Advertisement

The Slow Birth of Liberal England

  • T. A. Jenkins
Chapter
Part of the British Studies Series book series (BRSS)

Abstract

Lord John Russell’s appreciation of the long-term dilemma confronting Whiggery, in the post-Reform Act era, is apparent in a famous letter to Lord Melbourne, written as early as the autumn of 1837:

I always thought that the Whig party as a party would be destroyed by the Reform Bill. Their strength lay in certain counties and in close boroughs. The Tories, by the new construction of the House, were sure to beat them in the counties, and the radicals in the open towns.1

It is extremely doubtful whether Russell had really taken such a gloomy view of the Whigs’ prospects during the heady days of 1832, and allowance has to be made for the natural sense of despondency engendered by the way their parliamentary majority had been dramatically eroded at the general elections of 1835 and 1837, the latter of which had just taken place when Russell wrote. Nevertheless, there remains in Russell’s letter an important recognition of the central paradox of ‘Liberalism’ at the beginning of the Victorian period: that a parliamentary grouping dominated by the landed aristocracy was becoming increasingly dependent for its electoral vitality on support from the urban and industrial centres of Britain. The spectacular successes achieved by the Whigs in the county elections of 1832 had proved to be a temporary phenomenon, and, although the Whigs were never extinguished in these constituencies as Russell seemed to fear, it is true that they were never again to be more than a substantial minority presence.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Russell to Melbourne, 9 September 1837, in Ian Newbould, Whiggery and Reform, 1830–1841 (London, 1990) p. 318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Michael Bentley, ‘Party, Doctrine and Thought’, in Michael Bentley and John Stevenson (eds), High and Low Politics in Modern Britain (Oxford, 1983).Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    John Prest, Lord John Russell (London, 1972) pp. 190–3.Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    Hadfield to Morley, n. d., and 23 October 1843, in Edwin Hodder, The Life of Samuel Morley (London, 1887) pp. 77–8.Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    Mrs Hardcastle, Life of John, Lord Campbell (London, 1881) vol. 2, p. 204 (autobiography, n. d.); vol. 2, p. 248 (journal, 11 January 1849).Google Scholar
  6. 9.
    Robert Stewart, The Foundation of the Conservative Party, 1830–1867 (London, 1978) p. 279.Google Scholar
  7. 11.
    F. A. Dreyer, ‘The Whigs and the Ministerial Crisis of 1845’, English Historical Review, lxxx (1965) p. 534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 12.
    David Cannadine, ‘The Last Hanoverian Sovereign? The Victorian Monarchy in Historical Perspective’, in A. L. Beier et al. (eds), The First Modern Society (London, 1989).Google Scholar
  9. 13.
    Russell to Joseph Parkes, 4 April 1844, in G. P. Gooch (ed.), The Later Correspondence of Lard John Russell, 1840–1878 (London, 1925) vol. 1, p. 72.Google Scholar
  10. 19.
    Clarendon’s Cabinet memorandum, June 1846, in Sir Herbert Maxwell, Life and Letters of the Fourth Earl of Clarendon (London, 1913) vol. 1, pp. 265–7.Google Scholar
  11. 20.
    J. B. Conacher, The Peelites and the Party System, 1846–1852 (Newton Abbot, 1972) pp. 30–2.Google Scholar
  12. 25.
    Arthur Miall, Life of Edward Miall (London, 1884) p. 128.Google Scholar
  13. 26.
    I. G. C. Hutchison, A Political History of Scotland, 1832–1924 (Edinburgh, 1986) p. 65.Google Scholar
  14. 28.
    Peter Mandler, Aristocratic Government in the Age of Reform: Whigs and Liberals, 1830–1852 (Oxford, 1990) p. 280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 29.
    See Roebuck to Osborne, 22 February 1848, in P. H. Bagenal, Ralph Bernal Osborne MP (privately printed, 1884) pp. 100–2.Google Scholar
  16. 30.
    Cf. Hume to Walmsley, 17 November 1848, Cobden to Walmsley, January 1849, in H. M. Walmsley, The Life of Sir,Josuah Walmsley (London, 1879) pp. 203–6, 210.Google Scholar
  17. 31.
    See G. R. Searle, Entrepreneurial Politics in Mid-Victorian Britain (Oxford, 1993) pp. 51–74, for the financial reform movement. As Searle shows, the financial reformers were themselves divided over the relative merits of the income tax, some wishing to retain it in order to dispense with all indirect taxes, others desiring its abolition as well.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 35.
    Greg to Cobden, 11 May 1848, in Derek Fraser, Urban Politics in Victorian England (London, 1976) pp. 249–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 42.
    Norman Gash, Reaction and Reconstruction in English Politics, 1832–1852 (Oxford, 1965) pp. 195–200.Google Scholar
  20. 43.
    For example, Palmerston to William Temple, 30 April 1852, in Hon. E. Ashley, Life of Lord Palmerston, 1846–65 (London, 1876) vol. 1, pp. 336–41;Google Scholar
  21. Spencer Walpole, Life of Lord John Russell (London, 1889) vol. 2, p. 296;Google Scholar
  22. Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice, Life of Lord Granville, 1815–1891 (London, 1905), vol. 1, pp. 501–2.Google Scholar
  23. 45.
    Palmer to Edward Cardwell, 25 February 1852, in Lord Selborne, Memorials: Family and Personal, 1766–1865 (London, 1896) vol. 2, pp. 133–5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© T. A. Jenkins 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. A. Jenkins

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations