, Lawless’s position as a ‘moral force’ repealer was unassailable and he was proposed in his absence. That he was then ‘amusing himself with the sport of cock-shooting in the Highlands of Scotland’ caused some disapproval, but Burke ‘soon silenced the grumblers’.67Freeman’s Journal, 10 Sept., 1 Oct. 1846; The Times, 15 Sept. 1846; Standard, 14 Sept. 1846; Hull Packet, 18 Sept. 1846. Though denounced by radical repealers as a ‘place-hunting Whig’, who had been nominated ‘at the command of the dictator of Burgh-quay’. Rumours that Francis Meagher would contest the seat on Young Ireland principles came to nothing and Lawless was nominated by Burke and Hackett and was returned unopposed.68Northern Star, 12, 19 Sept. 1846; Standard, 11 Sept. 1846. The young aristocrat ‘at length “turned up”’ to address his constituents in October when he avowed his life-long commitment to repeal.69Hull Packet, 2 Oct. 1846; Freeman’s Journal, 1 Oct. 1846.

Lawless’s position as a Protestant aristocrat representing a Catholic radical constituency was anomalous. The dispute over the representation had occurred just as the experience of famine became evident, the town experiencing a serious outbreak of fever in April 1846.70A. Bielenberg, ‘Some aspects of the famine in Clonmel’, Tipperary Historical Journal (1998), 76-80 [76, 78-80]; Freeman’s Journal, 16, 17 Apr. 1846; Freeman’s Journal, 22 Aug. 1846. Yet the high unemployment resulting from the deepening agricultural crisis led to food riots in Clonmel, and stimulated popular support for the repeal party.71Bielenberg, ‘Famine in Clonmel’, 76-8; The Times, 24 Apr. 1847; Freeman’s Journal, 28 June 1847. The number of registered electors in Clonmel was apparently rising, being reported as 540 in February 1847, and 687 in July.72Freeman’s Journal, 18 June 1847; Morning Post, 27 July 1847. At the 1847 general election John Bagwell was touted as an anti-repeal candidate, but did not come forward.73Morning Chronicle, 24 July 1847; Standard, 9 Aug. 1847. Instead James Monahan, the Irish solicitor-general, then sitting for Galway Borough, was proposed in his absence. However, no poll was demanded and Lawless was duly re-elected.74Freeman’s Journal, 9 Aug. 1847; B. Walker, ‘Politicians, Elections and Catastrophe: The General Election of 1847’, Irish Political Studies, 22:1 (2007), 1-34 [21]. In addition to expressing support for the ballot, the abolition of parliamentary oaths and opposition to ‘the unwieldly church establishment in Ireland’, Lawless was severely critical of the Whig’s handling of the famine, holding Lord John Russell ‘accountable for many lives which most certainly never would have been lost if proper measures had been timely taken’, and arguing that his efforts on behalf of the constituency would be more ‘productive of benefit to it in the event of Peel’s accession to office’.75Freeman’s Journal, 13 Aug. 1847.

The turbulence created in Tipperary during the Young Ireland rising of May 1848 did not subside quickly, and there was a renewal of unrest in the neighbourhood of Clonmel that November.76Morning Chronicle, 9 Aug. 1848; Leeds Mercury, 29 July 1848. At the anniversary meeting of the borough’s Liberal Club on 29 December, Burke restated the demand for repeal, yet Lawless, who had promised in 1846 to be a ‘working member’, was subsequently made to defend himself against charges of laxity in the performance of his parliamentary duties.77Freeman’s Journal, 3, 25 Jan. 1849, 1 Oct. 1846. In August 1849 the corporation petitioned the queen concerning the redress of Irish grievances and the privilege of ‘self-government’.78Freeman’s Journal, 9 Aug. 1849. Yet, in spite of the persistence of repeal sentiments within the civic leadership,79See mayor Joseph Kenny’s letter to John O’Connell in Freeman’s Journal, 8 Mar. 1851. the collapse of the movement’s central organisation after 1847 meant that the smaller traders of the town were freed from the political domination of large businessmen, such as Bianconi, who, like the Catholic clergy, had most actively supported O’Connell. Clonmel was one of the few towns in southern Ireland that was not overwhelmed by poverty in mid-century, and the town’s artisans and tradesmen began to lose interest in party politics as they became more exclusively involved in the pursuit of their sectional interests.80Hughes, 358; Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 440. The Irish Franchise Act of 1850 had added £8 householders to the borough electorate, but by July 1852 the number of eligible voters was only 379, less than three-quarters the number registered in 1832.81Freeman’s Journal, 6 July 1852. It was estimated that if the Act had extended the franchise to £5 rated occupiers the number of existing voters would have almost doubled: Hanham, Dod’s Electoral Facts, 68.

