The Great Reform Act

The Great Reform Act of 1832 was passed at the climax of a two year period of high political tension (Evans, 1994, p.1) to soothe the boiling blood of working class people in Britain. MPs were afraid of the tyranny of the French Revolution and wanted to appease the working class in order to prevent a full blown revolution in Britain. It was an attempt to bandage a gaping wound in order to protect their property, class structure and way of life.

The Reform Act was flawed but a step in the right direction, it abolished the rotten boroughs, which were ridiculous in the first place. Parliamentary seats fell into two broad categories: county and borough. Each English County regardless of its size or population had two members of parliament. This highly underrepresented Scotland, Ireland and Wales and densely populated areas of Britain. It was highly unfair as Scottish members of Parliament needed to have property valued at over £100 whereas in England their property needed only amount to £2 (Evans, 1994, p.1).

The air was static with the possibility of revolution. The atrocity of the Peterloo Massacre in 1819 still cast a black cloud over the working class who were fed up and angry at the political system. Groups such as the The London Corresponding Society and the Luddites were demanding representation in government. How was it fair that their livelihoods were directed by the aristocracy who had never worked a hard day in their life?  The under-representation of Britain’s leading commercial and industrial centres became more difficult to justify with every year that passed (Evans, 1994, p.17).

The distribution of seats act was a distraction from universal suffrage. It still kept the power in the hands of the aristocracy but it distracted the working class from a bloody revolution for the time being. It goes to show that Britain was about reform from above rather than allowing things to get out of control. I believe that the upper class implemented the Reform Act in order to appease the middle class in order to avoid them siding with the working class.

Economic distress causes civil unrest. When people are hungry and don’t feel that they are being fairly treated while people are living in affluent luxury they begin to get agitated and push for reform or begin to riot. William Cobbett famously defied anyone “to agitate a fellow on a full stomach”. He said to the public that their main problem was misgovernment. A landowners parliament was wasting people’s hard earned taxes on lavish expenditure, patronage and corruption.

The upper middle class gained the most from this act. The upper and middle classes were afraid of the lower classes. They gave the middle class the vote in order to buy their loyalty to avoid them siding with the lower classes and forming a revolution. 

The Chartists

Chartism was a working class political movement that was formed in reaction to the economic state of affairs for working class people in Britain in 1837 (Brown, Daniels, p.2). Chartism was created by changes to the economy and the growth of towns, it was the working class population demanding their political rights (Brown, Daniels, p.2). The Chartists believed that they should be represented by a parliament that included people like themselves so they demanded Universal Suffrage. They wanted a government that would represent their interests rather than just protect themselves and their comrades.

 

In learning about The Chartists, I can’t help but think about the current Tory government under Prime Minister Theresa May. Although we have come a long way, in terms of representation of women and minority groups, it is far from perfect. The Conservatives have consistently voted against the interests of those from lower socioeconomic groups (Keane). The current government seems to echo the political state of Britain during the time of the Chartists. For the few not the many.

The Corn Law of 1804 provides a perfect example of parliament using its power to keep the money in the pockets the landowners and drive prices of wheat (bread) up for the common person (Simkin) by imposing tariffs and restrictions on grain imports between 1815 and 1846 (Howe). The Government of 1804 and Theresa May’s government are not that different as a few privileged people continue to gain staggering amounts of wealth, a small amount of which is handed over to the Conservative Party to continue the same pattern (Trickett).

Punch Magazine

Chartism was a means of returning to working conditions before technological change made them obsolete (Brown, Daniels, p.3). We are facing a similar situation in modern times. It has been predicted that every commercial sector will be affected by robotic automation in the next several years (Shewan). We are facing the modern industrial revolution but through technological advances. Owners of large corporations will soon be able to dramatically cut labour costs as there simply won’t be the need for the current workforce.

The Chartists have fought for our right to vote and to have just and equal representation in Parliament. We must remember their fight and the fight of the Suffragettes and be politically active and part of the discussion, it only seeks to benefit the rich and powerful if we sit back and do nothing.

Bibliography

BIBLIOGRAPHY

---

John Wilkes and Liberty

Rude, George, Wilkes and Liberty, A social study of 1763-1774: Oxford, Claredon Press, 1962.
Thomas, Peter D.G, John Wilkes, a Friend to Liberty: Oxford, Claredon Press, 1962.

