Talk:Irish House of Commons

Ireland High‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Removed (from famous members:)

Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington who defeated Emperor Napoleon I of France at the Battle of Waterloo and later became British Prime Minister. It was he as prime minister who conceded Catholic Emancipation in 1829.

He did not enter politics until after the parliament was dissolved. Wellesley was a member of the British House of Commons in Westminster. He could despite being a Lord as the peerage was created prior to the act of Union. I believe (by following the logic of the Westminster Houses at the time) that being an Irish Lord would in fact prevented him from bening a member the Irish House of Commons. Dainamo

Are you sure? He was returned in the April 1790 general election, and is recorded as speaking in the Parliamentary Register. His maiden speech was on January 10, 1793 seconding the address to the throne - see vol. 13, p. 5. He also did take his seat in the UK House. Wellington did not become a Peer until 1809. Dbiv 00:40, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Better image

That photo of a copy of a picture of the Irish House of Commons in session in the 1790s (with light glare) is really not up to much. It seems to be a copy of Francis Wheatley's painting which is in the Gascoigne collection at Lotherton Hall, near Leeds (see website). Can we get a better version? Dbiv 00:40, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Boroughs

This [1] link links to a list of boroughs disenfranchised by the 1801 Act of Union. There are 83 in total. Morwen - Talk 22:56, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Was the Old Leighlin borough really in Armagh?

The Old Leighlin of which I'm aware is in Co. Carlow, near Leighlinbridge. It has a C of I cathedral (now used as a parish church under the diocese of Ossory). I was also under the impression that it elected an MP.

Merge proposal

Totally oppose: Constituency pages exist for other parliaments, so why not for this one. --Damac 11:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What merge proposal? Can you provide a link? --BrownHairedGirl 12:02, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, BrownHairedGirl. You'll see what I'm talking about if you hit the "What links here" button for this page.[2] The proposer, User:Dsreyn, didn't follow correct proceedure and didn't set up a place to discuss his proposal here.

As I said, I oppose it. On top of that, what would you think of the proposal that the constituencies be renamed from XX (Irish Parliament constituency) to XX (Parliament of Ireland constituency). --Damac 12:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename sounds like a good idea (less ambiguous), but might it not be better to dispsnse with the merge propsal first? --BrownHairedGirl 12:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose to merge proposals. Parliamentary constituencies are an important part of the political process, and merit an article in each case, even iff it ends up being a short one. --BrownHairedGirl 12:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this one can be wound up. The proposer didn't even bother to justify the proposal, and it has found no support whatsoever from other uses. I suggest that we now discuss how to name the constituency articles at Talk:List of Irish constituencies.--Damac 08:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The merge tag was added in June, but the proposer didn't offer any explanation of why it was advocated. So I'm now putting on my admin hat and removing the merge tags, and I'm also taking the plunge and putting these articles in a category I have just created, Category:Constituencies of the Parliament of Ireland (to 1800). --BrownHairedGirl 12:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now done. Merge rag removed, all categorised and marked as stubs. But they need work soon to at least make them credible stubs (see WP:STUB#Ideal_stub_article), or someone will come along and AFD them all. --BrownHairedGirl 13:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Irish constituency names

Before I start creating articles on the constituencies of the pre-1801 Irish House of Commons, I'd like to sound out views on how to name them. Here are my proposals:

1. I propose that for every county constituency, there should be page like Galway (constituency), which will list out all the constituencies from that county over time.

2. The names of each constituency should follow the pattern XX (Parliament of Ireland constituency). In cases where a constituency had a borough and a county variant, only the borough should be specified, i.e. simply Galway (Parliament of Ireland constituency) (for the county) but Galway Borough (Parliament of Ireland constituency) for the borough.

3. Although I suggested to User:Gary J months ago that pre- and post-1801 constituencies were essentially the same thing and should not be split but form one article, I think that his creation Antrim (constituency) shows that this is perhaps not such a good idea in practice. Not only is the article above the recommended size (47 KB), but the article does not allow for an effective distinction between pre and post political entities. Therefore, I would propose breaking up these articles (sorry Gary J) into pre- and post-union articles and replacing Antrim (constituency) with something like what I've done for Galway (constituency).

On a slightly different note, I'd ask for help in:

1. populating Category:Historic parliamentary constituencies in Ireland (perhaps this should be renamed Category:Historic UK parliamentary constituencies in Ireland so that it remains solely for UK House of Commons constituencies in Ireland.)