At the 1852 general election Thomas Henry Barton, a barrister, addressed electors in the Conservative interest.82John Ball of the Irish independent party also sounded out the constituency, and Alexander McCarthy, a repeal candidate for Cork in 1847, was briefly spoken of: J.H. Whyte, The Independent Irish Party, 1850-9 (1958), 52. Though well-regarded as a landlord who compensated his tenants for their improvements, his protectionism seemed unlikely to find favour with electors, a Tory being thought to have ‘far less chance now in Clonmel than at any period since the municipal act enfranchised its householders’.83Freeman’s Journal, 6, 24 Apr. 1852. Although Barton promised to oppose the Derby ministry ‘if it insulted or persecuted the Catholic faith’, and regarded his canvass as a success, Lawless headed the poll by a wide margin.84Whyte, Independent Irish Party, 60; Freeman’s Journal, 6 July 1852; Standard, 10 July 1852. Barton lodged a petition questioning Lawless’s qualification, 22 Nov. 1852, which was withdrawn, 28 Apr. 1853.85CJ, cviii. 59, 191, 439, 440.

A by-election consequent upon Lawless’s sudden death in November 1853 occasioned considerable political controversy. It had been anticipated that ‘over a hundred of Father Burke’s men’ would lose their votes under Griffith’s valuation, leaving only 230 available votes (out of 379 registered electors), 80 of which belonged to Conservatives.86Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 26-7; Morning Post, 16 Nov. 1853. With the borough appearing to be more open than ever, a number of potential Liberal candidates were spoken of, including Nicholas Valentine Maher, the former county member, and Laurence Waldron, a Dublin-based landowner.87Freeman’s Journal, 11 Nov. 1853. Bagwell was expected to stand as a moderate Conservative, while John Reynolds, Henry Grattan and Charles Bianconi’s son were also mentioned as Liberals. Colonel Justin Sheil, the brother of Richard Lalor Sheil, who had recently returned from service as ambassador to Persia, was also expected to stand as ‘an uncompromising Church Reformer’ and supporter of tenant-right: Morning Chronicle, 11 Nov. 1853; Freeman’s Journal, 14 Nov. 1853; Morning Post, 11 Nov. 1853. When, however, John O’Connell who, in February 1851, had been publicly criticised by Clonmel’s mayor for abstaining from the Irish Brigade’s attempt to overturn the Whig ministry, addressed electors on the principles of his father, a deputation from the Tenant League, consisting of Frederick Lucas, Edward Gray, Charles Gavan Duffy and Anthony Moore, visited the town to force the pledge of independence on the candidate.88Freeman’s Journal, 12, 17 Nov. 1853; Daily News, 14 Nov. 1853. It was briefly suggested that Gray might contest the election: Standard, 11 Nov. 1853; Daily News, 17 Nov. 1853. The election was thought crucial if the League was to stem further defections from the Irish Independent party to the government benches.89J. O’Shea, Priest, Politics and Society in Post-famine Ireland. A study of County Tipperary 1850-1891 (1983), 183; Freeman’s Journal, 10 Nov. 1853. While Baldwin was sympathetic to these concerns, Burke was strongly opposed to the Tenant League, owing to the ‘physical force’ doctrine once espoused by some of its leaders.90Freeman’s Journal, 21 Nov. 1853; O’Shea, Priest, Politics and Society, 147. Like Hackett and Bianconi, who also supported O’Connell, he believed that the Aberdeen ministry would pursue a fair policy towards Ireland.91Manchester Times, 16 Nov. 1851; Daily News, 9 Dec. 1853; O’Shea, Politics, Priest and Society, 180-1. On 15 November the two candidates were interviewed by a ‘committee of 31’ representatives of the Liberal electors.92Daily News, 14, 17 Nov. 1853; Freeman’s Journal, 16 Nov. 1853. After this proved inconclusive, a public meeting of electors resolved not to accept any candidate who would not pledge himself to sit and act with the Irish party in the Commons.93Freeman’s Journal, 18, 19 Nov. 1853; Morning Chronicle, 19 Nov. 1853. At a second meeting of the selection committee, O’Connell ‘yielded somewhat’ to the League, making ‘a very watery undertaking’ to cooperate with the independent party to oppose ‘bad measures from any government’.94Freeman’s Journal, 22 Nov. 1853; R.V. Comerford, ‘Tipperary representation at Westminster 1801-1918’, in W. Nolan & T.G. McGrath, Tipperary: History and Society. Interdisciplinary Essays on the History of an Irish County (1985), 325-38 [330]. For the disputed nature of this pledge, see Freeman’s Journal, 21, 23, 24, 26 Nov. 1853. On the basis of this agreement, another public meeting affirmed the committee’s choice of O’Connell on 21 November.95Freeman’s Journal, 22 Nov. 1853; Daily News, 22, 25 Nov. 1853; O’Shea, Priest, Politics and Society, 184; Duffy, League of the North and the South, 283. For the acrimonious correspondence concerning this outcome, see Freeman’s Journal, 29 Nov. 1853.

