Abstract: Electoral reforms in England. Electoral reforms in England in the 19th century
INTRODUCTION........................................................ ........................................................ ..........3
CHAPTER I.
LIBERAL REFORM IN THE UK
1815-30................................................... ........................................................ .................7
1.1 GREAT BRITAIN ON THE EVE OF REFORM...............................................7
1.2 PARLIAMENTARY REFORM OF 1832 IN ENGLAND................................................... ........................................................ ...................11
CHAPTER II. SOCIAL AND POLITICAL MOVEMENTS
IN ENGLAND IN THE 30-40s. XIX century................................................... ........................16
2.1LIBERAL REFORM MOVEMENT
IN THE UK................................................... ................................16
2.2 CHARTISM................................................... ........................................................ ....21
CHAPTER III. ELECTORAL REFORM OF THE SECOND HALF OF THE 19th century. IN GREAT BRITAIN……………………………………………………...23
3.1. ELECTION RIGHT REFORM IN THE 50-60s....................................23
3.2 ELECTORAL REFORM AT THE END OF THE 19TH CENTURY....................................31
CONCLUSION................................................. ...................................................36
LIST OF REFERENCES....................................................................39
INTRODUCTION
By the end of the 80s. XVIII century The picture of Great Britain's economic, domestic political and international situation no longer bore any resemblance to the state of deep crisis caused by the inglorious war with the former North American colonies several years earlier.
The fiscal measures of William Peat the Younger in the field of taxation and customs policy, the reduction of unnecessary government spending, the fight against sinecures and embezzlement, combined with skillfully carried out administrative reforms, were crowned with success. Industry grew and strengthened - there was a huge step forward in the factory system; first of all, metallurgy, mechanical engineering, textile production, and shipbuilding were rapidly developing, and workers' earnings were steadily growing. Trade intensified (a special role was played by the agreement with France in 1786, which was actually based on the principles of free trade), British goods conquered new markets, especially in Asia and America; total exports 1784-92 increased by 70%. The national debt, which in 1783 amounted to 243 million pounds. Art. decreased in 10 years to only 10 million. The country was still ruled by an extremely limited number of aristocratic families, often not distinguished by high business and moral standards, with the obedient support of a parliamentary majority consisting of politically inactive gentry. The largely bourgeois image of Britain, which was rapidly changing with the growth of industry and trade, had surprisingly little effect on the personal composition of the members of the House of Commons. Timid attempts by Pitt the Younger to reform representative government in the mid-80s. encountered mute resistance from parliament, caused open discontent from the king, and Pitt tried not to return to this problem again.
The strength of Pitt's own position depended to a great extent on the royal favor; he can only be considered the first prime minister of modern times with great reservations.
Many British did not greet the revolution in France with hostility, if not favorably. The meeting of the Estates General, the oath in the ballroom, the storming of the Bastille, the proclamation of the National Assembly, later the autumn march to Versailles, etc. - all this did not cause rejection on the other side of the English Channel. This does not mean, however, that the British were impressed by revolutionary principles and slogans. Perhaps only the Whigs, led by their permanent leader and eternal parliamentary opponent Pitt C.D., unequivocally and sincerely welcomed the revolution. Fox (1759-1806). They saw in French events the end of tyranny and unlimited privileges of the upper classes and poverty of the masses, for France was often presented as a country of “papists, black bread and wooden shoes.” Revolutionary societies and associations multiplied in England. For example, already in November 1789, the “London Revolutionary Society” adopted an appeal to the National Assembly, congratulating it on the victory of justice and freedom over absolutism.
In 1791, the “Reform Movement Association” was created in Birmingham, and a year later the “Friends of the People” society was created with similar goals.
All this was perceived by the authorities without enthusiasm. Burke's pamphlet gradually became a manifesto of opponents of any reforms that could undermine the existing order. The majority of parliamentarians, members of the cabinet headed by Pitt, and George III himself, who realized that not only the throne of Louis XVI, but also his own, was under threat, took a position of rejection of the French Revolution. Internal unrest had to be suppressed. The publication of inflammatory articles and pamphlets, as well as unauthorized meetings, were prohibited by royal proclamations and government decisions. The situation was aggravated by the war declared by France on February 1, 1793, which Pitt and the king tried their best to avoid, the former to continue his policy of reconstruction, the latter due to his inherent peacefulness.
The Pitt administration attacked freedom of expression of public opinion, motivated by concerns for the security of the country. At the instigation of George III, supporters of parliamentary reform also began to be classified as “Jacobins” and “open enemies.” Reformist and revolutionary sentiments were no longer distinguished; supporters of “revolutionary” associations were identified with supporters of violence in France. Pitt put an end to this issue, declaring in mid-1793 that no reforms could be carried out and, moreover, one could not even speak out in their defense while the country was at war.
Already by the mid-90s. The negative consequences of the war began to be felt everywhere, the situation was aggravated by the poor harvest of 1795 and the resulting rise in prices. In October of this year, a huge crowd greeted the parliamentarians with whistles, curses and shouts of “Bread!”, “Peace!” and “Down with Pitt!” Elsewhere, George III's crew was showered with stones, but the king was miraculously unhurt. Not without the influence of such excesses, the repressive policy of the authorities intensified, it came to the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act and a series of death sentences against “troublemakers.”
The purpose of this work is an attempt to show the processes within British society in the 18th-19th centuries related to the problems of suffrage.
CHAPTER I. LIBERAL REFORM IN GREAT BRITAIN
In 1815-30
1.1 GREAT BRITAIN ON THE EVE OF REFORM.
The transition to peaceful life after the long Napoleonic wars was far from easy for Great Britain. Inflation, a colossal national debt and rising unemployment, primarily associated with the demobilization of the armed forces, have placed a heavy burden on the country. The situation was not improved by the publication in 1815, in order to ensure the interests of landlords, of the protectionist “corn laws”, which prohibited the import of grain until its price reached 80 shillings, i.e. 4 f. Art. per quart. Thus, a double standard was established - a free market for the lower strata of society, the main consumers of bread, and protective tariffs for landlords. The situation was aggravated by a bad harvest in 1816, and soon the price of a quart of grain rose to 100 shillings. At all agriculture England found itself in a period of protracted crisis, a way out of which was outlined only in the mid-30s.
Many industrialists also expressed dissatisfaction with the “corn laws”, hoping that cheap bread would keep wages low. In general, the position of industrialists varied significantly: while some succeeded in military supplies, others were ruined by the war; in addition, it turned out that devastated Europe was too poor to buy British goods.
Economic turmoil caused a number of protests, mainly from the poorest strata. Back in March 1815, the capital was practically paralyzed by popular unrest for several days. This period was characterized by unprecedented radical agitation, which was fueled by exacerbated class contradictions. To the usual economic demands in such cases, as always in times of crisis, political ones were added - primarily the demands for electoral reform. These trends were especially popular among the quickly politicized representatives of the middle strata.
Newly created opposition newspapers, such as the Independent or the Manchester Guardian, sold in unprecedented numbers, and radical speakers such as F. Burdett, W. Cobbett or G. Hunt quickly gained popularity. A meeting with the participation of the latter on St. Peter's Field near Manchester, which gathered thousands of people on August 16, 1819, was dispersed by troops, with 11 people killed and up to 400 injured: “Peterloo” became synonymous with the arbitrariness of the authorities.
IN next year a conspiracy was uncovered aimed at the physical elimination of members of the cabinet. The “case of Queen Caroline,” the wife of George IV, who had recently ascended the throne, and had once been abandoned by him, did not add popularity to the authorities either; now the king intended to divorce her. The Queen became the banner of many dissatisfied people, and only her sudden death prevented a colossal scandal.
All these difficulties were overcome with great difficulty by the cabinet of Lord Liverpool (1812-27). Gradually improved since the early 20s. The economic situation temporarily reduced the intensity of radical agitation. In addition, there were significant differences between the leaders of the radicals; for example, some preferred to turn to factory workers, others to artisans or small traders; differences between the regions of the country also affected them. Nevertheless, in general, the post-war radical movement still gained a mass base that it had not had before.
About the beginning of the 19th century. we can speak of a period of transformation of the “working poor” into a semblance of a more modern working class. However, at the head of the protest movements were, as a rule, representatives of the middle or even upper strata of society, the so-called “gentlemen reformers”, who realized the need for changes, especially electoral reform. Thus, already in 1817, up to 700 petitions with this requirement were submitted.
The above-mentioned shortcomings of the English political system have not undergone any changes, while the rapidly changing structure of society has made them even more relevant. At the same time, despite the Tories maintaining power, in the 20s. There is no longer any need to talk about the former unity of the ruling party; in its ranks there were serious disagreements between supporters of certain reforms, such as George Canning, Robert Peel or William Gaskisson, and the “conservatives of the conservatives” led by the Duke of Wellington. At the same time, Canning, who headed the British Foreign Office in 1822, took important steps to reform it, becoming, in a well-known manner, the founder of modern English diplomacy in general. Robert Peel, as Minister of the Interior, did a lot to modernize the system of criminal investigation and punishment, to give the police a more advanced appearance. Trade Minister William Gaskisson reduced customs duties, promoted the further introduction of free trade principles, and questioned the Navigation Acts.
After Canning's short tenure as head of government, interrupted by his sudden death in August 1827, the cabinet was headed by Lord Wellington, who did not show anything special, with the exception of the repeal in 1828 of the acts adopted under Charles II that prohibited Catholics from being in the public service or be elected to parliament. The rights of dissenters were thereby significantly expanded.
During the same period, the Whig party was on the rise - the elections of 1830 brought them an additional 130 seats in the House of Commons, and soon their leader Charles Gray headed the cabinet. For the first time since 1784, the Whigs returned to power. Proposals were immediately put forward to redistribute electoral districts from “rotten towns” in favor of new industrial cities and to change the electoral mechanism. In relation to this time, we can also talk about changes in the process of forming a two-party system in the country. Parties began to play a major role in the approval or rejection of certain laws in parliament, their influence on the identification of candidates, the nature and results of the election campaign increased, and, finally, thanks to the parties, not only the electorate, but also wider sections of society were politicized, their inclusion to new ideas, principles and programs. All this significantly influenced the process of preparing the electoral reform. It was under the sign of the struggle for these changes that the 30s began. For the first time in British history, the workers and middle classes acted together in an extra-parliamentary struggle to change representative power.
And yet, the first head of the cabinet who unequivocally spoke out in defense of such changes was Charles Gray. True, one should not overestimate the reformist fervor of the new prime minister and his followers; It is unlikely that Gray - “an aristocrat of aristocrats” - and his cabinet, composed almost entirely of lords, attempted a radical change in the status quo. The prime minister was a supporter of limited reforms, nothing more. As before, there was no talk, for example, of admitting representatives of the lower strata or women to the ranks of voters. Provided that the significant role of the monarch in the political system was preserved, the negative attitude of George IV, and after him William IV, to serious changes was of no small importance.
The mood of politically active circles of society gradually changed in a different direction. The next wave of radical sentiments was again associated with economic reasons - the financial crisis of 1825-26. and crop failures of 1828-31. All this gave rise to a new surge of protests, aimed mainly at demanding electoral reform. This movement was led by the Birmingham banker T. Atwood, who founded the Birmingham Political Union in 1830. He set the goal of uniting the middle strata and achieving, with the participation of even part of the proletariat, the main goal - strengthening the position of representatives of industrial capital. Atwood emphasized the common interests of entrepreneurs and employees: in his own words, the prosperity of the owners had a beneficial effect on the workers and, on the contrary, their difficulties quickly brought the latter into distress. Ensuring their interests was seen in the election of entrepreneurs to parliament.
Conclusion: Atwood’s Union quickly gained popularity, its rallies attracted 50-100 thousand participants. The Northern Political Union in Newcastle and the National Political Union in London were also created. The National Union of Working Classes, formed there in 1831, did not become widespread due to its radicalism, but was a direct predecessor of the Chartists. In general, the working people showed undoubted support for the idea of the Reform Bill. This had an impact on the House of Commons, which eventually supported a similar bill in September 1831. And although the upper house then thwarted the passage of the law, victory for the reform cause was just around the corner .
