SECOND REFORM ACT (1867) (The Liberal party was founded in 1859 at a meeting in Willis’ Rooms where Palmerston’s government was joined by the Peelites, the most influential of whom was Gladstone, who became Chancellor). Parliamentary reform is off the agenda while Palmerston is Prime Minister, as he is predominantly interested in foreign policy. The issue revives in 1865 after his death. By 1867, the Second Great Reform Act is passed. Why does reform occur? In 1832:1) Weakness of Tory opposition after Catholic Emancipation 2) Whig government in power who are committed to reform 3) Fear of revolution 4) Extra-parliamentary pressure.
1832 was widely regarded as a final settlement of the constitutional question, especially by people such as Lord John Russell: “Finality Jack” in 1837, he said the 1832 reform was final. But 1832 isn’t the end of reform (1867, 1884, 1918, and 1928) Five key questions to consider: 1)Why does reform revive after 1815? 2)Why is it the Conservatives and not the Liberals who pass the act? 3)Why was the Conservative act more radical than Liberal reform proposals? 4)What role did Extra-Parliamentary pressure take? Was there any & what influence did it have? 5)What was the impact of the act on late Victorian politics?
Russell (Finality Jack) was clearly wrong: 1832 only removed the worst aspects of the parliamentary system it left anomalies such as the imbalance between North and South. Many small, corrupt boroughs remained, and the largest cities are still underrepresented. Indeed, some boroughs lost votes (e.g.: Pot Walloper franchises), and only 813,000 out of the country’s 24million population could vote. There is clear dissatisfaction in Britain with the 1832 GRA shown by the Chartists they are upset by the middle class “betrayal”. Chartism keeps the reform issue alive in Parliament in the 1830s and 1840s the 6 points are a demand for parliamentary reform Chartism collapsed in 1848 after the Kennington Rally. In the 1850s and 1860s, demands for reform go back into parliament on a small scale by means of people introducing small reform bills, such as Lord John “Finality Jack” Russell. In the 1850s, Russell was the leading advocate of reform. Russell has changed his mind since the 1832 act: by 1850, there are more people who are capable of exercising the vote responsibly than in 1832, and there is a need to continue the process of adaptation which had saved Britain from 1848 revolution the constitution had been adapted to include the middle classes, and this inclusion process had to continue: he wants to include the upper levels of the working class. The working class appeared quiescent since the demise of Chartism. Energies are now channelled into trade unions these are exclusive and craft-based: made up of skilled workers, who want to defend their position against unskilled labour as much as against their employers. Therefore, the constitution has to be extended to include the RESPECTABLE members of the working class. Respectability is very different for historians to define. Thus, they want to co-opt the upper working classes, & prevent them allying with the residuum (as John Bright put it), who were unskilled, intemperent, and irresponsible. Russell’s Record
1846Declares that the 1832 act is no longer final 1849Becomes Prime Minister: he introduces a proposal to extend the franchise to £5 householder in the boroughs, and £20 tenants in the counties. This is dropped due to a lack of enthusiasm in the cabinet 1852Another similar proposal introduced (merging small boroughs), but fails as his ministry is collapsing 1854Proposes a £10 tenants in counties, and £6 tenants in boroughs. But due to the outbreak of the Crimean War, this proposal is dropped. 1860Introduces a proposal which is dropped
But reform proposals are not limited to the Liberals: in 1859, Disraeli introduces a reform proposal. Some Conservatives are interested in reform, as it would benefit the party: they thought that 1832 had rigged the system in favour of the Whigs (despite Peel’s victory of 1841) - they want a break out of the political wilderness where they are in 1846 (see notes on political instability). Disraeli wanted to lower the county franchise by making it equal to the borough franchise, and forcing everyone in urban areas (who usually voted Liberal) to vote in the boroughs this means that the Liberal voters wouldn’t threaten the County seats, which were Conservative strongholds. Disraeli aims to make county seats safe for Conservatives. Disraeli also wants to redistribute 52 seats from small boroughs to counties to increase county representation. In the 1850’s, despite interest of individuals in parliamentary reform, there is no popular enthusiasm: public attention is diverted to foreign policy, especially the Crimean war. Palmerston, who is the dominant figure, is opposed to reform. Therefore, there is no reform pre-1865 But the situation begins to change after 1865. Palmerston dies and Russell becomes Prime Minister the leading opponent is replaced with the leading advocate of reform! Russell is in his 70s, & wants to leave a legacy of great reform. Palmerston’s death allows the Liberals to collapse: his force of personality held the differing factions (Whigs and radicals) together. Also, Gladstone is converted to reform in the 1860s, he is regarded as PM-in-waiting: his reputation is built while he is Palmerston’s chancellor. Gladstone has come a long way from his political roots as an Ultra-Tory in 1832. In the 1860’s, Gladstone re-invents himself. Previously, he was an aloof Peelite: an administrator, as opposed to a man of “popular politics”, like Peel. In the 1860’s, he becomes the “People’s William”, based on his performance as “People’s Chancellor” after 1859. He seeks a financial revolution Retrenchment (low government expenditure), more efficient economic management, and free operation of the economy. His popularity is boosted by the 1860-1 removal of paper duties these duties are seen to be a “tax on knowledge”. The removal of the paper duties meant that it was easier for the radical press to circulate. Gladstone also dramatically cut income tax from 10d to 4d this also increases his popularity. He also cuts tariffs, so goods becomes cheaper. This makes him the “People’s Chancellor”. Gladstone has faith in the upper working class due to their faith in his policy & the success of the Post Office Savings Bank (which received £2 million in it’s first year this shows that people are thrifty and share Gladstone’s ideas of financial dealing.