However, the Freeman’s Journal’s claim of victory for the independent opposition soon proved hollow.96Freeman’s Journal, 25 Nov. 1853. On 19 November O’Connell had informed Gray that he would neither support the League nor pledge himself to ‘indiscriminate opposition to every government’.97Morning Chronicle, 22 Nov. 1853; Daily News, 23 Dec. 1853. He subsequently announced to The Times that he had not yielded to the League’s conditions, and repudiated the parliamentary policy adopted by Moore and others in 1851: The Times, 29 Nov. 1853. The election was delayed owing to an ‘informality of the writ’,98Standard, 15 Dec. 1853. which gave time for Christopher Hamilton of Castlejordan, to offer as a Conservative representative of the Tenant League.99Morning Chronicle, 1 Dec. 1853; Standard, 1, 14 Dec. 1853. This late challenge having failed to gather force, O’Connell was returned without opposition on 21 December, when he restated his commitment to his father’s policies, and criticised Palmerston’s recent secession from the coalition cabinet.100Daily News, 23 Nov. 1853; Freeman’s Journal, 24 Dec. 1853.

As feared, O’Connell proved a firm adherent of the Aberdeen ministry and a vacancy in the representation was long awaited. It was not until August 1856, however, that O’Connell was appointed as clerk of crown and hanaper and another by-election was held.101Freeman’s Journal, 4 Mar. 1856; Standard, 19 Aug. 1856. By this time the nominal electorate had fallen to only 318, and Patrick John Murray, a Dublin-based Catholic barrister and the proprietor of the Irish Quarterly Review, came forward as the ‘Young Ireland candidate’, standing in favour of ‘an Irish National Legislature’ and tenant-right. Being ‘independent of governmental or any other influence’, he was said to have the non-electors on his side, while John Bagwell, now identified as ‘a thorough Whig’, offered in the Liberal interest. He remained the largest landlord in the town and, having enlisted Burke’s indispensible support, conducted a successful canvass. Thomas Henry Barton again took the field for the Conservatives.102Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 26-7; Standard, 19 Aug. 1856; Freeman’s Journal, 25, 28 Aug. 1856; Morning Chronicle, 10 Feb. 1857; Daily News, 12 Feb. 1857. The contest was expected to be ‘a desperate one’ as the Liberals were divided, the larger section led by Burke supporting Bagwell, with the radicals joining Hackett to back Murray.103Daily News, 9 Feb. 1857. The latter faction argued that ‘born and bred a Tory’, Bagwell was unsound on the tenant-right question, and when Murray canvassed the constituency he claimed to find ‘a very large number of electors’ still unpledged.104Freeman’s Journal, 28 Aug. 1856. Addressing a crowd of about 5,000 people, Murray portrayed Bagwell as ‘a weathercock politician’, dependant on support from Conservatives who ‘well knew that Mr. B. did not mean to meddle at all with the church’, and his supporters bluntly declared that they wanted ‘Catholic members to represent Catholic constituencies’.105Freeman’s Journal, 4 Sept. 1856.

The election was not held until the following February, when a strong force of police and military were required to keep the peace between the ‘Murrayites’ and the ‘Bagwellites’. Proposed by Burke, Bagwell sympathised with the plight of tenant farmers and supported reform of the Irish church establishment, adding that ‘as a Protestant gentleman of high position, his vote would have weight in protecting the threatened Maynooth Grant’. Murray continued to charge Bagwell with concealing his real opinions under generalities, and the show of hands was greatly in his favour. After polling began, Murray challenged Bagwell’s eligibility for election on the ground that he had employed the sub-sheriff of Tipperary as his conducting agent.106Freeman’s Journal, 16 Feb. 1857. This was expressly provided against by the election act of 1&2 Geo. IV, c. 68. Perceiving that there might be something in the objection, and as insurance against Murray’s return, Bagwell’s cousin, Captain Edward Bagwell Purefoy, was hastily nominated and a poll was opened for him by the returning officer.107Daily News, 18 Feb. 1857. Purefoy was a Conservative landowner of Greenfields, county Tipperary, and had recently been requisitioned by the local gentry to preside over a meeting on the income tax. The move was regarded as ‘a good specimen of Tipperary tactics’, and Bagwell was returned by a clear margin, in what amounted to a ‘remarkable resurrection after a quarter of a century’ for his family.108Comerford, ‘Tipperary representation at Westminster’, 330. Having come in third, Murray’s claim to have been beaten by ‘a dodge’ engineered through ‘the compulsion and coercion of the slave-driver from Marlfield’ was dismissed by the English liberal press and his challenge described as a ‘farce’.109Daily News, 18 Feb. 1857. The Times, 19 Feb. 1857; Freeman’s Journal, 3, 17, 19 Feb. 1857; Morning Chronicle, 17, 19 Feb. 1857. The Freeman’s Journal, however, regarded Bagwell’s success as a fateful indication ‘of the tendency of all parties to return to an acceptance of the old claims of territorial nomination’.110Freeman’s Journal, 12 Feb. 1857.