1.2 PARLIAMENTARY REFORM OF 1832 IN ENGLAND.
The movement for parliamentary reform in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland gained momentum in the late 1920s. XIX century new impulse. In Russian historiography (for example, the works of T.S. Solovyova) 1828-32. in England are considered as a “constitutional revolution”. Fermentation began in Ireland. The Irish Catholic Association, led by Daniel O'Connell and Richard Sheil, launched a widespread campaign for the emancipation of Catholics - for equality of constitutional rights between Catholics and Protestants. The voting limit in Ireland was 40 shillings. gave the right to a Catholic to participate in elections, but to become a member of parliament, he was required to take an oath in writing supreme power, from which the Protestants were spared. Inequality manifested itself in many aspects of public life, in the administration of court cases, and in the army. Thus, in 1828, 2,023 Protestants and only 39 Catholics conducted legal cases. The mass movement for Catholic emancipation was the first organized movement in Ireland in the general struggle for constitutional rights. The association received popular support: every Catholic brought one penny a month to the doors of churches.
In January 1828, the Duke, Viscount Arthur Wellesley of Wellington became Prime Minister of Great Britain - national hero, who defeated Napoleon in the Battle of the Allied Forces at Waterloo and received the popular name of the “Iron Duke”. In parliament and the cabinet of ministers, he represented the group of the most conservative Tories. However, the intensity of the speeches of Irish Catholics, as well as the extensive political experience of serving in Ireland in leading positions of the English administration, prompted him that British parliamentarians should make concessions. Wellington relied on the support of one of the Tory leaders, Robert Peel, whom he brought into his administration, given his career successes. Peel had recently (1827) resigned as Home Secretary and for six years had been second in command to the Viceroy of Ireland. Wellington and Peel persuaded King George IV to accept the Catholic demands. At this time, O'Connell won the election and received a seat in parliament.
The Catholic Emancipation Bill was drafted by Peel in March 1829. Wellington used all his influence to ensure that the bill passed through the House of Lords and became law in April 1828. However, Peel managed to limit the effect of this law, which at the same time deprived the Irish people of the right to vote. freeholders who enjoyed a qualification of 40 shillings. Now the qualification has been raised to 10 pounds. Art. Thus, the electorate decreased from 230 thousand people to 14 thousand.
Meanwhile, the victory of the Irish Catholics caused a great resonance in England and influenced the growth of activity of various sections of the population.
During the economic crisis that gripped the country in 1829-30. There was a wave of strikes and lockouts. Armed groups of workers appeared and there were rumors that they were undergoing military training. Peaks were made in factories. The agrarian movement broke out again in Ireland. In 1832 alone, 9,000 agrarian “crimes” were recorded. These included arson and destruction of livestock, attacks on individuals and murder. In the immediate vicinity of the capital, in southern and south-eastern England, unrest among agricultural workers began. The spinners in 1829 managed to create the Grand National Union of the United Kingdom, which included workers in this industry not only in England and Scotland, but also in Ireland. The ideas of the utopian socialist Robert Owen became especially popular among workers.
Since 1829, the movement for parliamentary reform began to develop rapidly. It is characteristic that in previous years (from 1824 to 1829) the question of parliamentary reform was practically not raised, and during this time not a single petition on this issue was submitted to parliament. The most ardent champion of reform, Lord John Russell, in his speech delivered in the House of Commons on May 3, 1827, noted that many were treating possible reform with great indifference. But very soon this inaction gave way to an explosion of people’s energy.
At crowded rallies, radical speakers persistently repeated that all the country’s disasters stem from the criminal expenditure of public funds: there was a practice of bribing parliamentarians, the distribution of pensions to parliamentarians was not controlled by anyone, expensive sinecures were created as an indirect bribe, the state debt was unsustainable, while completely unnecessary institutions to act. Due to the lack of control, which could only be established through effective representation of the people, all these abuses reached appalling proportions. Parliament did not pay attention to the passionate speeches of the speakers, to the mood in broad sections of the population. At numerous rallies, the idea was expressed, increasingly clear to the masses, that only a government that would be elected by the people themselves could act in the true interests of the people.
In his notes, which provide invaluable evidence of the time of struggle in England for the first parliamentary reform, Francis Place wrote: “The shameful corruption of parliament, which had already manifested itself in 1793, intensified even more in 1831, and the people had to join the fight against the unworthy power and its manifestations... Bribery, bribery, perjury, widespread crime and lowering of the moral level, which the government created, encouraged and supported throughout the country, constituted an evil much more terrible than all other disasters, no matter how great they were - an evil that our posterity will hardly believe.” Describing the events of that time, Place said: “Everyone recognized the existence of extreme and widespread poverty, and the debate in Parliament only reinforced this belief and increased the anxiety in society. If we also add to this the impression made by noisy speakers outside the walls of parliament, then all this was more than enough to imagine, in the eyes of people accustomed to taking everything on faith, a country that stood not only on the edge, but already at the very bottom of the abyss.” The consequence of all these sentiments was a general and firmly rooted conviction that the country was on the eve of an important revolution.
Changes in the mood of the working masses were evidenced by the addresses received in the name of the new king, William IV, who ascended the throne on July 26, 1830, after the death of George IV. Addresses and messages on the occasion of the accession of William IV contained demands for radical reforms. The new king responded by postponing the parliamentary sessions on July 23, 1830, and then dissolving it altogether.
While everyone's attention was focused on the elections, an event occurred that gave the parliamentary struggle even greater urgency: a revolution took place in France. In July 1830, the government of this country was overthrown, the king was expelled from the country. Supporters of reform in England considered this revolution a happy omen. The Whig bill introduced some significant changes to the English parliamentary system. According to the bill, most of the “rotten” and “pocket” towns were liquidated. Some small constituencies, which previously sent two deputies to parliament, retained the right to only one seat. A total of 143 parliamentary seats were vacant. Of these, 13 seats were allocated to Scotland and Ireland, and the remaining 130 seats were divided equally between urban and rural constituencies. In total, 65 seats were given to cities that grew up during the industrial revolution and were not previously represented in parliament. This meant that the landowning nobility was deprived of its monopoly in political life. The property qualification in the counties increased from £2. up to 10, and sometimes up to 50 pounds sterling. In cities, a ten-pound qualification was established.
Thus, a serious concession was made to the industrial bourgeoisie, whose representatives now received political rights.
The Reform Bill somewhat expanded the number of voters to include sections of the urban and rural bourgeoisie. The compromise of 1688, which at that time affected only the top of the financial and commercial bourgeoisie, was now extended to the industrial bourgeoisie. She came to power, but not through revolutionary means, but as a result of a new compromise with landowners. Therefore, feudal remnants in the political system of England were not swept away. The reform did not affect the House of Lords. The landed aristocracy still held ministerial posts and leading positions in the state apparatus, army and navy.
The Tories tried to maintain their influence in Parliament. The bill passed with a majority of one vote, and when the details of the bill were discussed in the committee, the government remained in the minority. Then the government dissolved the chamber and called new elections. Resistance from the Tory reaction caused an explosion of discontent in the country.
In the newly elected Parliament, the Whigs gained a strong majority of 136 votes, and the bill passed the House of Commons with relative ease. But the House of Lords in the fall of 1831 rejected the bill almost without discussion. It seemed that, within the framework of the current constitution, the bill was doomed to failure. There was a threat of public discontent.
When the reform bill was introduced into the House of Commons for the third time and passed by it, the lords resorted to a maneuver: they accepted it with a majority of nine votes, but then, when discussed by article, they actually rejected all reforms. Prime Minister Gray resigned in response to this. Given the situation in the country, King William IV was forced to again entrust Gray with forming a cabinet. To save the reform bill, Gray demanded from the king the right to appoint as many new lords as would be sufficient to ensure a majority for the reform supporters. The king gave his consent, and the lords capitulated to this threat. The Upper House approved the bill, and on June 7, 1832 it was signed by the king, i.e. became law.
The industrial bourgeoisie achieved success and gained open access to political power. Broad sections of the English people who took the most active part in the struggle for parliamentary reform - these were primarily residents of cities and rural areas - did not receive voting rights. The Whigs and radicals who led the movement took advantage of the fruits of the victory.
Conclusion: English historians call the parliamentary reform of 1832 “great”. And indeed, its significance is great, for it marked the beginning of the creation of modern civil society in Great Britain, the process of which in the 19th century. was marked by such milestones as the parliamentary reforms of 1832, 1867, 1884-85, 1888. The reform of 1832 was the first difficult step in this democratic movement.
CHAPTER II. SOCIAL AND POLITICAL MOVEMENTS IN ENGLAND IN THE 30-40s. XIX century
2.1 LIBERAL REFORM MOVEMENT IN GREAT BRITAIN.
The reform of 1832 was the end of one and the beginning of a new period in the history of the country, which lasted until the middle of the century. Society greeted her with great enthusiasm. The bourgeoisie, artisans, workers and farmers expected further changes. They were associated with hopes for improving the economic situation, easing the tax burden and eliminating abuses. Elections to the new parliament in the fall of 1832 took place in an atmosphere of general upsurge. The new composition of the House of Commons reflected the prevailing expectation in society of further changes. The Whigs, who carried out changes in the system of representation and promised to solve the most important problems of society, won a majority of seats in the House. The role of the radicals has changed in the new parliament. Together with Irish MPs, Dissenters and Independents, they formed a group of 190 people. The Conservatives (as the Tories are now increasingly called) suffered a crushing defeat in the elections and found themselves in the minority in the House.
The reform did not change the procedure for preparing and considering bills that had developed over centuries, but it brought significant changes to political life. As a result of the reduction in the representation of “pocket” towns, the balance of power between both houses and the crown changed due to the strengthening of the role of the House of Commons. The volume of its activities has increased: sessions are becoming longer, work in parliament is becoming more intense. The expansion of the electorate and the attention with which voters followed the speeches of the deputies were a serious incentive to intensify the activities of members of the lower house. The number of the passive group, the so-called “back benchers,” decreased over time. By the middle of the century, the number of independent deputies had also decreased significantly, which reflected the further demarcation of political forces in the country and in parliament.
The reform contributed to the formation of a two-party system. If by the beginning of the 30s. The Tories and Whigs were rather parliamentary groupings in nature, but by the middle of the century their transformation into parties of conservatives and liberals became more and more noticeable. They were not parties in the modern sense of the word, however, both conservatives and liberals throughout the 30s and 40s. made significant progress in developing party ideology, organizational structures, forms and methods of activity in the election process.
The first post-reform cabinet consisted of Whigs. But in the fall of 1834, contrary to established tradition, the king instructed Robert Peel, a representative of the conservative camp, to form the government. Peel's appointment was the last intervention in the history of the country by the British crown in the political life of Parliament. The new elections that followed the resignation of Lord Melbourne increased the representation of conservatives in the House of Commons, but did not affect the balance of power in it. Conservatives were still in the minority. R. Peel's government met with stiff opposition from Whigs, radicals and Irish deputies who united against the conservatives. The cabinet was unable to pass a single decision through the chamber, and in April 1835 Peel was forced to resign.
The short existence of Peel's first cabinet had important consequences for the political life of the country, accelerating the formation of the Conservative and Liberal parties of the Victorian period. By the king's decision, Peel became not only the head of the cabinet, but also the parliamentary leader of the Conservatives. Thus, the most important issue for them at this stage was resolved.