2. removing the inconsistencies in naming. On the one hand we have Birmingham East (UK Parliament constituency), and the other North Galway (UK Parliament constituency) (both established 1885). Perhaps for simplicities sake, the county name should always come first. --Damac 13:45, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re your proposals

Constituency dab pages like page like Galway (constituency): agree! (I think I started that process, so no surprise I'm in favour).
Constit names: Agree -- county name first, compass points (or other qualifiers) after.
Separate the Irish Parl constits from UK Parl constits: Agree. A constituency exists to elect members to a specific parliament; its name should reflct that --BrownHairedGirl 14:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re the names of the UK parl constits, currently in Category:Historic UK parliamentary constituencies in Ireland, I suggest following the logic of Category:Members of the United Kingdom Parliament from Irish constituencies (1801-1922), and calling it: Category:Irish constituencies of the United Kingdom Parliament (1801-1922). That avoids any confusion with the post-1922 Northern Irish constits. --BrownHairedGirl 14:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Parliaments 1692-1800

I have made a number of amendments whichn I hope are correct and have moved the section to a new article. I think otherwise the main article is too long. Does anyone have a difficulty with this? Durrus 18:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I've reverted your changes but have included new information. Before carrying out major moves like this, please allow for some consultation with other users.--Damac 20:20, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

British?

RE: 'The British appointed Irish executive, under the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, was not answerable to the House of Commons but to the British government.' As far as I was aware, the term 'the British' cannot be applied accurately in this context until after the 1707 union of the Scottish and English Parliaments. Therefore, 'the British' government did not technically exist for most of the time the Irish parliament did. In this sentence the term 'the British' should be replaced with the term 'The English executive' or 'the English government' as it is historically correct. Meanwhile, the use of the term is correct later on in the paragraph: 'the Irish parliament merged with its British counterpart in 1801 under the Act of Union'. Now that I think about it, the whole sentence is somewhat misleading or even biased. Certainly the Irish executive were answerable to the monarch and the English executive, but legislation could not be passed without the cooperation of the Irish House of Commons. I would suggest merely stating the facts: 'The English government appointed members of the Irish executive, under the Lord Lieutenant, to represent the royal prerogative in Ireland'.Sebrofs (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parliamentary Sessions.

I think it would be more helpful to list each parliamentary session where possible, rather than just the start and end dates of the parliament. See below for an example for the Parliament of James I:

Year	Start of Session	End of Session	Terminated by	Dismissal Date
1613	18 May	5 June	Prorogation
1614	11 October	29 November	Prorogation
1615	18 April	16 May	Prorogation
1615	N/A	N/A	Dismissal	24 October

I have the dates from 1613 to Union, so I'll go ahead with this eventually if no-one objects. Sebrofs (talk) 13:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peers in the Commons?

Obviously members of the Peerage of Ireland would have been disqualified from election to the Irish House of Commons as they already had seats in the Irish House of Lords, but did the same thing apply to members of the British House of Lords who were not Irish peers? Opera hat (talk) 11:53, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of MPs

I think the whole Sessions section should be calved out of this parent article. It takes up too much space, and is currently rather ragged. As regards a general list of sessions, there is already List of Parliaments of Ireland, which (except in the early years before the Lords-Commons distinction was settled) would correspond with sessions of the Commons. We then need two orthogonal families of list articles: one with all MPs over time for a given constituency, the other with all MPs for a given session across all constituencies. The former lists already exist in the constituency articles, though incomplete and underreferenced; the latter is what is currently bloating out the Sessions section of this article. A starting-point is the by-session subcategories of Category:Members of the Parliament of Ireland (pre-1801), though obviously there is no structure to those lists, and MPs with no Wikipedia article cannot be shown. A noncopyright source with fairly complete lists of Irish MPs from 1559 is pp.603–691 of Return of the name of every member of the lower house of parliament of England, Scotland, and Ireland, with name of constituency represented, and date of return, from 1213 to 1874: Part II (Command paper C.180-I). If you or your IP proxy are in the US you can download it from Google books here; elsewhere Google's copyright paranoia is too great. jnestorius^(talk) 21:30, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Category:Lists of members of the Parliament of Ireland and {{Lists of Irish MPs}} now. jnestorius^(talk) 10:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I would have no objection to carving out Sessions Chrisdoyleorwell (talk) 17:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Irish House of Commons. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121011192652/http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1962/en/act/pub/0029/sched1.html to http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1962/en/act/pub/0029/sched1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clogher (Parliament of Ireland constituency)

The article gives the date of creation of the above constituency as "Between 1614 and 1692".
Clogher (Parliament of Ireland constituency) has a section Clogher_(Parliament_of_Ireland_constituency)#Members_of_Parliament,_1264–1801.
Template:County_Tyrone_constituencies also gives a date of formation as 1264.
That article gives the first MPs as elected in 1613.
The source for that seems to be the 1876 Parliamentary report.
The Irish Parliament under Elizabeth and James I: A General Survey by T. W. Moody Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy: Archaeology, Culture, History, Literature, Vol. 45 (1939/1940), page 75 (subscription needed) does not include Clogher City either as having had MPs in 1560 or 1585-6, or as having been incorporated between 1604-1613.

Can anyone shed any light on the discrepancy? Alekksandr (talk) 21:28, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bishop's_borough#Clogher says that "The village of Clogher, County Tyrone was originally a corporation borough. It was enfranchised by letters patent in the fifth year of Charles I". Which does not explain why Sir Thomas Ridgway and Sir Francis Roe are recorded as representing Clogher in 1613. Alekksandr (talk) 18:42, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]