Monaghan, a largely undeveloped county of hills and lakes, contained an almost equal population of Protestants and Catholics, so that both communities had to be wooed at elections, which took place in the county town of the same name. None of the major landlords, who were mostly absentees and therefore usually exercised their influence through powerful agents, had a predominating interest and since the Union, when the borough of Monaghan was disfranchised, they had wrangled over the representation without coming to a contest.
At the general election of 1820, in which year 1,436 freeholders were registered, Rossmore and Cremorne made an arrangement placing county considerations above national politics: they agreed, as Westenra later recalled, to ‘our co-operating with him for one grand purpose. The engagement was simple and concise and divested of all conditions, except the one that I was to be considered the first object’.
During the early 1820s Westenra offered constant advice to his father on how to consolidate the family’s position in Monaghan. For instance, he argued that George IV should be welcomed by him to the county during his visit to Ireland; at least his brother Richard Westenra, as sheriff, was able to chair a meeting on 3 Aug. 1821 to approve a loyal address.
our families going together must in the end return the two Members. If he breaks off the connection now, God knows when it may be brought to unite again. If he makes a disturbance now, God knows what interests he may force into action against us, which are now favourably inclined towards us and would not act against us but on the strongest emergency.
Rossmore mss 3/14.
Rossmore certainly sought reassurances from Cremorne in the spring of 1822, but his son, whom he regarded as just as obstinate in the other extreme as their ally, persisted in following his own line at Westminster and believed that he could retrieve his fortunes in Monaghan. Far from despairing at Cremorne’s apparent betrayal, Westenra counted on a defensive alliance with Leslie (or ‘Shrug’, as he referred to him), which would see off the possibility of Cremorne’s introducing Barrett Lennard and prevent Lucas (who had always expected the reversion) picking up the other seat in the event of Leslie’s death or elevation to the peerage. The Members reached a provisional understanding when they met in May 1822, sharing a joke over the mutual misfortunes which would result from the rumoured candidacy of one of the Grattans. Yet it was that month that the first prescient suggestions emerged of the possible entry of Evelyn Shirley of Ettington, Warwickshire, and Blayney’s army officer son Cadwallader Blayney.
The inhabitants’ anti-Catholic petition was presented by Leslie, 16 Apr. 1823, while others from the Catholics for their claims were brought up in the Commons, 17 June 1824 (by Barrett Lennard), 26 May 1826 (by James Grattan), and the Lords, 15 June 1824 (by Lord Darnley), 26 May 1826 (by Lord Londonderry).
if this business of the 40s. freeholders being abolished is to take place ... every freeholder in the county Monaghan (with the exception of 10 perhaps at most) will be a stiff, uncompromising Protestant or one of the unco gude and reegidly righteous [sic] descendants of the John Presbyters of the north.
In that case, to declare in favour of relief would inevitably lead to his defeat.
In his optimistic ‘observations on Monaghan politics’, prepared for his son in early March 1824, Rossmore argued that the Westenras, who had several potential candidates for the representation within the family, could best consolidate their authority by a renewed alliance with Cremorne, whose heir would not reach his majority until 1838, rather than by joining the unpopular Leslie, whose sons were also very young. This would be better achieved by steering Cremorne away from Lucas, who was likely to prove a capable public speaker and man of business, and towards the youthful and untried Cadwallader Blayney, who would have no relative ready to take over the seat in the event of his expected imminent succession to his father’s peerage. Thus, even if a junction between Cremorne and Rossmore failed to defeat Leslie, whose friends would rally to him in the event of a challenge, Westenra could return at the next vacancy.
Shirley was supposed to be certain of success in September 1825, when Blayney also offered in expectation of a dissolution, and although he contacted Leslie for a deal to tie up the representation between them, he was deemed to favour Catholic relief and Cremorne was mentioned as his more likely partner.