Conservatives were united by the idea of the inviolability of constitutional foundations - the crown, the House of Lords and the House of Commons, union with Ireland and the colonial empire. They shared the same attitude towards reforms. By 1832, three main branches of conservatives had been identified. The first included the so-called “ultra”. These were irreconcilable opponents of any changes in the constitution; not resigning themselves to the adoption of certain reforms, they insisted on their abolition. The second group - the “angry” - unlike the “ultra”, considered the approved bills as a fait accompli and no longer opposed them. The third is the “Pilites”, supporters of Peel. They shared his conviction that the overdue reforms should be carried out, but they should be carried out by conservatives, not radicals. Representatives of all three groups claimed leadership in the conservative camp. Thanks to the appointment of the king, the question of the leader was resolved in favor of Peel, thereby winning the direction of “reasonable” conservatism, which recognized the need for change in society. These principles were proclaimed by Peel during the elections of 1835 in an address to the voters of his constituency, published in the pages of leading newspapers and which went down in history as the “Tamworth Manifesto”. For the first time in the history of the country, the leader of the party and the head of government addressed the population of the country through the press, explaining his position and publishing a program of action. This helped the Conservatives significantly increase the number of seats in the House of Commons, although they remained in the minority.
Peel's resignation made it clear that the Conservatives could only come to power by winning a majority of seats in the House of Commons. Subsequently, all of Peel’s efforts were subordinated to solving this problem.
The short existence of Peel's cabinet provided an incentive for the creation of conservative organizations in the province. By 1836, a network of associations, societies and clubs had been established throughout the country. They held regular meetings and dinners and collected funds by subscription. Each society had a secretary and treasurer. The main focus of their activities was the preparation and conduct of elections. They selected candidates, provided them with financial support, and participated in voter registration. According to the reform of 1832, voters were required to annually enter their name into the electoral lists, paying a certain amount, which created the ground for abuse and buying of votes. Conservatives, before their political opponents, appreciated the “opportunities” that registration provided, and actively participated in it every year. Following them, the Whigs and Radicals began to do the same.
The conservative tactics were successful. By 1841, they managed to win back almost all of their supporters who had left them during the struggle for the reform of 1832. Their main support remained the agricultural counties, that part of the landowners that was less involved in the process of industrial production or in other non-agricultural enterprises in contrast with the Whig landowners. The “old ones” were on their side commercial structures interested in maintaining protectionist policies. In addition, Peel managed to overcome the prejudiced attitude towards him of the young Queen Victoria, whose political adviser and leader in the first years of her reign was Lord Melbourne. Peel failed to significantly expand the social base, nevertheless, each election led to a gradual increase in the number of Conservative deputies - from 150 in 1832 to 313 in 1837. In the spring of 1841, the resignation of the government was followed by elections in which the Conservatives received the majority of seats House of Commons. The government was again headed by Pil.
The victory of the Conservatives meant the party's coming to power in the modern sense of the word, since it was the result of a long and focused political campaign that the Conservatives waged in society. For the first time, a cabinet was formed that relied on the majority of its party in the House of Commons, which it achieved in the elections, managing to attract the electorate to its side. The Conservatives won thanks to the leadership of the talented politician and organizer Robert Peel. At the same time, the roots of the Conservatives' victory lie in disappointment with the policies of the Melbourne cabinet, in the economic crises that shook the country during these years, and in the social tension of those years. Farmers, frightened by the scale of the activities of the Anti-Corn Law League and the Chartist movement, unconditionally sided with the Conservatives and supported them in the elections. Peel's cabinet policy was based on the same principles as during his opposition to the Whig government. He was forced to carry out a number of reforms, primarily of an economic nature. Gradually reducing customs tariffs, conservatives in 1846 moved to repeal the “Corn Laws.” But the course pursued by Peel caused sharp disagreements in society, the unification turned out to be fragile, and in 1846 the Conservative Party split.
The period from the mid-20s to the end of the 40s. in the history of Great Britain was distinguished by an unprecedented social upsurge and mass movements. Diverse in their goals, objectives, composition of participants and scope, they also had some common features. The emergence of this or that idea led to the creation of societies or associations with a single center that led the activities for its implementation. The campaign used the democratic rights of citizens - freedom of the press, meetings, rallies, processions and petitions to parliament. The societies published newspapers, pamphlets, organized lectures (often using paid speakers), and held rallies. A special role was given to appealing to the legislature, parliament, and the king through petitions, the collection of signatures for which also became an important part of the campaign. When the idea found significant support in society, the associations sent their deputies to parliament, where they used every opportunity to defend the interests of the movement. The largest movements that influenced the course of development of the country were: the struggle for the reform of parliament, for the abolition of slavery in British colonies, for the transition to free trade (free trade), the struggle of dissenters for their social rights, for factory legislation, Chartism, the cooperative movement.
Along with the struggle for parliamentary reform, the abolitionist movement played an important role in the formation of civil society in Great Britain. Great Britain, the largest colonial power, actively used slave labor on plantations in its possessions and occupied a leading place among countries involved in the slave trade. And it was in it that the most powerful abolitionist movement was born and achieved success. By the beginning of the 30s. Abolitionists, using the tactic of putting pressure on the government with petitions, concentrated their propaganda within the walls of parliament and achieved success quite quickly. Thus, on May 30, 1832, a parliamentary committee was created to study the situation of slaves.
After 1832, when West Indian planters lost a significant proportion of their seats in Parliament, the inevitability of emancipation became obvious. The planters and the trade, financial and industrial circles associated with them could not resist the onslaught of the abolitionists; the only question was how to resolve this problem. The corresponding bill was adopted in the summer of 1833. Under its terms, the owners were obliged to provide freedom to the slaves, who, however, had to undergo the so-called “apprenticeship” period and during this period continue to work for their masters. Children under six years of age at the time the law was approved were declared free from the moment it came into force. The planters received compensation of 20 million pounds sterling, which was mainly used to pay their debts to English creditors. In 1838, the “apprenticeship” system was also abolished; slavery in the English colonies was thus finally abolished.
Conclusion: The adoption of this law marked the victory of a powerful social movement that brought to the fore the ideas of humanism, individual rights and freedom. However, the activities of the abolitionists did not stop; they created new committees that set the task of abolishing slavery and the slave trade throughout the world.
2.2 CHARTISM.
Chartism became the largest independent popular movement these years not only in Great Britain, but throughout Europe. The main slogan of the Chartists was the demand for radical parliamentary reform, which would include universal suffrage, secret ballot, annual elections to parliament, equal electoral districts, payment for the activities of members of parliament and the abolition of property qualifications for deputies. These demands were set out in the “people's charter” (charter). In their struggle for the charter, the Chartists acted in two directions. The first was the preparation of petitions, collecting signatures for them and submitting them to parliament. A total of three petitions were sent to parliament: in 1839, 1842 and 1848. The collection of signatures for them took place everywhere - at rallies, factories, workhouses - and turned into an important political protest campaign. The second direction was the holding of rallies, processions, demonstrations, strikes and the creation of various societies.
The Chartists saw the cause of their disasters in the omnipotence of landowners and industrialists, which was enshrined in legislation. They hoped that the charter, representing the opinion of the majority of the people, would force the ruling classes to make concessions and introduce reform. People's representatives were expected to establish control over legislation, adopt acts that would improve life, reduce the tax burden and abolish the Poor Law. The question of ways to put pressure on the government was repeatedly on the agenda of the Chartists. However, supporters of “physical” pressure, i.e. open display with weapons were in the minority. As a rule, supporters of “moral” influence on parliament won. Nevertheless, conspiracies arose and open confrontation with the authorities, for example in Newport, Sheffield, Bradford, Dewsbury, which were brutally suppressed.
The movement itself was neither united nor homogeneous. Various segments of the population poured into it: these included some of the most skilled artisans (printers, tailors, cabinetmakers), and small shopkeepers, and factory workers, as a rule, from the textile regions of the country; as well as home workers - handloom weavers, knitters, nail makers, etc. The broad social composition reflected the economic changes taking place in the country, when, along with industrial production, handicraft production was still highly developed, and most factories employed up to 100 workers. At the same time, leadership, both national and local, rarely found itself in the hands of representatives of the working class. At the head of the Chartists one could find landowners, doctors, traders, artisans, small industrialists, teachers and journalists. Almost simultaneously, Chartism arose in the old regions where dispersed manufacturing was widespread, and in the new developing centers of industrial production, and in economically backward areas. National organizations were established in Scotland, England and Wales. They had their own funds, their members paid regular contributions. The birth centers of the Chartist movement were London, Birmingham and Leeds, where the largest organizations and their own press were created.
The Chartists failed to achieve immediate implementation of their demands. Nevertheless, the movement did not pass without a trace. Its most important result was a change in the social orientation of the policies of the ruling classes. The scale of the protests and the complaints of the Chartists played a role in the fact that the situation of workers became an important topic in the pages of the press. In the 40s, a number of laws were adopted concerning medical care of the population and the sanitary condition of cities, and factory legislation was expanded. The persistent demand for radical parliamentary reform led to a gradual change in the position of leading liberal politicians on this issue.
Conclusion: The beginning of Great Britain's movement along the path of reforms to a modern democratic society began in the 30s and 40s. And at this time, legal forms of expression of discontent, protest, and demands for further transformation of society are strengthened. The rights of citizens to convene meetings and to petition parliament and the king were used. The press, which won its right to freedom of speech, also played an important role in the formation of public opinion. The opportunity to openly express one's demands, complaints and dissatisfaction, both in the press and participation in movements, greatly contributed to the relief of social tension.
CHAPTER III. ELECTORAL REFORM IN THE SECOND HALF
XIX century IN THE UK.
3.1 ELECTION RIGHT REFORM IN THE 50-60s.
In the 50-60s. England occupied a unique position, being the center, the “heart” of the world economy. The London Industrial Exhibition of 1851 amazed contemporaries with the achievements of British industry. A monopoly on the world market, in maritime shipping, finance, and the possession of a colonial empire contributed to the acceleration of the rate of capital accumulation and the growth of national wealth. National income from the early 50s to the end of the 70s, having increased by almost a third, reached 1 billion pounds sterling, which affected the growth of household incomes.
A very important indicator of the change in the social picture was the reduction in the number of crimes committed and the number of beggars and poor people who received assistance. The social structure of society underwent significant changes. The formation of classes in a new, capitalist society was accompanied by a further increase in the urban population, which exceeded the rural population. Characteristic feature The socio-political life of Great Britain in these years saw a further deepening of the trend of weakening positions of landlordism, increasing activity of the middle classes, intellectuals and the emergence of the so-called “labor aristocracy”.
The rise of the Chartist movement, the growth of industry and national wealth and, finally, the exhibition of 1851 played an important role in changing society's attitude towards workers, and primarily towards the group of highly skilled workers and craftsmen, i.e. a “labor aristocracy” whose income and lifestyle were comparable to that of the middle class. Note that over time the share of the “labor aristocracy” increased.
Reforms of the late 40s concerning the sanitary condition of cities and medical care in the 50s and 60s. bore fruit. The appearance of cities changed, water pipelines and sewerage systems were installed. Years of economic prosperity and relative social stability consolidated the emerging Victorian morals, traditions, and way of life.
And these changes, in turn, determined both the evolution of the “political elite” towards “democratization” and the nature of further reforms.
In 1858, the property qualification for deputies was abolished. And the rights and their privileges - personal inviolability and freedom of speech within the walls of parliament - have existed since the 19th century. were practically not violated. An important sign of the times was the gradual abolition of veiled religious qualifications. In 1866, a new text of the oath opened up access to parliament for people of non-Christian faiths. From that time on, restrictions on passive suffrage were maintained, aimed at ensuring that only those who had free time, who had not tarnished their honor and who were not bankrupt, were elected.
In the second half of the 19th century. The process of organizational reorganization of the liberal and conservative parties is intensifying, which resulted in giving the political organizations of the Whigs and Tories the character of modern political parties. Simultaneously with purely organizational design, there was a process of modification of their social base. And although it did not finally end by the end of the 19th century, it is not difficult to identify emerging trends in the orientation of the English electorate, which were reflected in the positions of liberals and conservatives in the country’s political arena.