1863-4Cotton famine due to the American Civil War During this time, not much cotton is exported to Britain this hits weavers (Lancashire) very hard. But there is no revolution or rioting at this. This impresses Gladstone. He is also impressed by the way the trade union leaders conduct themselves.
Gladstone appeals directly to the people over the heads of the party.
(This implies a very limited vision of reform). Extra-Parliamentary Pressure revives in 1863-4 in two main forms:
The Reform Union- made up of Northern Businessmen a middle class organisation. The Reform League- Dominated by the trade unions lead by Robert Applegarth and George Odger. More London-based than the RU.
These provided some pressure, but nothing like the amount pre-1832 before 1866: pressure happens in 1866 because of the defeat of the Russell-Gladstone Bill. Thus, extra-parliamentary pressure isn’t important in getting the reform issue on the parliamentary agenda. After 1866, EPP includes the Hyde Park Riots, and Bright’s Tours, but these are not on the same scale as 1832 they weren’t even as violent as the 1865 election. The Liberal Bill (1866) Gladstone and Russell face two problems:
1)The Liberal party is divided over the issue of reform. 2)Where to draw the line between the Respectable and the Residuum.
There two are linked because arguments in the party focus on where to draw the line.
1859The Liberal party was formed. It was a loose coalition of Radicals, Peelites, Liberals and Whigs.
Gladstone & Russell needed to satisfy the demands of the radicals and allay fears of the more Conservative wing “Adullamites” (led by Lord Elcho and Lowe) [Lowe’s involvement came from his experience in Australia]. They believed that reform would lead to:
1)DEMOCRACY (not what R & G intended to do) 2)More corruption 3)Working class domination 4)Quality of politicians would decline (like the American system) 5)Centralisation of power
The Adullamites bring down the bill and government by temporary alliance with Darby and the Conservatives. Their case is strengthened by the fact that there are twice as many working class people on the Poor Law rate rolls than as had been expected. They have a problem identifying the “Respectable” part of the working classes: no one wanted to enfranchise the residuum. There is much discussion whether to use “fancy franchises”: here, savings accounts or degrees act as qualifications to vote. Gladstone wanted exactly a £7 borough franchise, but only after extensive debate. It was also argued whether this classification should be done on rates or rent rates tended to be lower. Also argued about COMPOUNDERS: people paying rates through a landlord: this ended up being cheaper as you only paid bit by bit as opposed to paying one lump sum. should these people be allowed to vote? In March 1866, they settle on:£7 rental franchise in boroughs £14 rental franchise in counties There is no real seat distribution. THIS ISN’T VERY RADICAL it would have added about 400,000 voters to the register. It is defeated in June 1866 by a Conservative & Adullamite coalition Conservative Reform Bill (1866) Derby’s 3rd minority government had just defeated the Liberals by opposing reform. Yet, by 1867, a more radical reform act is guided through by the Conservatives. Why reform?
1)Rivalry between Gladstone & Disraeli Gladstone was a Peelite and Disraeli the architect of Peel’s downfall Peel got faster promotion through the conservative party than Disraeli. As a result, Disraeli wants to “dish the Whigs” by getting this bill passed: this is why he accepts amendments from almost everyone {except Gladstone} 2)The Conservatives aren’t scared of the working classes a hangover of Paternalism. 3)The Conservatives aren’t scared of reform the existing system is rigged to the Whigs from 1832, and they see reform as an opportunity to re-distribute seats. 4)Darby is fed up of being a stop-gap PM 5)The Conservatives want to take the initiative of reform from the Whigs. 6)20 years in the political wilderness they will do anything to get back in. 7)Growing Extra-Parliamentary pressure especially because the previous bill had been rejected. Examples: Hyde Park & Bright’s Tours. But this was not the decisive factor in the radicalness of the act: it simply keeps the issue alive after Russell & Gladstone’s attempt is defeated R & G get the issue into Parliament.