With Shirley safe, the battle was between Westenra and Leslie, whose supporters clashed violently before the opening of the proceedings, 24 June 1826, when one Tanner met his death. Leslie, proposed by his brother-in-law Colonel John Madden of Hilton, spoke in defence of his record, but Westenra, nominated by Lucas, and Shirley, introduced by William Tennison of Ballycromer, did not attempt to gain a hearing. On the hustings, as in the many published addresses and squibs, Leslie was accused of being a domineering landlord and Westenra was branded as duplicitous, but it was Shirley who was regarded with most suspicion, being labelled an unscrupulous interloper. The priests, led by the Catholic bishop of Clogher, Edward Kernan, preached openly for Westenra, and in response to a demand that his ‘Cossacks’, as his Farney tenants were called, should support Leslie, Shirley was met by a defiant statement promising their second votes to Westenra. Having held second place for two of the four days of the poll, Leslie slipped into third position on 28 June, when there were again fatal disturbances, and finally resigned on the 30th, when it was claimed that his opponents had another 3,000 voters, out of an electorate of over 7,000, unpolled.
In the acrimonious aftermath of the election, Westenra, who was widely blamed for the first day’s unrest, fought an inconsequential duel with Madden, and other members of his family were embroiled in aspects of this controversy.
The eclipse of the Dawson interest on the death of Cremorne in March 1827 presumably gave greater freedom of action both to Westenra, who voted for Catholic claims that month, and to Shirley, who abstained then but later voted consistently against relief. The county’s Presbyterians, specifically citing the role of the priests in the recent contest, and the sheriff, grand jurors and Protestant gentlemen, had their petitions brought up, 5 Mar., 11 June, and the Catholics’ petition in their favour was presented to the Commons, 6 Mar., and the Lords, 16 Mar. 1827. The anti-Catholic petitions of the grand jury and of Monaghan parish were brought up in the Commons by Shirley, 21, 28 Apr., and the Lords by Lord Roden, 28 Apr. 1828, but at a dinner for Rossmore in the county town that month considerable praise was lavished on Westenra for his votes on the question and a Liberal Club was formed in his support.
The Catholics again met in Monaghan in November 1828 to petition for their claims, while the following month a requisition was got up for another anti-Catholic county meeting.
Already in 1829 speculation had arisen about Westenra’s future, to Rossmore’s annoyance, and Corry had agreed to stand in defence of the remnants of the constitution. He did so again at the general election of 1830, acting for the ‘preservation of our menaced independence’, but soon retired to avoid dividing the Tory interest.
The county’s Orangemen met under Corry’s chairmanship, 22 Jan. 1831, to pass resolutions in defence of the Protestant constitution. They were presumably satisfied with Blayney and Shirley, who both voted against the Grey ministry’s reform bill and offered again at the general election that spring. Westenra started, without uttering on the reform question, but O’Connell thought he might succeed as a supporter of the bill, while Lucas, endorsing the sitting Members, declined to offer and addressed the electors against the evils of another contest.
If they carried their threat into execution, the public would lose nothing by it, as they are generally speaking useless magistrates as absentees or non-effectives from age, infirmity and inability, and ... the other magistrates, the resident gentry and the clergy of all denominations are disgusted with their conduct as tending to perpetuate discord and want of harmony in our county.
Derby mss 122/2.
Resentment was expressed about Lord Blayney being passed over, but in November 1831 there was an illumination in Monaghan town on the swearing-in of Rossmore, who sought to end the rancorous politics of the county by appointing Madden to succeed as colonel of the Monaghan militia on Leslie’s death.
The petitions of the inhabitants of the borough and its vicinity against the ministerial plan for Irish national education and for making the Irish reform bill as extensive as the English measure were presented to the Lords, 22 Mar., 28 June, and to the Commons (by Westenra), 3 July 1832.
Partly based on the extract from an untraced thesis by C. McGimpsey on ‘Co. Monaghan Elections, 1800-68’ in PRO NI ENV5/HP/23/1, pt. 1.
Number of voters: about 3500 in 1826 852 in 1830;
Registered freeholders: 12,860 in 1829; 1,148 in 1830 1148 in 1830