The organizational structure of the liberal and conservative parties took shape in the 60s and 70s. XIX century, when their central bodies were created. For the Conservatives, these were the Federation of Local Conservative Associations - the National Union of Conservatives and the Constitutional Associations. Their objectives were for these associations, firstly, to represent the central organizations of the Conservative Party and, secondly, to be the official means of communication between party members, local agents and associations throughout the country. The organizational structure of the Liberal Party developed more slowly and took shape by 1877.
Second half of the 19th century. marked in England by significant successes in the democratization of the representative body of government - the House of Commons of the English Parliament. The expansion of the voting rights of the British during the parliamentary reforms of 1867 and 1884 resulted in the involvement of more and more new strata of society in the political life of the country - the middle, petty-bourgeois classes and workers. And this, in turn, could not but affect the social composition of the two leading political parties - liberal and conservative.
As a result of the parliamentary reform of 1832, the petty and partly middle bourgeoisie, as well as the working class, did not receive voting rights. The unresolved nature of this problem constantly aggravated the political situation in the country. At the end of the 50s. the need to reform the electoral system became obvious to many political figures of both liberal and conservative persuasions. Thus, in 1859, the conservative government of Derby-Disraeli attempted to introduce a project of parliamentary reform, which was rather limited, for discussion in parliament. However, the bill was rejected by liberals and radicals who did not want to give the initiative for parliamentary reform to the Tories.
The situation in the first half of the 60s. was characterized by a growing movement of the working class and the petty and middle bourgeois strata, the main demand of which was the reform of suffrage.
With the death in 1865 of Lord Palmerston, the main opponent of parliamentary reform, the movement for its implementation acquired new dimensions. The liberals, led by Lord Russell, who were in power, could not help but take into account the mood in society. In 1866, they submitted a bill to parliament, according to which 400 thousand people received the right to vote. Despite its obvious moderation, the bill met resistance from not only conservatives, but also some right-wing liberals.
However, far-sighted politicians from the Tory party also understood the need for reform. Already in the early 60s. B. Disraeli formulated a number of provisions that, in his opinion, should have been taken into account when carrying out the reform, in particular the principles of redistribution of parliamentary seats and reducing the influence of counties in the electoral system. At the same time, he emphasized the importance of respecting the interests of the aristocracy.
The parliamentary reform of 1867 carried out by the Conservative government of Derby-Disraeli marked a new stage in the attitude of the ruling political parties of Great Britain towards voters, towards the issue of expanding their social base. The increase in the number of voters after the reform of 1867, including from the working masses, required political parties to develop new strategy and tactics in relations with the electorate. The old program guidelines, methods of election work, and organizational structures of the conservative and liberal parties turned out to be of little use for solving new problems that emerged as a result of qualitative and quantitative changes among the electorate. Liberals and conservatives had to determine their attitude towards new categories of voters and the social problems that worried them, reflect it in program documents, reorganize party organizations and master new forms of work aimed at the mass voter.
The liberals' social reform policy is associated with the name of the outstanding English politician William Gladstone. Gladstone and liberalism - these two concepts are connected in the political history of Great Britain in the second half of the 19th century. together. Gladstone, or the “Grand Old Man,” as his contemporaries called him, who led the liberal party during the last 30 years of the 19th century, made a significant contribution to the development of liberal concepts and their implementation in the practice of political life in England. Gladstone's path to the post of leader of the Liberal Party and to his first premiership (1868) was difficult. He was born in 1809 in Liverpool into the family of a wealthy merchant and owner of large plantations in the West Indies. He received his education at the aristocratic educational institutions of Eton and Oxford. Already in his youth, Gladstone differed from his peers by his increased interest in politics, science and literature, and deep religiosity. His love for the classics and theological teachings did not leave him throughout his life. But along with religious interests and everyday practicality, young Gladstone also showed great business abilities and oratorical talent, which made one suspect him of being an extraordinary parliamentary figure. In 1832, at the age of 22, he was first elected to parliament as a candidate from the Tory party, and already in 1834 he became part of the Conservative government of R. Peel. Gladstone did not disgrace the Tory banner: he approved the state of siege in Ireland, defended the institution of slavery, fought against the abolition of grain duties and the introduction of secret voting in elections. In 1838, he published a treatise in defense of the state church and finally secured his reputation as a zealous guardian of the foundations.
Since the early 50s. Political rivalry begins between W. Gladstone and B. Disraeli. Still a member of the Tory party, Gladstone opposed the budget of the Dorian cabinet (1852), of which his political rival was minister of finance. This was the first duel between them. Gladstone won. The Tory government was defeated, and Gladstone entered the coalition cabinet of Whigs and Peelites (supporters of R. Peel) as Chancellor of the Exchequer (1852). As Minister of Finance, he immediately attracted the attention of political and business circles in England. The first budget he introduced (April 1853) made an impression with its decisive focus on free trade. With the fall of Lord Aberdeen's cabinet he entered the new cabinet of Lord Palmerston, but very soon left it. Gladstone refused to join Lord Derby's Conservative government (1858), although Disraeli attempted to persuade him to rejoin the Tories.
In 1859, it finally became clear that Gladstone was moving to new political positions, since he was part of the second cabinet of Lord Palmerston, which was quite Whig in composition. The break with the Tory party becomes final. In the new government, Gladstone received the post of Minister of Finance, dealing with issues of streamlining the English tax system, revising tariffs, and largely contributed to the conclusion of a trade agreement with France. For his transition to the liberal ranks, Gladstone lost the support of the voters of the Oxford district and during the parliamentary elections of 1865 he entered parliament thanks to his election from the South Lancashire constituency. After the death of Lord Palmerston in 1865, Gladstone became leader of the Liberals in the House of Commons and again Chancellor of the Exchequer in Lord Russell's cabinet. In 1866, he introduced a bill for the reform of suffrage into parliament, which was defeated by the conservatives, and the liberals resigned, giving up the reins of government to the latter. They were responsible for the adoption of the second parliamentary reform in England (1867). As leader of the opposition, Gladstone was instrumental in changing the nature of the law by introducing liberal amendments to it. After the fall of B. Disraeli's cabinet in 1868, representatives of all political trends in the Liberal Party (Whigs, Peelites, Radicals) gave preference to W. Gladstone, and he became the head of the Liberal government (1868-74).
Thus, Gladstone's political path into the ranks of the liberal party and to the pinnacle of political triumph - the premiership - was difficult, accompanied by a change in political orientation and supporters. In the person of the Conservatives, he acquired serious opponents who had not forgotten his political betrayal of their party and did not forgive him for any, even the slightest, mistakes in the domestic and foreign political life of England.
Since the 60s XIX century W. Gladstone consistently advocated the implementation of a policy of social liberalism. He believed that social policy was central to the Liberal Party and that Liberals could compete successfully with Conservatives only by relying on mass national support. Liberal government 1868-74 included in political history England as “reformist”. The work of Gladstone's first cabinet can be seen as the beginning of a new era of concerted action between political parties and the masses throughout the country. Among the most significant legislative activities of the Liberals during the period under review are the law on the separation of the state church in Ireland, the Irish Land Law of 1870, the school reform of 1870, which provided children from working-class backgrounds with the opportunity to receive a primary education, the Civil Service Act of 1870, military reform in 1871, the introduction of secret voting in 1872, the law on the legalization of trade unions in 1871, the law on universities in 1873.
As a result of early parliamentary elections in February 1874, the liberals were defeated. The disappointment of the majority of the British with the internal political measures of the liberals was one of the main reasons that determined their defeat in the elections. In fact, Gladstone's government was unable to maintain moderate positions that would satisfy both radical and conservative circles of English society. In 1873, when the main points of the Liberals' election program were completed, they were unable to offer voters anything meaningful. The Whig periodical Edinburgh Review noted that “the Liberal party has been weakened by the completeness of its achievements,” and Queen Victoria observed in February 1874 that “most Liberals are asking with trepidation, “What next?” . On the eve of the parliamentary elections, they did not put forward a constructive program that could attract the attention of various sections of English society. This was evidenced, for example, by the text of W. Gladstone's manifesto to his voters in Greenwich. Russian Ambassador F.I. Brunnov, who was in London at the time, wrote about the “uncertainty” and “uncertainty” of the liberal leader himself. “In his speech there was not a trace of the authority that one would expect from a minister who headed parliament and who would feel the trust of the entire huge political party,” the ambassador concluded.
The presence of several rival factions in the liberal party itself played an important role in the resignation of the liberal government. When analyzing the results of the 1874 elections, one cannot fail to take into account the fact that the Tories, led by B. Disraeli, used the opposition period to gather forces. The Conservative party machine began work to attract new voters from the middle and petty bourgeois strata of society to its camp. The contrast between the liberal party, split into various factions, and the united, monolithic conservative party, was a serious factor in determining the sympathies of the British. It must also be borne in mind that, despite the adoption by the Liberals of a number of laws relating to the problems of Ireland, the Irish question was far from its final solution. Therefore, during the elections of 1874, Irish nationalists acted as a separate bloc, which, in turn, weakened the position of the liberals.
In the 60-70s. XIX century The Conservative Party also began to revise its programs and themes of work with voters. And this was associated with the name of B. Disraeli.
After Palmerston's death, B. Disraeli spoke out at the 1866 session as an opponent of the reform bill proposed by the new Russell-Gladston ministry. In the government of Lord Derby (July 1866), he again occupied the post of Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was he who was responsible for the final version of the parliamentary reform carried out by the Conservatives in 1867. The amazing talent and indomitable perseverance with which he carried out this legislation gave him his greatest political triumph and paved the way for the last stage of power that he had yet to achieve. When Lord Derby resigned as Prime Minister in February 1868, Disraeli succeeded him in this position. After the death of Lord Derby in 1869, he finally became the head of the Conservative Party. The years of his second premiership (1874-80) went down in British history as a period of strengthening its international prestige and expanding its colonial possessions. Regarding social reforms, the Disraeli government in the sessions of 1874-1876. passed a law allowing workers to picket, a law to improve living conditions working class, new shipping law, etc. For his services, B. Disraeli was awarded the title of Lord Beaconsfield by Queen Victoria. B. Disraeli died on April 19, 1881.
The actions of the Conservatives in carrying out parliamentary reform in 1867 had far-reaching consequences for the party in a number of ways. Its leadership did not simply accept the participation of the lower classes in political life and their numerical dominance among the electorate. It came to the understanding that the future of the party is unthinkable without a definite policy towards these classes, without constant influence on various layers of the city's working people. Recognizing this automatically forced the Tories to pay at least some attention to their needs, aspirations, and interests. The formation of the National Union of Conservatives and Constitutional Associations was symbolic.
However, in the late 60s and early 70s. Conservatives did not counter the actions of Liberals with their alternative positive program. Disraeli only watched as the Liberals increased the number of people dissatisfied with their policies, but did not seek to put forward a specific program to the electorate. True, the range of opportunities for conservatives was limited. The main slogans of the Tories were to remain protective aspects. At the same time, the need to develop a program was obvious.
Disraeli was by no means a political thinker: his political philosophy was not distinguished by either depth or richness of ideas. However, it was easier for him than for the well-born aristocrats to see the important realities of the new time, especially the increasing role of the masses, especially the working class. If R. Peel emphasized the union of all owners, then Disraeli, continuing this line, supplemented it with the idea of “one nation,” i.e. transforming the conservative party into a “national” party, capable of securing mass support for all classes of society and creating “class harmony.” The “one nation” propaganda was aimed at showing the bourgeoisie and working people that conservatives were better able to solve social problems than liberals.
Conclusion: Disraeli concluded that by supporting cautious reforms, the party could compete for the votes of the workers without alienating the bourgeoisie. The only card that conservatives could play to attract the working class was the promise of social improvement of society. This explained the emergence of the idea of “popular Toryism”, or “Tory democracy” of Disraeli.