The Chartists

Brown, Richard, and Christopher Daniels. The Chartists. Macmillan Press, 1993.

Howe, Anthony.“Brexit lessons from Britain’s 19th-Century push for free trade.” The Conversation, 15 Dec. 2017, theconversation.com/brexit-lessons-from-britains-19th-century-push-for-free-trade-79400.

John Simkin. “The Corn Laws.” Spartacus Educational, Spartacus Educational, Sept. 1997, spartacus-educational.com/PRcorn.htm.

Kean, Owen. “If Corbyn has ‘deserted’ the working class, what exactly have the Tories been doing for the past seven years?” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 12 May 2017, http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/theresa-may-corbyn-working-class-what-have-tories-been-doing-a7733226.html.

Shewan, Dan. “Robots will destroy our jobs – and we’re not ready for it.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 11 Jan. 2017, http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/11/robots-jobs-employees-artificial-intelligence.

Trickett, John. “Rich Tory donors have thrived this year – for nurses it’s a different story.” New Statesman, 12 May 2017, http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/june2017/2017/05/jon-trickett-rich-tory-donors-have-thrived-year-nurses-its-different-story.

The Great Reform Act

Evans, Erik J. The Great Reform Act of 1832. Psychology Press, 1994.

John Wilkes and Liberty

John Wilkes was a man who “had a reputation for wit and libertine”(Rude, 1962, p. 19) was famed for his satire. He was a man who openly ‘declared himself throughout a friend of liberty’ and promised he would act up to it. (Rude, 1962, p.18)  His publication The North Britain, was born on June 6th 1792 (Rude, 1962, p. 20) and was to set off a large degree of support for Wilkes and his cause of liberty. The publication was a satirical commentary on the fact the new administration was over heavily staffed with Scots and over-tender to Scottish interest.” The publication exposed and ridiculed the government’s conduct of affairs… and heaped all manner of abuse on the Government and its friends…This proved to be vastly entertaining to some, while it roused the passionate anger and resentment of others.”(Rude, 1962, p. 21).

He won the favor of the many tiers of society, gentlemen, shopkeepers and craftsmen (Rude, 1962, p. 27) due to his humour and the raucous and scandalous commentary on the new administration. The common man had access to the publication and was inspired and angered by its contents. “Wilkes reinforced opposition attacks in Parliament by denouncing very unpopular tax that had been placed on cider as ‘odious and partial and a threat to liberty” (Thomas, 1996, p27).

The King’s Speech at the opening of Parliament on April 19th, 1763 riled Wilkes and his editors to release the 45th edition of The North Britain which seemed to accuse King George III of being a liar (Rude, 1962, p. 26). Even though Wilkes was a member of Parliament, he was not above the law, he was arrested and taken into custody. When he was brought from the tower to  Westminster and it seemed that ‘The whole City of London was there to support him, when he addressed the judges in court he was cheered to the support of a large and sympathetic audience. When he left the court there were thunderous shouts of ‘Liberty! Liberty! Wilkes forever’ (Rude, 1962, p.27). He was a very calculated and intelligent man and used this skill to evoke a response to his audience in court. “The liberty of all peers and gentlemen, and, what touches me more sensibly, that of all the middling and inferior set of people, who stand most in need of protection, is in my case this day to be finally decided upon a question of such importance as to determine at once whether English Liberty shall be a reality or a shadow” (Rude, 1962, p.27).

Chief Justice Pratt concluded: That due to Wilkes position as a member of parliament he must be discharged. The Galleys erupted into cheers and shouts and as George Onslow reported to his father ‘the many thousand that escorted Wilkes home to his house were of a far higher rank than the common mob.” “Wilkes and Liberty” became the new slogan of Militant Radicalism and echoed throughout the streets of London (Rude, 1962, p.27).

John Wilkes was a man who used his wit to turn the public against the Government in order to expose the injustices in society. He claimed to stand for the common man and used his publication The North Britain to appeal to the many different levels of society through satire.

Bibliography

 

Rude, George, Wilkes and Liberty, A social study of 1763-1774: Oxford, Claredon Press, 1962.
Thomas, Peter D.G, John Wilkes, a Friend to Liberty: Oxford, Claredon Press, 1962.