Clare had a tradition of turbulent electioneering. One reason was the existence of an unusually large number of territorial interests. The most ancient belonged to various branches of the O’Brien family: the Marquess of Thomond at Inchiquin, Sir Edward of Dromoland and O’Brien of Ballynalacker. Another interest, based upon 35,000 acres of former O’Brien territory, had devolved by inheritance to an Englishman, Lord Egremont.
Cavan was a largely Catholic county, remarkable for its density of population and thriving industries. The Earl of Farnham commanded the strongest electoral interest and in 1809 this was thought to consist of at least 1,000 freeholders; others with significant interests were the Saundersons of Castle Saunderson and the Cootes of Bellamont Forest. The numerous minor interests proved capable of coalescing into an effective ‘independent’ force, when occasion demanded.Wakefield, Account of Ireland, i. 249; ii.
Just before the Union, Lord Charleville bought control of this close corporation borough, in which he owned no other property, from William BurtonLife of Grattan, v. 188; Report on Mun. Corp. [I], H.C. 1835, xxvii, app. pt. 1, p. 167. and returned his step-brothers, the Pritties, before offering the seat to government unconditionally in June 1801. Chief Secretary Abbot accepted the offer and nominated Ormsby to the seat.
It was reliably reported in 1812 that although Carlow was geographically small, ‘destitute of manufacturers’ and lacking ‘a resident temporal or spiritual peer’, it was ‘tenanted by more wealthy people than almost any other Irish county’. It is certainly true that a number of gentry drew sizeable incomes from their estates in the county and that many of them possessed influential electoral interests. The most important belonged to the Kavanaghs of Borris, a Catholic family descended from the ancient kings of Leinster whose head was evidently referred to in Carlow as the ‘monarch’.
In January 1801 the question of who was patron of Armagh, a flourishing market town and centre of the linen trade, was a matter of debate. As the borough fell within the see of the primate of the established church, the archbishop of Armagh, he was commonly regarded as patron.
Armagh was fairly prosperous and, appropriately enough for the county which contained the headquarters of both the Catholic and Established churches, possessed an almost equal number of Catholics and Protestants. The leading electoral interests belonged to the Caulfeild, Acheson and Brownlow families, the first two being ennobled with the respective earldoms of Charlemont and Gosford, and until 1812 elections were largely settled between them without much reference to political issues.Wakefield, Account of Ireland, ii.
For most of the 18th century the 1st Marquess of Hertford was patron of this potwalloping borough, of which his descendants were described as owners in fee simple. Hertford usually managed to settle his electoral affairs in Ireland with a minimum of difficulty. The only serious set-back he had suffered had been at the general election of 1783, when the two volunteer candidates defeated his nominees.E. M. Johnston, Great Britain and Ireland 1760-1800, pp.
Commenting on the substitution of Carrickfergus, ‘the only county of a town which would have stood excluded’, for Strabane, in the list of Irish representative boroughs, 16 May 1800, Castlereagh explained:
Belfast was the most important town in the north of Ireland and in the later 18th century and throughout this period enjoyed a rapid growth in commercial and industrial prosperity. Before the Union, it had been the natural focus of political activity, particularly of the radical and revolutionary type, and to a limited extent this tradition persisted, but neither prosperity nor political tradition affected elections. Most of Belfast was owned by the Marquess of Donegall, ‘every brick of it’, according to one observer.
Antrim, one of the more prosperous Irish counties, had a predominantly protestant population. The county developed a reputation for political radicalism in the late 18th century, and through the sympathy and sometimes the support of major landowners this had an impact on parliamentary elections.
