{"title":"Politics as Usual: Charles Edward Trevelyan and the Irish and Scottish Fisheries Before and During the Great Famine","authors":"J. Leazer","doi":"10.1177/03324893211049539","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the Great Irish Famine a debate has raged concerning the culpability of the British government, especially in the person of Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Charles Edward Trevelyan, and its failure to come to the aid of the starving Irish. On one end of the debate, Trevelyan is accused of severe prejudice against the Irish, with some ultra-nationalists even accusing him of genocide. On the other end, Trevelyan is viewed simply as an ideologue intent on enforcing the Whig view of laissez-faire economics. However, a study of government involvement in the Irish and Scottish fishing industries shows that the political situation before and during the Famine was more complex than the traditional debate indicates. This paper argues that the government’s treatment of the Irish fisheries, which were in a dismal state compared to the Scots, had more to do with political realities that Trevelyan inherited and could not ignore.","PeriodicalId":41191,"journal":{"name":"Irish Economic and Social History","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Irish Economic and Social History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03324893211049539","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Since the Great Irish Famine a debate has raged concerning the culpability of the British government, especially in the person of Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Charles Edward Trevelyan, and its failure to come to the aid of the starving Irish. On one end of the debate, Trevelyan is accused of severe prejudice against the Irish, with some ultra-nationalists even accusing him of genocide. On the other end, Trevelyan is viewed simply as an ideologue intent on enforcing the Whig view of laissez-faire economics. However, a study of government involvement in the Irish and Scottish fishing industries shows that the political situation before and during the Famine was more complex than the traditional debate indicates. This paper argues that the government’s treatment of the Irish fisheries, which were in a dismal state compared to the Scots, had more to do with political realities that Trevelyan inherited and could not ignore.
自从爱尔兰大饥荒以来,一场关于英国政府的罪责的激烈辩论,尤其是以财政助理部长查尔斯·爱德华·特里维廉(Charles Edward Trevelyan)为代表的争论,以及英国政府未能帮助饥饿的爱尔兰人。在辩论的一端,特里维廉被指控对爱尔兰人有严重的偏见,一些极端民族主义者甚至指责他种族灭绝。另一方面,特里维廉被简单地看作是一个想要推行辉格党自由放任经济学观点的理论家。然而,一项关于政府参与爱尔兰和苏格兰渔业的研究表明,饥荒之前和期间的政治局势比传统辩论所表明的要复杂得多。本文认为,政府对爱尔兰渔业的处理,与苏格兰相比,处于惨淡状态,更多地与特里维廉继承的政治现实有关,不能忽视。