Liverpool 1812 - 21
How did Liverpool stay in
power for so long?
• Personality and
leadership
• A strong Cabinet
• Support of the king
• Luck
• Experience
• Liverpool and luck
• His election was by a
small minority
• Lack of a credible
opponent
• Opposition was divided
• Whigs divided
• The political system
worked in his favour –
easy to hold onto power
Liverpool and experience
• Very experience
politician
• A skilful politician used
to hold the cabinet
together
• Cabinet had a wide
range of political views
• Liverpool and royal
support
• A strong relationship
with the King
• King was suspicious of
the Whigs
• Developed the principle
of collective registration
• The Six Acts
• Suspension of Habeas
Corpus
• Seditious Meetings Act
• How did Liverpool deal
with the radical threat
1815 – 21?
•
• What were the Six
Acts
(1) Training Prevention Act A measure which
made any person attending a gathering for
the purpose of training or drilling liable to
arrest. People found guilty of this offence
could be transportated for seven years.
(2) Seizure of Arms Act A measure that gave
power to local magistrates to search any
property or person for arms.
(3) Seditious Meetings Prevention Act A
measure which prohibited the holding of
public meetings of more than fifty people
without the consent of a sheriff or
magistrate.
(4) The Misdemeanours Act A measure that
attempted to reduce the delay in the
administration of justice.
(5) The Basphemous and Seditious Libels Act
A measure which provided much stronger
punishments, including banishment for
publications judged to be blaspemous or
sedtious.
(6) Newspaper and Stamp Duties Act A
measure which subjected certain radical
publications which had previously avoided
stamp duty by publishing opinion and not
news, to such duty.
• What were the key
radical protests 1815 21
•
•
•
•
•
•
Spa Fields Meeting
The Spenceans and Hunt
March of the Blanketeers
The Pentrich Rebellion
The Peterloo Massacre
The Cato Street Conspiracy
• What was Spa Fields
•
•
•
•
A mass meeting
On of the first held
Held on 15 Nov 1816
Organised by the
Spencean
• Henry Hunt was the
main speaker
• Spenceans supported
revolution
– Not sure it revolution
should be organised or
spontaneous.
• Who were the
Spenceans and who
was Henry Hunt?
• Henry Hunt – radical
speaker who wanted
reform not revolution.
The march of the Blanketeers
• March 1817 William Benbow
organised a hunger march from St
Peters field Manchester to
London
– Wanted to present a petition
to the Prince Regent asking
him to relieve distress in the
textile industry
– 4500 marched, local
magistrates declared it
seditious and it was
dispersed.
– 300 set out on the march one
person was killed
• The Pentrich Rebellion
• An attempt by the
northern working class
to take over the north
and then march on
London.
• A government spy –
Oliver the spy –
exposed them
• Only two attempts at
uprisings one in
Huddersfield one in
Nottingham.
• The Peterloo Massacre
• St Peters Field
Manchester Jan 1819
• Henry Hunt due to
speak magistrates tried
to prevent him
• Yeomanry could not
arrest Hunt
• Army called in – panic
and stampede- 11
protestors die 400
injured.
• The Cato Street
Conspiracy
• Organised by Spenceans
• Most extreme and radical
group of the time
• Plan to assassinate
Liverpool and is cabinet
on 22 Feb 1820
• Plan was to paralyse the
capital and spread unrest
across the country
• Discovered by George the
Spy
• 4 tried and executed 5
others transported for
life.
• What debates is there
about Radicalism
between 1815 – 1821?
1. Britain was close to
revolution due to the
mass unrest and
protest seen in the
country
2. The threat was
exaggerated and point
to the fact that the
radical groups were
not linked or
organised.
• Repressive and
reactionary
• Was Liverpool's
government repressive
1815 -21?
– Use of spies
– Use of force
– Six Acts
• Not repressive
– Six Acts time limited and
not enforced
– Habeas Corpus suspended
for only 10 months
– Seditious Meetings Act
lapsed in 1818
Liverpool 1822 - 27
• Who were the Liberal
Tories?
• Sir Robert Peel – Home
Secretary
• WJ Robinson –
Chancellor of the
Exchequer
• William Huskisson –
President of the Board
of Trade
• George Canning –
Foreign Secretary
• Liberal Tories Key
Themes
• The emergence of younger
and more energetic
ministers gave the
government a more liberal
image.
• The new ministers were
more open to the idea of
reform
• Growing prosperity and a
decline in social unrest
• Did the social and economic
policies represent a
departure from the ideas of
the previous ministers?
• What reforms did
Liverpool and the
Liberal Tories introduce
1822 – 30?
•
•
•
•
Legal Reforms
Economic Reforms
Trade Union Reform
Catholic Emancipation
• Legal Reforms
• Capital Offences Act –
abolished the death
penalty for 180
offences. Peel did it as
many magistrates were
not enforcing the law as
it stood.
• Prison Reforms Gaols
Act 1823 – Gaols set up
in every county, officers
were to be paid, female
prisons had female
guards.
• Metropolitan Police Act
• Yes
• Was Peel a reformer?