Why was the Bill so radical? The Bill becomes more radical as it progresses through Parliament
- Disraeli will accept amendments from ANYONE (except Gladstone) he does this to win over Liberal Radicals, as he is a minority government, and not all conservatives will support the Bill. The fact of the Bill (i.e.: that the Conservatives bring it in) is more important than the content to Disraeli.
- The initial Bill had household suffrage in the boroughs with safeguards to limit the number of people who are enfranchised,
- PLURAL VOTINGS: votes for all householders, but the rich get 2 votes.
- 2 YEARS RESIDENCE: you had to live in the same place for 2 years in order to vote
- NO COMPOUNDERS: this is against poorer people, as a compounder pays little by little through his landlord as opposed to paying in one lump sum.
- All the safeguards are lost to amendments: residence is reduced to 1 year, and compounding is completely abolished by Hodgkinson’s amendment.
- There is also a £50-15 county franchise reduction, which settles at £14
- Application for woman suffrage is rejected
- A £10 lodger franchise is introduced in boroughs: you don’t have to own the house, just be lodged in one paying £10 in annual rent.
Despite mythmaking, Disraeli isn’t aiming for ‘Tory Democracy’ he isn’t trying to create working class Conservative voters: this is shown by the fact that the vast majority of the amendments to the Bill aren’t his idea. Also, the Borough electorate grows more rapidly than that in the County (134% to 46% increase) supports this. Disraeli’s Strategy for reform:
1)Pass one thing at a time 2)Retain the aspects of the existing system that favour the Conservatives to keep influence in the counties. 3)Disraeli has written off the Boroughs as Liberal “strongholds”, but he wants to limit change in & redistribute seats to the Counties. 4)Disraeli isn’t trying to make more people vote Conservative, but to make the existing Conservative votes count for more.
The results of the Great Reform Act Many people prophesied doom:
- Lord Carnarvon: “The Conservative party is in imminent danger of going to pieces now if indeed it does not disappear under the deluge that the Government are bringing on”.
- Lowe (Liberal): “the shame, the rage, the scorn, the indignation and the despair with which this measure is viewed be every cultivated Englishman who is not a slave to the trammels of party, or who is not dazzled by the glare of a temporary and ignoble success”. The principle of numbers had replaced wealth and intelligence: representation used to be about representing property. University seats represented intelligence. This old idea is being eroded by sheer numbers of working class voters.
- Carlisle referred to it as “shooting Niagara” no one knew what would happen
Regarded by many as “a leap in the dark”: many people enfranchised in 1867 e.g.: Birmingham’s electorate of 15,000 in 1866 rose to 43,000 in 1868 and to 62,000 in 1877. In 3 years, the size of the electorate doubled. After 1867, the role of the party agent grew more important in getting people on the registers. Redistribution of seats slowed down the rate of political change: by Laing’s (an Adullamite) amendment, 1 MP was removed from each borough with a population of less than 10,000. The 1868 election was the first fought under the “new rules”: The Liberals retained a comfortable majority in the Commons. In February 1868, Darby resigned through illness, and recommended that Disraeli is appointed PM. He forms the fourth minority Conservative government in sixteen years. After the 1868 election, 80% of Tory seats were in England, gaining 75% of the county seats. The 1867 reform act didn’t turn the political world upside down overnight: it can be said that it was another manipulation of power in the interests of the ruling classes. The act led to the creation of a new type of party that needed central organisational and decision making bodies: this organisation was tested in the 1867 act’s “Minority clause”, which was based on the idea that if there were three MPs in a large borough but only two votes from each elector, then one-party exclusivity would be broken. Intended that 2 Libs and a Con would be returned as opposed to 2 Libs. This system affected the biggest cities, such as Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds. However, this is not yet democracy, as only 2/3 of the population can vote. There are also problems:
- The biggest cities are still underrepresented:
- 19 largest boroughs have a population of 5m, and 46MPs
- 68 smallest boroughs have a population of 0.42m and 68MPs.
- The “Minority Clause” doesn’t always work due to the Liberal party having close restrictions on who the electorate should vote for: in Birmingham, the Liberals return all 3 candidates.
Many things, however, still remain:
- Composition of parliament: still the ruling classes
- North-South imbalance
- Conservatives and Liberals become more polarised
- Patronage dictates seats: Bedford is controlled by Whitbread breweries
- Changes to the structure of the party in response to the huge increase in the electorate.
|
