The Peel Web
I am happy that you are using this web site and hope that you found it useful. Unfortunately, the cost of making this material freely available is increasing, so if you have found the site useful and would like to contribute towards its continuation, I would greatly appreciate it. Click the button to go to Paypal and make a donation.
The following report is taken from the Edinburgh Review of December 1828; the Review reproduced reports from other newspapers.
From The Courier; December 1828
It is held to be false and absurd supposition, that his Excellency's recall was in the slightest degree the consequence of his letter to Dr Curtis: because it had not transpired to any person, doctors Curtis and Murray can excepted, before the 1st inst., 18 hours after the letter of recall had been in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant. A word or two to those who indulge this supposition: The Marquis received a letter from Dr Curtis, inclosing in it the Duke of Wellington's letter to him, and the doctor's reply. On the 23d he replies to the doctor. Would it be a very unnatural proceeding that the marquis, meaning to give an opinion so little in accordance with that of the duke, should think it an act of fairness to dispatch to the duke a copy of his answer, on the same day on which he sent that answer to the doctor? The dispatch sent off on the 23d would reach the duke on Thursday night, or Friday morning, the 26th. On the 28th the papers stated his grace to have gone to Windsor to have an interview with his Majesty — before whom, supposing him to have received the day before a copy of the marquis's letter, he would naturally lay it, and take his Majesty's commands upon it. On Sunday, the 28th, the papers informed us that a Council was held; and if it were then determined to recall his excellency, the letter of recall sent off in the afternoon of Sunday, would reach Dublin on the evening of the 30th. Is there any impossibility or absurdity in this? Nay, is it at all likely that the marquis, with the openness that belongs to him, would suffer the Duke of Wellington to remain in perfect ignorance of his having written such a letter until he saw it in the Dublin or London papers? If it be said that, if he had not informed the duke, he would only have acted as the duke did in not sending him a copy of his letter to the doctor; we reply that the cases are different. The duke's was not, we believe, intended to be made public — and was, besides, a repetition of the sentiments he had expressed in Parliament, which were know to the Lord Lieutenant. But whether the recall was or was not the consequence of the letter to Dr curtis, still it is obvious that the marquis would no longer remain Lord Lieutenant. Nothing has yet transpired with respect to his lordship's successor. but we would again and again impress this truth upon the public mind, that the Catholic question would not have been advanced by the Marquis of Anglesea's continuance in Ireland, nor will it be impaired or retarded by his recall. "It is the legislature," as the marquis says truly, "that must decide this great question."
|Meet the web creator||
These materials may be freely used for
non-commercial purposes in accordance with applicable statutory allowances
and distribution to students.
Last modified 4 March, 2016
|American Affairs 1760-83||The Age of the French Wars 1792-1815||Irish Affairs 1760-89|
|Economic Affairs in the Age of Peel||Irish
|Primary sources index||British Political Personalities||British Foreign policy 1815-65||European history||