Repealing Proclamations

Peter Grey on Bluesky, March 22, 2025 at 9:12 AM
I was just thinking it’s about time the Clontarf Proclamation was rescinded
More than 3,300 obsolete laws from 19th century set to be repealed
(Irish Times link)

Every set of legislation contains some dead wood, but the Irish system probably contains more than most. This is due to the existence of proclamations. These were originally issued by the (English) crown, without requiring parliamentary approval (or even knowledge). The Case of Proclamations (1611) determined that proclamations could not create new legislation or common law, but only exercise existing legal rights (more on this here). After 1689, the Crown’s powers were exercised directly by parliament, including that of proclamation making.

Proclamations often dealt with once off matters, yet they still remain on the books. The Irish government removed a batch of proclamations and other obsolete laws last decade, and it is reported they are repeating the exercise, with the Clontarf Proclamation as one of the 3,300 laws enacted in the 19th century to be removed. ¹

The Clontarf Proclamation, written by Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel, was issued on Saturday, October 7, 1843, banning the Repeal Meeting called by Daniel O’Connell to be held at Clontarf on the following day. Peel described the meetings as  “an attempt to overthrow the constitution of the British Empire as by law established”, so effectively an act of sedition.²

To back up the proclamation, 3,000 soldiers arrived to enforce it. O’Connell, fearing bloodshed, frantically acted to let the people know not to attend, posting handbills, removing the stage in Clontarf, and sending men on horseback to turn back those en route.³

It was fortunate O’Connell took such concerted action. The following year there were complaints in Parliament that the Proclamation could and should have been issued on the Friday before, and that the proclamation was not posted as it should have been (one man travelling from Dublin to Maynooth, arriving there at  2:30 am on 8th October did not see it posted in any town he passed through until he reached Maynooth.) The people, therefore, were not given the proper opportunity to obey it. One MP, John Rawdon of Armagh declared “the Proclamation issued by the Irish Government was destitute of the most beautiful feature of the Prerogative—mercy.”⁴.

The Nation, a nationalist Dublin paper, argued that, even with proper notice, Peel was wrong to have banned the meeting: “if it is right to coerce [the Repeal movement] he [Peel] is scandalously to blame for having delayed coercion so long, if it was wrong he is shamefully tyrannical to coerce now.”⁵

Claims of coercion were central to another proclamation, which was removed in a previous tidying exercise. Those old statutes included the 1685 acclamation of James II as king, acclaiming kings, instituting fasts, enforcing the Penal Laws and calling for the capture of miscreants.⁶.

One such miscreant was the writer of a series of pamphlets protesting the introduction of new currency in Ireland. A “Proclamation promising a reward for the discovery of the author of a seditious pamphlet” was issued on 27th October 1724. It stated that the pamphlets contained:

several seditious and scandalous paragraphs highly reflecting upon his Majesty and his Ministers, tending to alienate the affections of his good subjects of England and Ireland from each other, and to promote sedition among the people

However, no one came forward to give up Jonathan Swift and claim the £300 (though surely there must have been people who could). Full text of that proclamation is here and the full account of Swift’s Drapier Letters is here.

While we do not need obsolete laws on our statue book, that doesn’t mean they are without value. Proclamations are a window into the concerns of the past, and into what was viewed then as viable solutions.

Featured Image: A proclamation for the better discovery of seditious libellers. 1675, issued by Charles II. (Archive.org)

References