– Removed laws not needed
– Reorganised the criminal
code
– Goals act reduced the
number of executions
• No
– Simple completed a
process started before him
– Simplified criminal code
not get more arrests – was
not more lenient.
– 1805 – 12 67 executions
per year
– 1822 28 63 executions per
year
• Economic Reforms
• Move towards Free
Trade idea started by
Wallace vice president
of board of trade 1821 23
• Huskisson and Robinson
in charge
• Reduction of duties
• Navigation Act
• Corn Laws relaxed
• Reduction of duties
• Taxes on Rum, Silk,
wool, glass, books and
paper were reduced
• 50% tax on
manufacture goods
reduced to 20%
• Navigation Act
• Navigation Acts were a
restriction on free trade
• The repeal in 1823
allowed for non British
ships to trade directly
with British colonies
• Resulted in freer flow of
trade and lower prices
• Huskisson introduced a
sliding scale of duty on
imported corn. This
replaced the fixed 80
shilling rate in 1828
• Corn Laws relaxed
• Aim was to make bread
etc more affordable
whilst retaining
traditional supporters.
• Were the economic
reforms liberal?
• None of the reforms
were new ideas the
work of Wallace
• The reforms were in
place before 1822 but
they were still
introduced – there may
not have been a
decisive break with pre
1822 but it was the
start of a free trade
economy built on by
Peel in 1840’s
• Repeal of the
Combinations Act 1824
• What were the Trade
Union reforms?
– Combination Acts had
made strikes illegal
– Repeal now meant
Unions and strikers not
liable to prosecution
• Amending Act 1825
– A wave of unrest and
strikes followed the
relaxing of the
Combination Acts. This
amendment tightened
the law – any act of force
by a trade union was
illegal.
• At first glance yes –
workers could now join
unions and campaign
for better wages etc
• Can the Trade Union
reforms be seen as
liberal?
• No – the Amending Act
placed great restrictions
on Unions and
prevented them from
being truly effective.
•
•
•
There was no major
ideological shift
Liberal Toryism did reflect a
more tolerant and
imaginative approach to
problems.
Some reforms were of great
significance –
– The Metropolitan Police Act
– The Test and Corporations Act
– Catholic Emancipation
• The impact of the reforms
•
Other reforms though less
significant set a precedence
that marked the beginning of
a reform process that would
continue for the next 50
years.
• How important were
the reforms
• The improvement in the
economy was due more
to the period of peace
than to reforms
• Trade did not become
“Free” until the 1840’s
• The Corn Laws,
amended but stayed in
place
• The Liberal Tories were
as committed to the
landed interest as their
predecessors?
• How important were the
Liberal Tories or How
liberal were they?
• Perhaps the most significant
element of Liberal Toryism was
its attempt to embrace the
manufacturing interest.
• Peel and Huskisson both
sought to introduce reforms
that would appeal to the new
manufacturing interest and its
growing political influence.
• The significance of the reforms
may have been limited but the
importance of Liberal Toryism
should not be overlooked.
– For some they represented
a betrayal of Toryism
– For others they
represented a new attitude
and a new generation of
Tory Politicians
The end of the Tories 1828 - 32
• What were the reasons
for political unrest 1828
– 30.
• The collapse of the
Tories
• Pressure form the
emerging middle class
• Working class
discontent
• Political Unions
• The Economy
• Trade Unions
• International events
• Catholic Emancipation
• Instability in
Government.
• Pressure form the
emerging middle class
• New M/C wanted
political reform
• Wanted government to
move faster towards
free trade
• M/C were the backbone
of the new industrial
economy
• M/C wanted political
power
• Working class
discontent
• Growth of the new
industrial cities lead to
w/c becoming
radicalised
• Seemed to be working
with the m/c for
political change
• Effectively majority of
w/c wanted better pay
etc not the vote
• Govt saw a threat from
the w/c
• Political Unions
• Organised protest and
had a political agenda.
BPU put pressure on
govt.
• M/c seemed to be
representing the w/c
• Did put pressure on
govt but lacked a
national organisation.
• The Economy
• Bad harvest and an
economic depression
1828 – 30
• Wave of rural unrest swing riots in south and
east of England
• Contributed to a
growing fear of
insecurity
• Trade Unions
• Wave of strikes and
demonstrations
combined with rural
unrest to make govt
think a radical threat
was real.
• Govt perceived a threat
from the Unions and
the m/c
• International events
• July 1830 – Revolution
in France – overthrow
of Charles X.
• Other revolutions in
Belgium and the
Hapsburgs Empire
(Austria)
• This helped to create an
atmosphere – what
would happen in Britain
if there was no reform?
• Catholic Emancipation
• Irish Catholics lead by
Daniel O’Connell – right
to sit at Westminster
• Campaign came to a
head in 1829 – fear of
open revolt in Ireland
led the Govt to grant
the Catholic
Emancipation Act.
Wellington and Peel –
led on this. Split the
Tory Party. Let in the
Whigs
• Instability in Government
• 15 years of stability under
Liverpool.
• 1827 – 30 3 PM’s
Canning, Goodrich and
Wellington
• Liberal side of Party
alienated by refusal of a
moderate redistribution
of seats.