3.2 ELECTORAL REFORM AT THE END OF THE 19TH CENTURY
In the 70s In the 19th century, while in power (1874-1880), conservatives did not take bold steps in the social field. The main reason for the low productivity of conservatives in social issues was their reorientation towards the bourgeoisie. Frightened by the activities of the First International and the Paris Commune, the English bourgeoisie saw in the unity of the Conservative Party a reliable defender of their interests. For their part, the Tories did everything to strengthen these sentiments. As a result, it became simply impossible for conservatives to adopt a broad Democratic platform or go far enough in their appeals to working people. The main emphasis, as Disraeli quickly realized, had to be placed on a “national party” that would demonstrate the common interests of different classes in preserving the existing system. As a result, the Tories were unable to make any serious attempt to fill the vacuum created by the failure of official liberalism to meet the demands of working people.
In the 60-70s. XIX century New forms of work of representatives of political parties with the electorate are being created. In the 70s Major political campaigns took place in the country, during which new forms of interaction with voters were developed. The initiative in this belonged to the liberals - the Bulgarian campaign of 1876, the Middleton campaign of 1879-1880. The latter was an unprecedented event in the political history of England. At the end of the autumn of 1879, W. Gladstone undertook a two-week trip to the towns of the Midleton constituency in Scotland to meet with his voters. No political leader before him had taken such steps in an election campaign. The Middleton campaign gave impetus to a new political fashion of delivering keynote speeches addressed directly to voters. Gladstone's visit to the Middleton constituency was a response to the financial and foreign policies of Disraeli's Conservative government, which saw continued economic depression and increased uncertainty in international affairs (disagreements with Turkey over the presence of the British fleet in its waters, the Anglo-Afghan and Anglo-Zulu wars) contributed to the fact that the country was ready to listen to a politician who was associated “with peace and prosperity, especially with the prosperity of the mid-Victorian era,” the highest magnitude of which corresponded to the years of his first premiership. The main emphasis of Gladstone's speeches was aimed at criticizing the foreign and imperial course of the Tory cabinet. Critical sentiments in the liberal leader's statements prevailed over positive ones. This was because his Middleton speeches represented a kind of “restoration” program: they were not a vision of a liberal future, but rather an appeal to the great foundations and traditions of the liberal past - free trade, balanced budgets and consistent progress. The radical content of the Middleton speeches was insignificant.
About the end of the 19th century. some researchers speak of it as a period of crisis and decline of British liberalism. However, this is not entirely true: from 1880 to 1915, conservatives and liberals were in power almost equally (18 years each); Asquith's government was a coalition government. But British liberalism was indeed going through hard times. Changes in the global economic situation and industrial crises dealt a heavy blow to former self-confidence and optimism; faith in the infallibility of liberal doctrines of adherence to laisseferism (with its main slogan “don’t interfere with action”) and the harm of government intervention in the economy was shaken.
Some liberals left the party. Some of them came under the banner of renewed conservatives, others turned to socialist views. Other Liberals began to break with stale Whig traditions (in particular, Gladstone's unprecedented Middleton tour of 1880, when the party leader addressed himself directly to the masses). Under pressure from the radical wing, liberals had to recognize the need for state intervention in a self-governing economy. However, there were still noticeable tensions between the radicals and the orthodox in terms of interpretation of the role of the state. These discrepancies had serious consequences for the party's ability to function as an effective electoral mechanism.
By the end of the 19th century. liberalism transformed from a philosophy of the individual to a philosophy that reflected the interests of the community. The individual's virtues were no longer considered as a criterion social progress or social good. Individualism came to be seen as just one of the operating constants that limited the Liberal Party's fuller acceptance of responsibility for social reform. Still, civil liberties remained a major focus for liberals. For this reason, liberals, unlike conservatives, opposed maintaining the status quo in society. They were ready to undertake a certain disintegration of existing social structures in the name of creating a “new order” in order to achieve personal freedom. The acceptance of government intervention was accompanied by a rejection of statism as a threat to personal freedom. Since the beginning of the 20th century. for reasons of political unity, it was decided to entrust the government with the right to ensure political freedoms and security.
The idea of progress remained an integral part of liberal ideology. Often, however, liberals spoke of changes that did not follow from real events, that did not correspond to the rational individualistic conclusion that tolerable social conditions, especially in the economic field, could contribute to the improvement of human morality.
What was the nature of the reform activities of the liberals? The largest event of the era under study was the electoral reform of 1884. Liberals had been insisting on carrying out another electoral reform since 1867. They proposed extending voting rights to rural county districts. Next, deprive the old cities of mandates, where there was one deputy per 40 thousand inhabitants, and transfer them to counties where there were 70-80 thousand inhabitants per deputy. Reformers also felt it necessary to redraw electoral districts more evenly. As a result, 34 of the most populous cities retained the number of representatives, but 105 cities with a population of less than 16 thousand inhabitants had their rights of representation taken away, and their mandates were transferred to newly established districts in counties with a population of 50 thousand people. Rural homeowners and those who paid at least £10 for housing received the right to vote. per year. From now on, certain categories of workers, including miners, also had the right to vote. 12 new seats in the House of Commons were created, its strength now amounting to 670.
The reform, however, was of a rather compromise nature. 1 million 800 thousand men did not receive the right to vote, although the electorate as a whole increased by 4 million people. Multiple votes remained, and women continued to be disenfranchised. Nevertheless, the reform of 1884 had great value. It is characteristic that it did not encounter serious resistance when passing through parliament.
Conclusion: The considered shifts in the social structure of English society, within the ruling circles and political parties, indicated a certain trend in the 60-80s. XIX century towards weakening the positions of the aristocratic strata, strengthening and expanding the role of representatives of business circles and the intelligentsia, as well as noticeable activity of the petty and middle bourgeoisie and the working class. These processes required liberals and conservatives to revise their programs and search for new slogans and tactics that could attract English voters to their side. Already in these years, the ideas of bourgeois reformism laid the foundation that in subsequent decades became the foundation for the activities of the two leading parties in Great Britain.
CONCLUSION.
In general, by the end of the 19th century. the reform potential was largely lost by the liberals. They began to lose votes where they previously dominated. Obstinate remnants of Whigism prevented the party from establishing closer links with the electorate; Gladstone's Middleton speeches remained an exception.
What can be said about the evolution of the Conservative Party during the period under review? First of all, it should be noted that radical changes have occurred in Tory ideology and practice. Moreover, the reasons for this transformation lay deeper than the crushing defeat in the elections of 1880 or the departure from politics, and then from the life of B. Disraeli.
Now about the place that conservatives assigned to the state. They viewed the latter as an organic product of historical evolution. Responsibility for the advancement of civilization rested with a relatively small elite. In order to prevent usurpation of power, under certain conditions, conservatives were ready to allow state intervention in the economy.
Chamberlain found that British democracy is generally conservative, since it represents a harmonious synthesis of classes and interests that must be preserved (monarchy, church, House of Lords, etc.). If the masses are by nature conservative, then the conservative party is the people's party.
Many researchers emphasize the significant contribution of conservatives to the transformation of constitutional democracy into actual reality. So, in the attitude of conservatives to the state, two trends can be traced - the desire to preserve the foundations and the assumption of the possibility of a number of reforms.
The traditional place in the ideology and practice of conservatives was given to the role of the individual and the individual. Conservatives found that it was the free individual, using his abilities to achieve the best results, who was responsible for raising the standard of living. Conservatism emphasized the importance of the social environment in shaping the individual. Conservative politicians have always sought to maintain a balance between the individual, on the one hand, and society, on the other. The imperative to protect the individual was private property.
Freedom was seen as a social and formative concept. It is a right that an individual acquires and exercises in a social context.
On the other hand, the social movements that unfolded in the country during these years, in their socio-political and economic slogans, identified “painful” points in the legislation; their actions became a powerful lever of pressure on parliament and the government, which were forced, although often not immediately, yield to the pressure of public opinion.
Unlike liberals, conservatives believed that individuality, divorced from social ties, is not true freedom. The individual realizes freedom only within society. It is interesting that, for example, in practical terms, the declared protection of individual rights resulted in negative attitude to trade unions: it was believed that freedom was being protected from the tyranny of trade union organizations.
So, what were the reform actions of the conservatives? It should be noted that they in no way attempted to make any changes to the structures. If liberals accepted the possibility of changing existing structures, then conservatives considered the preservation of the status quo in society most important. All their reforms were planned and carried out within the existing system.
The movement for independent workers' representation, which originated in the north of England, is also growing. Already in 1891 the Manchester Labor Party was formed. Two years later, Labor unions began to form in many northern textile towns. Their main goal was the implementation of workers' representation locally and in parliament.
The Independent Labor Party, which was finally formed by 1900, had a number of important features. Firstly, it was a party with a socialist program. She came out with demands to ensure collective ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. However, in implementing these demands, Labor, unlike many socialist formations, clearly gave preference to parliamentary rather than revolutionary methods of struggle. It was argued that the people, not individuals, should control and drive the economy. In this regard, the evolution of R. Macdonald is characteristic. He spent four years as an aide to a Radical Liberal MP before turning to Labour. This transition of the future first Labor Prime Minister occurred in 1894. Labor, moreover, spoke out for change and persuasion through reform, and not the destruction of the entire economic apparatus of the country.
Secondly, Labor advocated special and specific goals rather than the development of theories of class struggle. This pragmatic position was clearly inherited by them from the trade unions.
Finally, Labor raised issues of religion, speaking out in favor of nonconformism. Many of their leaders were more familiar with the Bible than with the works of Marx. They believed that the principles of socialism were very close to the Sermon on the Mount. But Labor faced opposition from the trade unions, who insisted on a “blocking vote” policy. The first experience of participation in parliamentary elections brought failure - 28 Labor candidates were defeated, and only in 1900, having achieved the election of 29 of their candidates to parliament, Labor declared themselves as a serious political force.
The growth and importance of Laborism can be viewed in two ways: firstly, in terms of its role as a parliamentary pressure group, and secondly, in terms of assessing Laborism as the most significant force in advocating political change, the banner of struggle for which has fallen from the weakening hands of the Liberals.
And yet - the beginning of significant changes in British society in the 19th century. English historians call the parliamentary reform of 1832 “great.” Indeed, its significance is great, for it marked the beginning of the creation of modern civil society in Great Britain, the process of which in the 19th century. was marked by such milestones as the parliamentary reforms of 1832, 1867, 1884-85, 1888. The reform of 1832 was the first difficult step in this democratic movement.
1. Aizenstadt M.P. British parliament and society in the 30s and 40s. XIX century M., 1997. P. 130
2. Aizenstadt M.P., Gella T.M. English parties and the colonial empire of Great Britain in the 19th century. M., 1999. P. 629
3. Vinogradov V.N. British lion on the Bosphorus. M., 1991. -161 p.
4. Vinogradov K.B. World politics 60-80s of the XIX century: events and people. L., 1991. – 168 p.
5. History of Europe in eight volumes from ancient times to the present day. T. 5. From the French Revolution of the late 18th century to the First World War. M., 2000. P 215
6. Kan S.B. History of socialist ideas. M., 1967. – 164 p.
7. Kucherenko G.S. Research on the history of social thought in France and England: XV - first half of the XIX century. M., 1981.
8. Lieven D. History of Western aristocracy. 1815-1914 St. Petersburg, 2000. -364 p.
9. International labor movement: Questions of history and theory. M., 1976. T. 1.
10. Pokrovsky P. Bentham and his time. Pg., 1916.
11. Rotshtein F.A. International relations in late XIX century. M.-L., 1960. P.30
12.Ado A.V. Bourgeois revision of the history of the French Revolution of the 18th century. // Social movements and the struggle of ideas. M., 1982.
13. Tarle E.V. Essays and characteristics from the history of the European social movement in the 19th century. St. Petersburg, 1903.- 367 p.
14. Toritsyn T.M. The teachings of Robert Owen and his influence on the spread and development of socialist ideas. Ryazan, 1972.