At the 1857 general election, The Times anticipated that changes in the Irish representation would ‘be few and unimportant’, and it was considered an auspicious time to judge the relative balance of political forces within ‘popular’ Irish boroughs such as Clonmel. In the absence of a ‘bitter sectarian question … to influence the passions of the people’, electors were expected ‘to make an impartial selection of the candidates best qualified to guard their interests in the Legislature’.111The Times, 10 Mar. 1857. At the same time, the Freeman’s Journal contended that the result of an election in a constituency such as Clonmel could no longer be ‘looked to as an unerring indication of the public opinion of the kingdom’, and complained that ‘now a man of any principles, or of no fixed opinions, has only to hoist the Whig colours to ensure his election’. Bagwell, nevertheless, anticipated ‘a stiff contest’ after Murray came forward again as the champion of ‘independent opposition’, extended suffrage and ‘the total abolition’ of the Irish church establishment.112Freeman’s Journal, 19, 20 Mar. 1857. Serious divisions had arisen in the Liberal ranks over the county representation that might have adversely affected Bagwell’s chances of re-election.113Caledonian Mercury, 27 Mar. 1857. Bagwell had recently disappointed some of his following by supporting the landowner, Laurence Waldron against The O’Donoghue at the recent county by-election, and was reported to have lost 60 of his erstwhile supporters.114Freeman’s Journal, 21 Mar. 1857. Thomas Henry Barton took the field again as a Conservative, but once again political attitudes in Clonmel did not reflect those of the county and Bagwell, having made generous donations to Catholic charities to ensure support from the clergy, was returned unopposed.115Freeman’s Journal, 21 Mar. 1857; Caledonian Mercury, 28 Mar. 1857; Freeman’s Journal, 31 Mar. 1857; O’Shea, Priest, Politics and Society, 196.

Prior to the 1859 general election the Central Conservative Society of Ireland reported impressive activity in several southern boroughs, including Clonmel, and a Derbyite challenge was anticipated.116Hoppen, Elections, Politics and Society, 291. A nationalist tenant-righter, Thomas Neilson Underwood, was also spoken of, but in a period of comparative political tranquillity, the ‘mutually beneficial co-operation’ between the borough’s Catholic middle classes and their landlords ensured that Bagwell enjoyed ‘a walk over’. Upon being appointed as a commissioner of the treasury that July, he was re-elected without opposition.117Freeman’s Journal, 9 Apr., 2 July 1859; Standard, 8 Apr. 1859; Comerford, ‘Tipperary representation at Westminster’, 330; Nenagh Guardian, 23 Apr. 1859; Irish Times, 30 Apr. 1859.

There had been intense popular anger in Tipperary over Palmerston’s approval of the aims of the Risorgimento in Italy, many Irish Catholics believing that a successful challenge to papal authority there might adversely affect ‘the religious balance of power in Ireland’.118The agitation posed a dilemma for Irish Liberals who, while sympathetic to struggles for national independence, could neither afford to oppose public opinion nor alienate the Catholic clergy: J. O’Brien, ‘Irish public opinion and the Risorgimento, 1859-60’, in Irish Historical Studies, xxxiv (2005), 289-305, at 291-2. However, at a meeting held in Clonmel to support the Irish members of Papal Brigade in October 1860, Burke was eager to condemn Lord Derby’s position on the question in equal measure.119O’Shea, Priest, Politics and Society, 194; Freeman’s Journal, 30 Oct., 8 Nov. 1860. In spite of the unrest caused by the agricultural depression of 1862-3, which led to serious rioting and an attempt to burn down Clonmel’s workhouse, by the 1865 general election the town was relatively tranquil.120Belfast News-letter, 4 Feb. 1863. By then it was judged to be ‘a fruitless task to endeavour to sever the link’ that bound Bagwell to Clonmel, supported as he was ‘by the clergy of all denominations’ and ‘all ranks and classes of the electors’.121Freeman’s Journal, 7 Mar. 1863, 4 July 1865; Liverpool Mercury, 15 July 1865. After the increasing confusion of party and fractional strife of the mid-century, the constituency had reverted to its pre-reform status as a proprietary borough ‘under Bagwell domination’, and no opposition was offered to his returns in 1865 and 1868.122Freeman’s Journal, 8 Sept. 1832. The seat was, however, wrested from Bagwell’s grip by a home ruler in 1874, and held by that party until the constituency was disenfranchised in 1885 and incorporated into the constituency of South Tipperary, a nationalist stronghold.