• Reactionary (Ultra) Tories
alienated by Catholic
Emancipation
• Tory Party spilt into 3
– Ultras
– Canningites
– Wellingtons supporters
The Great Reform Act
• Key issues
• How great was the
Great Reform Act 1832
• What were the main
features of the old
system?
• Why had this system
survived so long?
• How and why did the
Tories and the Whig
parties differ over the
issue of reform?
• What were the main
features of the old
system?
• Who could vote?
– County seats men who
owned land worth 40 shillings
(approx £100)
– Boroughs varied enormously
– In 1831 12-13% of males
could vote out of a total
population of 24,132,294.
– Elections only held if the seat
was contested.
– Many boroughs were
controlled by large
landowners.
– Many different types of
Borough
• The Landowners
– Very important they
represented law an
order and providers of
welfare
• The idea of deference
• Why had this system
survived so long?
– It was the expectation
that man of rank would
represent ordinary
people.
– Why does it need to
change?
• Arguments against
Reform
• The French Revolution
• Democracy = mob rule
• Democracy was seen as a
threat to the rights of a
freeborn Englishman not an
ideal.
• System was not
unrepresentative – it
represented all major
economic interests
– A man may not have the
vote but is represented
by the landlord.
• Arguments for Reform
• Need to reduce the influence of
the King and his ministers.
• The allocation of MP’s to
boroughs depended on its status
in the Middle Ages
– Example Dunwich in 1831 32
electors and 2 MP’s.
Manchester, Birmingham,
Leeds no representation in
Parliament.
• The Rights of Man – legitimate
Government must had a mandate
from the people in governed.
• The impact of Catholic
Emancipation was huge – it paved
the way for further reform
– “the battering ram that broke
down the old system”
• This measure showed that you
could change a system.
I.
II.
• The Consequences of
the Reform Act
III.
To what extent did
the Reform Act
change British
politics?
What were the
continuities pre and
post 1832?
How significant was
the Great Reform
Act?
• Limited Change
• The Act only tinkered with the
edges of reform and too many
continuities remained.
• There was little change of
fundamental importance.
• To what extent did the
Reform Act change British
politics?
• Significant change
• Few historians contend that
there were major
continuities between the
pre and post reform period.
However –
– The Act must be viewed
in context and it can
then be seen to
represent a significant
turning point
• What were the
continuities pre and
post 1832?
• Few recent historians
believed the Act deserves to
be called Great.
– There are continuities
pre and post 1832. The
Act did little to change
the degree of power
exercised by the
aristocracy.
– The Middle Class
remained under
represented
– The working class
remained excluded form
the franchise.
• How significant was the
Great Reform Act?
• The development of
working class political
consciousness
• The evolution of the
British party system
• This first act made it more
difficult to resist further
reforms (1867, 1884,
1919)
• The Act created a
precedent it represented
the first occasion the
aristocracy were forced
into political concessions.
• The terms of the Act were
not as important as the
simple fact that it was
passed.
Sir Robert Peel
• Key Themes
• Peel as a Party leader
1832 - 41
• Peels aims as a party leader
• Attitude to Parliamentary
reform
• The Tamworth Manifesto
• The reconstruction of the
Tory Party
• Taking advantage of the
failures of the Whigs
• The 1841 election.
• Key themes
• The Budgets of 1842 and
1845
• Income Tax
• Financial Reform
• Peel as Prime Minister
1841 – 46
• (refer to big 37
powerpoint on Peel for
help here)
– The Bank Charter Act
– The Companies Act
• Peel and Ireland
– The Irish Famine, Maynooth,
Daniel O'Connell etc.
• Peel and the Corn Laws
– Influence of the Anti Corn
Law League
– Repeal of the Corn Laws
– The collapse of the
Conservative Party.
• Was Peel a successful
Prime Minister?
• An analysis of Peel
• Did Peel betray his
Party?
• Did Peel put the nation
above party politics?
• Yes
• Was Peel a successful
Prime Minister?
– His policies led to an age of
prosperity – financial stability,
trade revived,
– He restored confidence in
politics – out manoeuvred the
Chartists and O’Connell
– He was a progressive
reformer? Accepted things he
had previously opposed
– He was a man of principle
• No
– a one trick pony – all his faith
in free trade
– None of the ideas were his –
in fact he often started by
opposing many things he later
accepted.
• No
• Did Peel betray his
Party?
– The new party under his
leadership adapted to the
demands of the 1840’s
– He didn’t destroy he created –
gave the party a sense of
purpose
– Peelite supporters remained
within the party even after 1846.
• Yes
– Peel sacrificed his party on
many occasions
– 1829, 1834, 1842, 1845
– Ignored traditional party
values – landed interest
– Ireland
– The Corn Laws
•
• Did Peel put the nation
above party politics?
Yes
– Peel was more concerned with
good government that catered
for all the people even at the
risk of being unpopular in his
own Party. His policies were
designed to draw moderates
away from extremes.
– Peel gave the Party a national
appeal and national leadership,
he was a hero of the new
enfranchised classes
• No –
– No real evidence to
suggest otherwise he new
his actions would mean the
collapse of the Party but he
still went ahead.