15. Tupoleva L.F. Movement for parliamentary reform of 1832 in England // From the history of European parliamentarism: Great Britain. M., 1995. P 123
16. Tupoleva L.F. Irish Land League // Problems of British history. M., 1990.
17. Taylor A.J.P. The struggle for dominance in Europe. 1848-1918. M., 1958.- P.214
18. Houellebecq M. The possibility of an island. M., 1999.
19. Fadeeva L.A. Essays on the history of the British intelligentsia. Perm, 1995.
20. Ziegler T. Mental and social movements of the 19th century. St. Petersburg, 1900.
21. Chernyak E.B. Democratic movement in England 1816-1820. M., 1957.
22. Steckli A.E. Utopias and socialism. M., 1993.
23. History of diplomacy. M., 1963. T. II. 1871-1914. C. 269 History of Europe in eight volumes from ancient times to the present day. T. 5. From the French Revolution of the late 18th century to the First World War. M., 2000. P. 215
Francis Place creator of the pamphlet - a compilation of Bentham's texts - Not Paul, but Jesus ("Not Paul, but Jesus") 1823
Aizenstadt M.P. British parliament and society in the 30s and 40s. XIX century M., 1997. P. 130
Aizenstadt M.P., Gella T.M. English parties and the colonial empire of Great Britain in the 19th century. M., 1999. P. 629
History of diplomacy. M., 1963. T. II. 1871-1914. C. 269
Rotshtein F.A. International relations at the end of the 19th century. M.-L., 1960. P. 30
Electoral reforms
Class structure of society. IN late XVIII - early XIX centuries. In Great Britain there is a rapid development of industry, the results of which were the disappearance of small handicraft industries and the emergence of industrial centers. London has become a trading and financial center of global importance. As a result of the industrial revolution, a large proletariat appeared, whose situation was very difficult. The current legislation directly placed workers at the mercy of entrepreneurs, giving the latter the right to determine the terms of employment labor force. The economic situation of workers became especially difficult during the years of stagnation and decline in industrial production and trade.
The industrial revolution also gave rise to the agricultural revolution. Small-scale land rentals were replaced by large-scale capitalist farming. In rural areas, the majority of the population were farm laborers, exploited by large farmers and landlords.
So, the industrial revolution and the agricultural revolution significantly changed the class structure of society. In the village, there were essentially three classes: landlords, tenants and farm laborers. A class of industrial bourgeoisie and a class of proletarians were formed in the city.
Political system at the beginning of the 19th century. TO XIX V. England has a fairly developed political system. Changes in the class structure of society were also reflected in the social base of the main political parties - the Tories and Whigs. The Tories were the party of the landowners and financial bourgeoisie, the bearers historical tradition, conservatism. While accepting the new, they sought to preserve as much of the old as possible. The Whigs represented the interests of the industrial bourgeoisie. The struggle for power between the Tories and Whigs reflected the struggle for political dominance between the industrial bourgeoisie, on the one hand, and the landlords, allied with the commercial and financial bourgeoisie, on the other.
The power of these two parties alternated during the 18th century, and only they entered the 19th century. From the “glorious revolution” to the middle of the 18th century. Whigs dominated parliament. In 1783, the Tories formed a majority in the House of Commons. The strengthening of their dominance was facilitated by the Great French Revolution, which discouraged the English bourgeoisie from wanting radical changes. The Tories ruled until 1830.
Being in power for such a long time, the Tories tried to change the balance of forces in the state structure of society towards strengthening the executive power, in particular the royal prerogative. Formally, the king was still considered the head of state and all government power was concentrated in his hands: he represented the country in international relations, declared war, made peace, appointed and recalled ambassadors, and was commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The cabinet of ministers and parliament acted on his behalf. He appointed and dismissed ministers, could dissolve the House of Commons early, and appoint new members to the House of Lords. However, in reality the king could not carry out any of his many prerogatives. The unwritten Constitution established a completely different situation - the monarchy was deprived of its real content. The activities of the cabinet of ministers and its head, the prime minister, were not regulated by law, but were entirely determined by unwritten rules. This gave rise to the idea in the middle of the 18th century. some representatives of parliament protested against the position of the first minister, which, in their opinion, was contrary to the law and was dangerous for the state. But this practice constituted the most important feature of parliamentarism, which could no longer be abandoned.
The Cabinet of Ministers was a collective whose composition was limited by the environment of the parliamentary majority. This strengthened the position of ministers in relation to the king and simplified parliamentary control over the activities of ministers.
The most significant element of the English political system by the beginning of the 19th century. there was a parliament. The House of Commons played a special role - it was here that cooperation between the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy took place. Meanwhile, the House of Commons was a feudal representation. The old, pre-revolutionary election system ensured the dominance of the landed aristocracy in this body, which became the reason for the struggle for electoral reform. The entire 19th century in Great Britain was marked by this struggle.
The fight for electoral reform. After the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the English economy experienced a temporary recession. Exports of goods from England decreased significantly, and this led to a reduction in their production and increased unemployment.
In addition, prices for bread and other agricultural products fell. Landlords feared that the import of grain from abroad would further reduce prices and lead to a fall in land rent. In an effort to ensure that they would continue to receive large incomes, the landlords insisted on the adoption by Parliament of Corn Laws in 1815, which prohibited the import of grain into England if the price of grain in this country fell below 80 shillings per quarter (a quarter equal to 1.1012 dm 3) . Subsequently, Parliament reduced the ceiling price of grain to 66 shillings per quarter. The access of grain to England from other countries remained virtually closed. Industrial and agricultural workers began to fight against the Corn Laws, hoping that their repeal would lead to cheaper bread. The English industrial bourgeoisie was also hostile to these laws, since high grain prices prevented further reduction of workers' wages and enriched the landlords, thereby strengthening their dominance in Parliament.
England was gripped by popular unrest, in which workers, farm laborers, and the bankrupt petty bourgeoisie took part. In 1817, the government temporarily suspended the Habeas Corpus Act and resorted to repression. But when the law came into force again the following year, popular unrest resumed.
The petty bourgeoisie and workers demanded democratization political system and the introduction of universal suffrage. The movement for electoral reform was also supported by the industrial bourgeoisie.
Electoral reform of 1832 and its significance. In the 1920s, with the emergence of new markets in South America, trade revived and production began to grow in a number of industries. Salaries began to rise. A number of reforms were carried out. In particular, in 1824 the law prohibiting workers' unions was repealed. As a result, trade unions began to appear - associations of workers in their specialties to produce general conditions labor, providing assistance to union members.
Since the late 1920s, the movement for electoral reform began again. The first blow to the old electoral system came in 1829, when Catholics were admitted to parliament and public office. The next Parliamentary Reform Bill was prepared in 1830 by the Whigs. It was a very moderate project, in which the main attention was paid to the issue of redistribution of seats: only the large and middle bourgeoisie could apply for seats in parliament. However, the Tories called the project revolutionary and did not let it pass. The reform became possible only thanks to the active actions of workers who took to the streets with weapons, ready to fight for electoral reform. The House of Lords had to give in, and in June 1832 the Reform Bill was approved. The law on parliamentary reform deprived 56 “rotten towns” of the right of representation in parliament, and 30 “rotten towns” could henceforth send one deputy to parliament instead of two. Large industrial cities received the right of parliamentary representation. Thus, as a result of the reform, mandates were redistributed.
The Reform Act granted suffrage to men who had reached the age of 21, paid the poor tax and owned property (in counties - land, in cities - buildings) providing at least £10 an annual income. As a result of the reform, land tenants (until that time deprived of the right to vote) with an annual rent of at least 50 pounds sterling received the right to vote. A residency requirement was also established - 6 months.
As a result of the reform, the number of voters increased to 652 thousand. However, the workers and petty bourgeoisie, who fought so hard for voting rights, did not receive them. Inequality of constituencies was not eliminated, and open voting was maintained. The parliamentary reform of 1832 ensured the representation of the industrial bourgeoisie in parliament. This reform was the result of a compromise between the landowning aristocracy and the industrial bourgeoisie.
The reform of 1832 was a significant event in the life of England. She ended the feudal traditions of representation and contributed to the transformation of the House of Commons into a bourgeois parliament. The reform ensured the access of the industrial bourgeoisie to parliament, thus including it in a compromise with the aristocracy. Changes in the composition of the House of Commons allowed the cabinet to finally get rid of royal dependence, since the aristocracy standing behind the king could not provide the cabinet with the necessary majority in the House of Commons. At this time, the crown lost its last vestiges of power, and the royal prerogative was effectively transferred to the cabinet. The principle of government responsibility, developed in the 18th century, was strengthened: ministerial power mechanically passes into the hands of the party that has a parliamentary majority. Giving way to the leaders of the new majority, the cabinet takes the position of head of the parliamentary opposition. In connection with the concept of responsible government, during this period a principle emerged that determined the position of the crown: the king reigns, but does not govern. This conditional, unwritten rule is the most important basis of English parliamentarism.
An important consequence of the reform of 1832 was the transformation of political parties. The previous names of the parties lost their meaning, and the Tories were renamed the Conservative Party, the Whigs - the Liberal Party. “Over time, liberalism and conservatism turned into powerful political movements that marked a whole period in the development of bourgeois society and the state.
Not only the names of the parties have changed, their structure has also changed. After the adoption of the reform, it became necessary to register voters and draw up electoral lists. These functions were taken over by permanent party members who united locally into party organizations.
The reform of 1832 gave impetus to the transformation of the central state apparatus. Thus, in the Ministry of Finance, positions that had been preserved from the Middle Ages and had lost their significance were abolished, the Naval Ministry was significantly simplified, and the role of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Trade was strengthened. In general, the reorganization of the state apparatus led to a significant expansion and revitalization of the activities of the central administration.
A reform of city self-government was also carried out, in particular, city councils were created that managed city property, managed the police, and issued regulations to maintain order. The situation in the counties and parishes did not change; the arbitrariness of the justice of the peace and landowner still reigned there.
Chartist movement. The reform of 1832 did not satisfy the working people of Great Britain, who took an active part in the struggle for its implementation. In 1836-1838 The English economy was once again shaken by a crisis of overproduction, which caused a new deterioration in the situation of workers. This gave rise to the emergence of a political labor movement in England - Chartism.
In 1836, an association of workers was created in London, which put forward the following demands: 1) universal suffrage for men who have reached the age of 21 and have lived in a given parish for at least 6 months; 2) abolition of the property qualification for candidates for parliamentary deputies; 3) equal representation and equalization of electoral districts; 4) annual parliamentary elections; 5) remuneration for the work of deputies; 6) secret ballot. These demands were very popular among workers, who believed that by winning universal suffrage they would be able to achieve a radical change in their working and living conditions.
In addition to the workers, bourgeois liberals also advocated the democratization of the political system.
Participants in the movement decided to present their demands to parliament in the form of a petition for a people's charter (charter), which gave the name to the entire movement.
In 1838, the Chartists produced the first national petition for a people's charter, containing six demands put forward by the London Working Men's Association. The House of Commons rejected this petition, using repression against the participants in the movement. In the autumn of 1839, a temporary decline in the Chartist movement began.
The beginning of the 40s was marked by a new rise of Chartism, accompanied by increased revolutionary sentiment among the workers. In May 1842, the Chartists submitted a second petition for a people's charter to Parliament, which was signed by 3.3 million people. The basis of this petition was the same six demands that were contained in the first petition for a people's charter. The English Parliament rejected this petition too.
The third time the Chartists tried to storm Parliament in 1848. They decided to submit a petition to Parliament on April 10, 1848 and hold a massive popular demonstration in London on the same day in its defense. But the government, calling in troops, disrupted the demonstration. In July 1848, parliament in once again rejected the petition for a people's charter, and the government moved on to massive repression against the Chartists. Soon the economic boom took the edge off many social problems, and the Chartist movement faded away.
Chartism played an important role in English history. Political reforms subsequent decades were caused to a certain extent by the struggle of the working class.
