Talk:Irish House of Commons

message: * 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)
thread_title: Removed (from famous members:)

message: 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)
thread_title: Better image

message: This  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)
thread_title: Boroughs

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title: Parliaments 1692-1800

message: 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)
thread_title:  British? 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Parliamentary Sessions. 

message: 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)
thread_title: Peers in the Commons?

message: 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)
thread_title:  Lists of MPs 

message: 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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: # 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)
replies: text: Bishop%27s_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)
thread_title: Clogher (Parliament of Ireland constituency)