Abstract
The classification of political groups is far from easy. Eighteenth-century political parties tended to lack an identifiable national leadership, an organised constituent membership and a recognised corpus of policy and principle around which to cohere and which could serve to link local activists to national activity. However, many modern political parties can only be described as coalitions; they are monolithic neither in organisation nor in policy. This test might be failed by modern parties in France, India, Italy and the United States. Some scholars are unhappy about the applicability of a two-party system at the constituency level, arguing that although Whig and Tory alignments did exist under those names in many constituencies, these feuds were often traditional and that family interest was paramount.1 It is difficult to generalise on the relationship between electoral and parliamentary politics. The links between political behaviour in the localities and at Westminster varied widely, both over time and with reference to the type and size of constituency. There could be hostility to outsiders. In 1737 Viscount Lonsdale wrote to the Bishop of Carlisle about a local seat: ‘I am very glad the Cumberland Gentlemen have agreed in uniting their interests, I hope it will prove a means of keeping out a stranger at Cockermouth.’
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
P. Thomas, ‘Party Politics in Eighteenth-Century Britain’, British Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies, 10 (1987), 205. I have benefited greatly from discussing this article with Stephen Baskerville.
Sedgwick (ed.), House of Commons, I, p. 377; HL STG Box 22 (9); Lonsdale to Fleming, 30 Oct. 1737, 20 Sept. 1740, Carlisle, D/Sen/Fleming 14.
Reading, Berkshire Record Office, D/E Hy 04; Interesting works include G. Bage, ‘A Provincial Reaction to the French Revolution: radical politics, social unrest and the growth of loyal opinion in East Anglia at the end of the eighteenth century, with special reference to the county of Suffolk’ (Cambridge, MLitt, 1983); S. Baskerville, ‘The Management of the Tory Interest in Lancashire and Cheshire, 1714–47’ (Oxford, DPhil, 1976); A. Newman, ‘Elections in Kent and its Parliamentary Representation 1715–54’ (Oxford, DPhil, 1957); J. F. Quinn, ‘Political Activity in Yorkshire c. 1700–1742’ (University of Lancaster, MLitt, 1980); D. O’Sullivan, ‘Politics in Norwich, 1701–1835’ (University of East Anglia, MPhil, 1975); K. von den Steinen, ‘The Fabric of an Interest: the First Duke of Dorset and Kentish and Sussex Politics, 1705–65’ (University of California, Los Angeles, PhD, 1969); P. Jenkins, The Making of a Ruling Class: The Glamorgan Gentry 1640–1790 (Cambridge, 1983); J. Triffitt, ‘Politics and the Urban Community: Parliamentary Boroughs in the South West of England, 1710–1730’ (Oxford, DPhil, 1985).
L. Glassey, ‘Local Government’, in Jones (ed.), Britain in the First Age of Party, p. 171; Lowther to John Spedding, 25 Aug. 1743, Carlisle, Cumbria RO D/Lons/W2/1/104.
J. M. Black, ‘Eighteenth-Century Electioneering: A Yorkshire Example’, Yorkshire Archaeological Journal, 59 (1987), 191; Hertford, CRO D/EP F196 f.74; Gazette d’Amsterdam, 16 Nov. (ns) 1725.
G. Holmes (ed.), Britain after the Glorious Revolution 1689–1714 (1969), p. 235; Thomas, ‘Party Politics’, p. 205.
Thomas, ‘Sir Roger Newdigate’s Essays on Party, c.1762’, English Historical Review, 102 (1987), 394–400.
Anon., A Second Letter to Dr. Codex (1734), p. 12; Daily Gazetteer, 1 Sept. 1735; BL Add. 47021 B f.55; Old England, 16 Feb. 1745.
Robert Freebairne to Hay, 8 Jan. 1722, Earl of Orrery to the Pretender, 30 June 1727, RA 57/18, 107/150; James Craggs, Whig MP, to the Earl of Stair, 6 Dec. 1716, SRO, GD 135/147 No. 10; Broglie, French envoy, to Morville, French foreign minister, 30 Nov. (ns) 1724, Chammorel, French chargé d’affaires, to Morville, 12 Feb. (ns) 1725, AE.CP.Ang. 349 f.299, 350f. 134; Ossorio, Sardinian envoy in London, to Charles Emmanuel III, 7 Jan. (ns) 1735, Turin, Archivio di Stato, Lettere Ministri Inghilterra 42.
Thomas, ‘Party Politics’, p. 204; BL Add. 23825 f.276-7.
Newcastle to Townshend, 18 Aug. 1722, Beinecke, Osborn Files, Newcastle; BL Add. 32686 f.236.
BL Add. 37366 f.95. 47028 f.207, Stowe 232 f.51; Colley, Defiance, pp. 192–3; Duke of Chandos to Harcourt, 3 Nov. 1717, HL. ST 57 vol. 13, p. 79.
BL Add. 32686 f.330, Stowe 242 f.212; RA 26/32; HL ST. 57 vol. 13, p. 92.
Bodl. Add. Ms A.269, pp. 74–5.
BL Add. 32686 f.269.
Colley, Defiance, pp. 174, 50.
Browning review of Colley, Albion, 14 (1982), 311–12; Colley, Defiance, p. 55.
Black review of Colley, British Journal for Eighteenth Century Studies, 6 (1983), 96–8; Gibbs, ‘English Attitudes towards Hanover and the Hanoverian Succession in the First Half of the Eighteenth Century’, in A. M. Birke and K. Kluxen (eds), England and Hanover (Munich, 1986), p. 49.
Colley, Defiance, p. 208; Black, The Collapse of the Anglo-French Alliance 1727–1731 (Gloucester, 1987), p. 19.
E. Gregg, The Protestant Succession in International Politics 1710–1716 (New York, 1986), p. 297.
Baugh review of Hatton, Journal of Modern History, 53 (1981), 107.
Christie, ‘The Tory Party, Jacobitism and the Forty-Five: A Note’, Historical Journal, 30 (1987), 931.
D. McKay, ‘Bolingbroke, Oxford and the Defence of the Utrecht Settlement in Southern Europe’, English Historical Review, 86 (1971), 264–84; Toland, State Anatomy (3rd edn, 1917), pp. 17, 25; Coxe, Memoirs... Orford, II, p. 128; HL LO 7948.
P. Langford, The Excise Crisis (Oxford, 1975).
Black, ‘England’s “Ancien Régime”’, History Today, 38 (March, 1988), 47–9.
Hayton, ‘The “Country” interest and the party system, 1689-c. 1720’ in C. Jones (ed.), Party and Management in Parliament, 1660–1784 (Leicester, 1984), pp. 65–6.
Clark, The Dynamics of Change. The Crisis of the 1750s and English Party Systems (Cambridge, 1982), p. 454; Clark, ‘A General Theory of Party, Opposition and Government, 1688–1832’, Historical Journal, 23 (1980), 302–6.
Christie, ‘The Changing Face of Parliamentary Politics, 1742–1789’, in Black (ed.), British Politics and Society from Walpole to Pitt, 1742–1789 (London, 1990).
Clark, ‘The Decline of Party, 1740–1760’, English Historical Review, 93 (1978), 517–19; L. Namier, England in the Age of the American Revolution (2nd edn, London, 1963), pp. 192–5.
Important recent work includes S. Baxter, ‘The Conduct of the Seven Years War’ in Baxter (ed.), England’s Rise to Greatness, pp. 323–48; Schweizer (ed.), Bute; P. D. Brown and Schweizer, The Devonshire Diary (1982), pp. 57, 25, 52.
Namier and J. Brooke (eds), The History of Parliament. The House of Commons 1754–1790 (3 vols, 1964), II, p. 487.
Namier, ‘Monarchs and the Party System’, in Crossroads of Power: Essays on England in the Eighteenth Century (1962), pp. 213–34; I. R. Christie, The End of North’s Ministry 1780–1782 (1958), pp. 188–230; Christie, ‘Party in Politics in the Age of Lord North’s Administration’, Parliamentary History, 6 (1987), 47–8, 62.
Christie, Wilkes, Wyvill and Reform: The Parliamentary Reform Movement in British Politics 1760–1785 (1962); J. Brewer, Party Ideology and Popular Politics at the Accession of George III (Cambridge, 1976).
Mure to Elliot, 8 Feb. 1762, NLS Mss 11010 f.9; P. Thomas, Lord North (1976)
Copyright information
© 1990 Jeremy Black
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Black, J. (1990). Party and Politics Under the First two Georges. In: Robert Walpole and the Nature of Politics in Early Eighteenth-century Britain. British History in Perspective. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21119-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21119-7_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-45575-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-21119-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)