The fight for a new electoral reform. In the 50-60s of the XIX century. The political dominance of the industrial bourgeoisie was established in the form of classical bourgeois parliamentarism. House of Commons by the middle of the 19th century. sidelined the House of Lords and minimized the political influence of royal power. However, as a result of the reform of 1832, only the top of the industrial and commercial bourgeoisie gained access to parliament, which was not interested in radically breaking the laws and customs inherited from the Middle Ages.
At the end of the 40s of the XIX century. There was a split in the Conservative Party, which led to its decline, and the liberals strengthened in power for a long time. This party was led by major statesmen who knew how to make the necessary concessions to broad layers of the middle and petty bourgeoisie in a timely manner. Nevertheless, they stubbornly resisted further expansion of suffrage.
Disparate forces have united in the struggle for electoral reform. The bourgeoisie, having become a powerful economic force, came to the decision to take full political power in the country into its own hands, expanding the scope of the first parliamentary reform.
Back in the 30s of the XIX century. A group of radicals emerged from the Liberal Party and led the fight for the repeal of the Corn Laws. Now they have advocated new electoral reform. With the defeat of the Chartist movement, the labor movement in Great Britain lost its independence for some time and was directed towards the legal struggle for purely economic demands. It was during this period that the general outline the central organization of trade unions - professional labor unions that united well-paid skilled workers. The Council of Trade Unions did not want to enter into the political struggle and did not have a political program, but under pressure from the working masses it was forced to allow the participation of workers' organizations in the struggle for a new electoral system. The participation of the workers determined the success of this struggle.
The trade unions hoped that an increase in the number of labor voters would increase their influence on the House of Commons, which would ensure efficiency economic struggle with entrepreneurs.
At the same time, the political rights of workers were not linked to their access to parliament.
Both parties, frightened by the popular movement, understanding the need for reform, challenged each other on the initiative to implement it. In the end, the project proposed by the head of the Conservative cabinet, B. Disraeli, was adopted, with amendments put forward by the radical part of the liberals.
New suffrage. The reform of 1867 provided for a new redistribution of deputy seats: 11 “towns” were completely deprived of the right to elect deputies to the House of Commons, and 35 “towns” retained the right to elect only one deputy. The vacant mandates were transferred to the largest industrial cities and counties.
The new law significantly changed the suffrage of city residents: it was granted to all owners or tenants of houses paying a tax to the benefit of the poor, and to tenants paying at least 10 pounds sterling rent per year (with a residence requirement of one year).
The most important innovation of the reform was the clause that the direct payer of taxes in favor of the poor is considered to be the one who, like all the numerous tenants of small apartments, pays this tax not himself, but through his landlord, who until now was considered as the only taxpayer. Thanks to this, not only homeowners, but also all their residents were included in the electoral lists. Thus, the electoral rolls expanded to include the petty bourgeoisie, artisans and workers.
As a result of the reform of 1867 total number voters increased by more than a million. However, 2/3 of the male population of England (the bulk of the workers, not to mention women) were still deprived of voting rights. Until 1872, open voting was maintained. The old, uneven distribution of electoral districts also remained.
The reform of 1867 summed up the thirty-year development of English constitutionalism, which led to the growth of the real political power of industrial capital.
Through electoral reforms, there was a redistribution of power within the ruling elite, and the industrial bourgeoisie came to power in an evolutionary way, without any serious shocks. Liberals and conservatives strengthened their positions and prevented an explosive situation.
Electoral reform of 1832. The economic power of the industrial bourgeoisie grew rapidly, but its influence in parliament remained insignificant. Both houses of parliament were dominated by large landowners and the financial aristocracy thanks to the old medieval electoral system.
In this regard, the industrial bourgeoisie, concentrated mainly in large cities, needed a new electoral system. In the struggle for it, she relied on the proletariat, which was in dire straits and did not have voting rights at all. The current situation favored the emergence of various kinds of workers' unions and led to increased political activity of the English proletariat. The political struggle intensified in 1830, which was greatly facilitated by the July Revolution in France. This year's parliamentary elections brought victory to reform supporters. In 1831, Gray's Whig government introduced the Parliamentary Reform Bill to the House of Commons. The lower house accepted it, but the upper house rejected it. In response to this, bourgeois organizations called for the withdrawal of funds from banks. Labor unrest began. In 1832, under the influence of the growth of the labor movement and the threat of financial collapse, the House of Lords was forced to give in, approving the Parliamentary Reform Bill. The essence of the parliamentary reform of 1832 boiled down to the following: ü Representation in parliament from “rotten” and “pocket towns” was limited. 56 towns lost the right to send deputies to parliament completely; 30 - limited their representation to one deputy from each town. ü Large industrial cities who did not have representation in parliament received this right. ü The number of persons with active voting rights increased slightly: o suffrage was granted to men who had reached the age of 21, owned real estate that brought in at least 10 pounds sterling of annual income and paid the poor tax; o tenants were given the right to vote - on a long-term lease with an income of at least 10 pounds sterling per year and short-term - at least 50 pounds sterling; ü The residency requirement was established - 6 months. The electoral reform of 1832 was a significant event in the political life of England in the 19th century. century. It made it possible to eliminate a number of feudal remnants in the electoral system, ensuring the representation of the industrial bourgeoisie in parliament. However, the disparity in the representation of large industrial centers and provincial towns, the high property qualification and, at the same time, the absence of broad voting rights led to further struggle for democratization of the electoral system. The fight for radical electoral reform. Chartism. The proletariat, which took an active part in the struggle for parliamentary reform, did not receive any results from it. The rise to power of the top industrial bourgeoisie only worsened the situation of wage workers. The Poor Law Amendment Act adopted by Parliament in 1834, which limited the practice of helping the poor by parishes, contributed to the intensification of the proletariat's struggle for their voting rights. The situation was aggravated by the economic crisis of overproduction of 1836-1838, which caused a drop in wages and mass unemployment. In 1836, the Workers' Association was created in London, which became the core of Chartism - the workers' movement for universal suffrage. The political platform of the movement was the “People's Charter”, which contained six main demands providing for the creation of the foundations of a new electoral system: ü equal representation; ü re-election of parliament every year; ü universal suffrage for men who have reached the age of 21 and have lived in a given place for at least 6 months; ü abolition of property qualifications; ü secret ballot; ü remuneration for the work of deputies. Repeatedly, the Chartists submitted petitions to parliament for a “People's Charter”, but each time the House of Commons rejected them. The Chartist movement supported political demands for parliament with mass workers' rallies and demonstrations. The government, through a policy of repression, managed to cause a decline in the Chartist movement and avert the threat of a new parliamentary reform. The reform of 1832 and the struggle for further democratization of the electoral system caused changes in the state system, the main of which were: ü Transformation of political parties. The successor to the Whigs was the Liberal Party, which expressed the interests of the ruling industrial bourgeoisie, and the successor to the Tories was the Conservative Party, which represented large landowners and financial magnates. The concept of permanent party membership appeared. The created local party organizations took on the functions of compiling electoral lists and campaigning among voters. ü Further development of the principle of responsible government. The party that won the elections and had a majority in the House of Commons received executive power. ü The influence of the king on the activities of the government is increasingly weakening. The old formula “the king cannot be wrong” is formalized into a constitutional principle that determines the position of the crown - “the king reigns, but does not rule.” 50-60s of the XIX century. became the time of the greatest rise of English pre-monopoly capitalism and the period of consolidation of the political dominance of the industrial bourgeoisie. The House of Commons became main force state power, sidelining the House of Lords and minimizing the role of the crown. In the 50s and 60s, the trade union movement took shape and strengthened, and in English society a new social element - labor aristocracy. In 1868, the British Trade Union Congress was founded, uniting only skilled workers, in whom the bourgeoisie sought the social support of its power among the proletariat. In the conditions of a broad democratic movement, the struggle for a new voter prompted the bourgeoisie to a new parliamentary reform, the initiators of which both liberals and conservatives wanted to be. Ultimately, B. Disraeli's project was adopted. Electoral reform of 1867 provided for: ü A new redistribution of seats in parliament (11 towns lost the right to send deputies; 35 had their representation limited to 1 deputy). ü Reduction of property qualifications. ü The residency requirement was increased to 1 year. The main result of the reform was an almost double increase in the number of voters at the expense of the petty bourgeoisie and the wealthiest part of the working class. However, the persistence of uneven representation from industrial cities and small villages, the absence of secret voting, and the failure to provide voting rights to a huge mass of the population inevitably led to the need for further improvement of the electoral system. In the 70-90s, a transition took place from pre-monopoly capitalism to imperialism, the main features of which were the concentration of production and the centralization of capital. British imperialism developed as colonial imperialism. At the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries, the basis of English capitalism was not an industrial and trade monopoly, but a colonial and financial one, which led England to the loss of primacy in industrial production. The transition to imperialism affected the political regime and state system of England at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. Third electoral reform 1884-1885 In the last quarter of the 19th century. In England, a number of laws are being adopted providing for the further democratization of suffrage. In 1872, in order to avoid abuses during elections, secret voting was introduced; in 1883, a bill was passed to punish bribery of voters during elections; in 1889 - a law that required election agents to publicly report on the funds spent and limited the costs of conducting elections. Among the electoral laws of this period, a special place is occupied by the legislative acts of 1884 and 1885, which constituted the third electoral reform in England. Significant innovations of the reform were: ü Reduction and streamlining of the property electoral qualification - a unified electoral right was established for homeowners and tenants of all counties and cities; ü Introduction of electoral districts with equal representation from the same population (one deputy from 50-54 thousand). residents). The reform significantly expanded the electoral corps, clearly defined the territorial units that elected deputies to the House of Commons, but when summing up the voting results, the majority electoral system of the relative majority was preserved, according to which the candidate who received a relative majority of votes in the district compared to other candidates was considered elected. The preservation of property and gender electoral qualifications, the right to several electoral votes for owners of real estate in various districts, the complex procedure for registering voters, and the lack of remuneration for deputy work put the poorest sections of the population and its wealthy part in an unequal position and were serious shortcomings of the new electoral system of England. Along with the expansion of voting rights, there is also some democratization of the political life of England: workers' trade unions are achieving legal existence; criminal penalties for organizing strikes are abolished; Freedom of speech and freedom of conscience are recognized. A characteristic feature of the social and political life of England at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries was the strengthening of the labor movement and the emergence of workers' parties. In 1883, the Social Democratic Federation arose, in 1884 - the Fabian Society - an organization with a socialist orientation; in 1893 the Independent Labor Party appeared. On the basis of various workers' organizations in 1906. a single Labor Party of Great Britain was formed, which began to represent the interests of the petty bourgeoisie and the labor aristocracy. Traditional parties of liberals and conservatives until the end of the 19th century. maintain their positions. However, there is a gradual blurring of the differences between them. The Conservative Party is turning into a party of the big financial bourgeoisie, while the Liberal Party is losing its social support and is leaving the political arena altogether. The rise of the labor movement in the 90s of the XIX century. in conditions of economic recession, it caused a crisis of parliamentarism in the political sphere, which manifested itself in the strengthening of executive authorities and the bureaucratization of the administrative apparatus. A number of circumstances contributed to the growth of the government's authority. The expansion of the electoral corps caused an increase in the social base of parliament, which forced the ruling classes to think about the need to control it and limit its powers. In 1882, the Closure Rules Bill was passed, allowing the government to stop discussion of an issue. The development of party discipline contributed to the transformation of the House of Commons into an instrument of the government, which had a majority in the lower house. Ordinary party members who became deputies of the House of Commons were often in solidarity with the leader of their party, who headed the cabinet. 