Growth of the Parliamentary Reform Movement in the C18th

Question 1

Parliamentary Reform: Popular Support for the Status Quo (part one)

Answer 1

Despite calls for reform and radicalism in the late C18th, there was plenty of support for the status Quo.

1. Although there was support for radical views, this cannot be applied to Britain as a whole. There is also little evidence that campaigns launched by radicals such as John Wilkes had little popular support from non-voters outside of London. Likewise, by 1783, the ‘Yorkshire Association’ had little support outside of Yorkshire.
2. There was support for the Status Quo of the ‘Establishment’ and the ‘Monarchy’. John Nichols commented that George III was regarded by many as ‘The Father of the People’.

Question 2

Parliamentary Reform: Popular Support for the Status Quo (part two)

Answer 2

3. There is also evidence to suggest that many ordinary people held reactionary, prejudicial and conservative views, for example religious intolerance against Catholics.
   - Although there was a growth of the Parliamentary Reform Movement, they ultimately failed in their aims. Although the clubs, discussion groups and societies aimed to reach all classes, they were dominated by members of the middle or upper classes, who wrote pamphlets and distributed them in the hope that their message would spread. Further, no actual Parliamentary Reform took place in the C18th.

Question 3

Why the Parliamentary Reform Movement grew in the late C18th and Early C9th. (part one)

Answer 3

• The most high profile figures in political life e.g. Pitt and Fox, both demonstrated sympathy for Parliamentary Reform. The 1780’s saw a great crystallization of the efforts of prison reformers, antislavery activists and parliamentary reforms.

Question 4

Why the Parliamentary Reform Movement grew in the late C18th and Early C9th. (part two)

Answer 4

• Pitt’s plan for parliamentary reform emerged in May 1783. It is likely he used it as an opportunity to attract reformers to his leadership, and as a way of steering them away from his rival Fox. He proposed checking bribery at elections, disenfranchising corrupt constituencies, and adding more MPs for London. His proposals were defeated by 293 to 149. A second Bill came two years later in April 1785, designed to get rid of 36 rotten boroughs and transfer the 72 seats to fast growing areas (industrial areas). Although Pitt spoke in favour of reform, he did not threaten to resign if the measure was defeated. The House of Commons took this as a sign that he didn’t feel strongly about reform. The Bill was defeatd by 248 votes to 174. Pitt accepted the decision of the House of Commons and never made another attempt to introduce Parliamentary Reform.