How far do you agree that the 1867 reform act was more significant than the 1832 reform act? Flashcards
How far do you agree that the 1867 reform act was more significant than the 1832 reform act?
How far do you agree that the 1867 reform act was more significant than the 1832 reform act?
Factor 1- Size of the electorate, arguments for 1832 and 1867
1832- Facts- the electorate was extended from 366,000 to 650,000, now 18% of the population and with 50% more MPs going for the same positions. Despite the increased representation, there were still problems related to bribery and corruption, and the electorate only represented middle class/ conservative upper classes.
EXPLANATION- This is important but not necessarily significant because it highlighted the remaining issue with the reform act, but didn’t fix them; the problems were then amended in the 1867 act.
1867- Facts- Now, the electorate was 2.46 million people, and included people owning land worth £5 a year instead of £10, and 1/3 of all adult males could vote. In most towns the working class were the majority of voters.
EXPLANATION- Although the 1832 act may have been more important as a starting point for more inclusive elections, the 1867 act was more significant because the changes were greater than in 1832, with the electorate size more than doubling. This was more significant because even after the 1832 act, the political power was still dominated by upper classes, who influenced elections through bribery etc, but the 1867 act began to change these problems by increasing electorate sizes to involve more lower class people in politics to shift the power away from the rich.
Party politics- 1832 and 1867 argument
1832- facts- there was a changing attitude towards party politics, where it became a more refined and professional environment that was less focused on personal gains of MPs, and instead looked at working together to bring about changes for bigger groups of people. 42 new borough constituencies created, 56 disenfranchised and 30 lost 1 of their 2 MPs. Shifting importance towards parties to encourage party politics to match differing demographics across country.
EXPLANATION- This idea was significant in inspiring the new campaigning methods of liberals and tories following the 1867 reform act. Gladstone toured the country to give speeches to the masses and win over the growing electorates support, leading to the liberals win in 1868. This inspired parties to take public interest into account more when they realised that touring campaigns were more effective than Disraeli’s method of printed/written election speeches.
1867- explanation- further reallocation of seats to encourage party politics more equally across the country. 45 seats taken from boroughs with less than 10,000 people, 7 completely disenfranchised, 25 seats went to counties, 20 went to new boroughs, 6 existing boroughs got an additional seat and on seat reserved for university of London.
Effect on different classes 1832 and 1867 arguments
1832- facts - as a result of increased electorates and more impactful party politics, there was increased involvement in politics by middle class people. This is an important factor of change to the system as previously the middle class had political demands, but felt they were ignored in favour of aristocratic nepotism and patronage. Now they had more chance for representation, and to provide their business knowledge in parliament to increase the emphasis of government and businesses working together eg laissez faire policies. Key people in local governments emerged to represent people in industrial areas. In counties, people renting £50 worth of land or renting £10 worth of land a year were included, -Whigs made no attempt to hide the fact they were trying to exclude the lower classes from suffrage
Explanation- small amount of change to some middle class people whilst the lower classes were exempt from voting because of a lack of wealth and assets. Power still remained in the hands of aristocratic landowners, and the new middle class that did gain suffrage didn’t want further reform as they had their own business ventures to attend to and liked the freedom that the current system gave them
Facts- new voting qualifications meant many more middle class voters as well as accommodating many urban skilled workers especially in the north in cities like Liverpool and Manchester. Now 1/3 of adult males voting and so many were lower classes. However, it didn’t eradicate pre reform corruption- large areas of north and midlands were under represented whilst southern counties were over represented. residency clause demanding occupancy for at least one year discriminated against 30% of working class.
line of argument/ judgement
The 1867 act was more significant than the 1832 act, although the 1832 act could be considered more important because it was a starting point for positive, political and widespread change across Britain. However, 1867 was more significant because it made greater changes for more classes of people in British society; 1832 benefited a small number of middle class people by giving them suffrage, whilst 1867 meant that working class people were the majority of workers in most cities. This makes it more significant because it created a changing attitude for politicians regarding lower classes in Britain, and the importance of gaining their support, which has continued to present day and led to the emergence of more working class focused parties.