6. Parliamentary reforms in England in 1911 and 1949. Electoral reforms of 1918, 1928, 1948 and 1969 In the 20th century Several electoral laws were passed, democratizing the right to vote. The first electoral reform was carried out immediately after the First World War, in 1918-1919. According to this law, the right to vote was given to all males who had reached the age of 21 and met the requirements of a residence qualification (6 months) or owned premises for business activities. Women had the right to vote if they had reached the age of 30 and owned property with an annual income of at least five pounds sterling or were married to a person satisfying the latter condition. Thus, the new electoral law introduced universal male and partial female suffrage. On the eve of the parliamentary elections of 1929, the Conservative government implemented another suffrage reform, giving women equal voting rights with men. A new stage in the democratization of suffrage was marked after the Second World War. The Representation of the People Act 1948, passed by the Labor government, changed the distribution of constituencies and abolished double voting. From now on, no one could vote in more than one constituency. Finally, in 1969, the Labor government passed the Representation of the People Act, which lowered the voting age from 21 to 18. Changes in the government system. At the beginning of the 20th century, as a result of the parliamentary reform of 1911, the importance of the House of Lords was greatly undermined. The reason for reforming parliament was the conflict between the government and the House of Lords, which rejected the budget proposed by the government and approved by the House of Commons. The question arose about the very existence of the House of Lords. A solution was found in parliamentary reform, which limited the rights of the upper house. The 1911 Bill of Parliament provided: ü a financial bill passed by the House of Commons, but not approved by the upper house within a month, was presented to the king and, after its approval, became law; ü non-financial bills rejected by the House of Lords, but adopted by the lower house in three readings, went for approval by the king, if at least two years passed between the first and last reading. ü introduction of salaries for deputies and a five-year term for the lower chamber. By sidelining the House of Lords and controlling the majority in the House of Commons, the government became the main body of state power. The strengthening of executive power was accompanied by the growth of the state apparatus. During this period, the system of sectoral management was actively developing in Great Britain: new ministries and departments appeared; the importance of the old ones, such as the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Internal Affairs, increased. The strengthening of executive power and the bureaucratization of the state apparatus contributed to the onset of a crisis of parliamentarism in England. In 1914, the Habeas Corpus Act was suspended and the Defense of the State Act was adopted, which legally transferred full power to the government for the duration of the war. At the end of the war, this act was repealed, but some rights granted to the government as temporary and extraordinary continued to be applied even after their official repeal. In addition, the practice of issuing acts granting the government emergency powers was initiated. So, in 1920 a law on emergency powers was adopted, which was no longer temporary, but permanent. This law provided for the possibility that the government, on behalf of the king, could issue a decree declaring a state of emergency in the country if it considered that any person or group of persons was disrupting the normal life of society by their actions. In a state of emergency, the government may take any measures necessary to maintain public safety and normal life of society. The content of the Act made it possible to apply it against strikes, which was done in practice more than once. On the eve of the Second World War in 1939, parliament adopted new act on emergency powers, which gives the executive power the authority to issue such regulations as the government considers necessary to ensure public safety, protect the state, maintain public order . By granting the government emergency powers, parliament not only contributed to the strengthening of its executive power, but also transferred legislative power to it. The so-called delegated legislation has become widespread - acts issued by the government formally on behalf of parliament. The “delegating act” gave the executive power the right to issue rules in the “development of the law.” This was often accompanied by permission to change the delegating statute itself if necessary. The forms of delegated legislation were very diverse: orders, orders, instructions, ministerial instructions, etc. Delegated legislation is one of the manifestations of the omnipotence of the cabinet of ministers. Parliament has practically lost the ability to control the activities of government bodies. The House of Commons has lost its leading role in the exercise of political power; on the contrary, the government controls the House of Commons through the party system. The right of the prime minister to force the dissolution of parliament at any time further enhances the power of the cabinet. The result is a literal dictatorship of the cabinet, which can act first and only then expect approval of its actions from parliament. Act 1949 to amend the Parliament Act 1911. In 1949, the Labor government introduced new parliamentary reforms affecting the House of Lords. The composition of this chamber was as follows: ü the minority were the descendants of the ancient landed aristocracy; ü approximately half of the members of the chamber are peers with titles granted in the 20th century; ü a third of the members of the House of Lords are company directors. The 1949 Amendment Act of Parliament 1911, which reduced the Lords' veto on non-financial bills to one year, was intended to limit its power. But this goal was not achieved, and in 1956 the Lords defeated a bill to abolish the death penalty. Conservative attempt in 1958 to expand the powers of the House of Lords failed. However, the upper house is still strong enough to fulfill its original purpose - to slow down the initiatives of the elected lower house. The House of Lords remains the highest court of appeal for all UK courts. Possessing great influence, she is capable of exerting strong political pressure. The crown occupies a unique place in the political system of Great Britain. Formally, many royal prerogatives are retained, the most important of which is the right to appoint the prime minister. As a rule, the appointed prime minister must have the confidence of a majority of the House of Commons and be able to form a cabinet of ministers. However, in cases where the leader of the majority party does not have a strong enough position, the word of the reigning monarch is decisive. So, in 1931, the Labor cabinet decided to resign. It was assumed that the king would instruct S. Boldun to form a Conservative government, but George V invited R. Macdonald to remain at the head of the new coalition government. Other powers of the monarch remain: no bill can become law without royal assent, only the monarch can convene or dissolve parliament, only the monarch can grant a peerage. All these powers are considered a mere formality, since the head of state must act on the advice of his ministers, but at the same time it is established that the monarch is not obliged to follow all the recommendations of advisers: he has the right to withhold his consent to such a policy as, in his opinion, destroys the "basis of the English constitution." In this regard, the crown can remove the cabinet of ministers from retirement, dissolve parliament, refuse to approve a bill, etc. True, monarchs did not exercise many of their powers for centuries. Thus, the power of the crown is hidden, and thanks to its constitutional rights, if necessary, the monarchy can become a serious reserve force of the ruling class.
37. Electoral reforms of 1832, 1867, 1884-1885. in England.
Electoral reforms of 1832, 1868.
The bourgeoisie shared power with the landowners. From the landowning aristocracy they were elected to the House of Lords. The bulk were chosen by small towns and villages, which received this privilege later. Many of these towns were considered “rotten”; representatives were not sent from them, but were appointed by the owners.
Prerequisites:
Fundamental changes took place in the economy: the industrial revolution and class structure were completed, and large industrial centers emerged.
In the cities, a class of industrial bourgeoisie and an educated class of proletarians emerged and grew. But due to the archaic electoral system, cities could not send representatives from among the bourgeoisie. The demands of the bourgeoisie to let them into the lower house.
The Whigs are in power. Gray introduced a third bill to liquidate the "rotten towns." The House of Commons accepted it, but the House of Lords did not. Then the bourgeoisie began to rouse the proletarians, calling for them to take their savings from the banks.
In 1832 - redistricting. 56 rotten towns with a population of 2 thousand people lost representation. Cities with a population of 2 to 4 thousand people received one place.
With pre-election, an electoral qualification is introduced - an annual income of 10 feet sterling.
Consequences:
30-40s of the 19th century there was a dominance of the bourgeoisie, which formed the corps of electoral deputies
In the House of Lords there are nobility, but the main leadership in the lower house is the “golden era of parliamentarism”
One of the next reforms is the transformation of parties. Liberals used the concept to win votes. ( Whigs)
But a change is also taking place within the party of the bourgeoisie.
Tori- conservatives. Defenders of the old order, large landowners who have become bourgeois.
Unforeseen: workers realized that they had been deceived widespread discontent among the masses
England appear garthists(workers' advocates). They drafted a new electoral charter - universal male suffrage; equal constituencies.
"People's Charter":
Universal suffrage
Equality in the number of electoral districts
Cancellation of property qualification
The petition was repeatedly rejected by Parliament, but under the influence of Hartism, a law on a 10-hour working day was passed in the 40s of the 19th century; electoral reform was adopted (1867).
A labor aristocracy was emerging.
The reform included redistricting; liquidation of another 52 “rotten” towns; lowering the property qualification (in the counties income was 5 feet sterling); in cities, owners and tenants of houses, tenants (who paid 10 feet sterling). That is, the petty bourgeoisie, the top of the working class, was included in the electoral corps.
At the beginning of the 19th century. In England, a constitutional parliamentary monarchy was formed, but the medieval electoral system was preserved. The disadvantages of this electoral system were that the right to elect members to the House of Commons belonged to a small minority of the population. Members of the House of Commons were elected from counties (regions) and cities (towns). These territories were given the right to elect two representatives, regardless of population size. Various “rotten towns” enjoyed the right of representation in the House of Commons, and many large cities that still existed in the Middle Ages did not have representation in the House of Commons. Rotten towns were those that were sparsely populated or completely depopulated by the 18th-19th centuries. towns and villages, which in the XVI-XVII centuries. were thriving centers of crafts and trade. However, they had an ancient right; representation to parliament. Many large cities, which did not yet exist in the Middle Ages, did not have representation in the House of Commons, since they did not have a royal charter and, as a result, were generally deprived of the right to vote. As a result of the transformation of England in the second half of the 18th - early 19th centuries. from an agricultural country to a leading industrial power, in which the urban population began to predominate over the rural, an economically influential, wealthy and educated bourgeoisie emerged, which thereby potentially became ready to enjoy political rights. The landowning aristocracy, having received an influential rival, was forced to change the electoral system. Electoral reform of 1832 In 1832, the Whigs carried out the first electoral reform, which redistributed electoral districts in order to establish at least relative proportionality of the number of deputies to the population and expanded the number of voters by changing property qualifications. The reform changed the property qualification. In the counties, suffrage was granted to the owners or tenants of a plot of land generating a certain annual income. Thus, the electoral qualification was increased for landowners from 40 shillings to 200, and for tenants it was even higher. The electoral reform also established other qualifications for voters: male gender; reaching adulthood (21 years old); payment of tax in favor of the poor, presence of residence qualification (residence in the electoral district) - 12 months. The electoral reform opened up access to the House of Commons for the bourgeoisie, rich people who did not have noble titles, and thereby deprived the landowning aristocracy of their monopoly on participation in the political life of the country. After the reform, the bourgeoisie, along with the aristocracy, sleeps on possessing political power. Electoral reform of 1867 In 1867, the Conservatives, under pressure from the workers' unions, carried out a second electoral reform. Under this reform, the remaining towns were deprived of the right to send deputies to the House of Commons, and the vacant seats were distributed among the more populous cities and counties. In the counties, property prices for land owners or tenants were reduced to 5 pounds. In the cities, the right to vote was granted to all tenants paying rent of at least 10 pounds per rut. Thus, the reform gave the right to vote to wealthy urban workers, but in the countryside, rural workers did not receive the right to vote. Other qualifications remained the same as those provided for by the electoral reform of 1832. Electoral reform 1884- 1885 In 1884, the third electoral reform was carried out, according to which, in the counties, the right to vote was given to residential tenants paying a rent of at least 10 pounds per year. Thus, the reform extended suffrage to rural workers. As a result of three electoral reforms of the 19th century. Two-thirds of the total male population of England received suffrage. The 1885 Act reduced the previous inequality of electoral districts. Cities and counties were divided into electoral districts according to population, electing one deputy each.
Any number of deputies could be nominated in a district, usually 3 or 4, but the candidate who received a relative majority of votes was considered elected, the majority being only one vote.
Class structure of society. At the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries. In Great Britain there is a rapid development of industry, the results of which were the disappearance of small handicraft industries and the emergence of industrial centers. The industrial revolution also gave rise to the agricultural revolution. Small-scale land rentals were replaced by large-scale capitalist farming.
So, the industrial revolution and the agricultural revolution significantly changed the class structure of society. In the village, there were essentially three classes: landlords, tenants and farm laborers. A class of industrial bourgeoisie and a class of proletarians were formed in the city.
Political system at the beginning of the 19th century. By the 19th century England has a fairly developed political system. Changes in the class structure of society were also reflected in the social base of the main political parties - the Tories and Whigs. The Tories were the party of landowners and the financial bourgeoisie, bearers of historical tradition and conservatism. While accepting the new, they sought to preserve as much of the old as possible. The Whigs represented the interests of the industrial bourgeoisie. The struggle for power between the Tories and Whigs reflected the struggle for political dominance between the industrial bourgeoisie, on the one hand, and the landlords, allied with the commercial and financial bourgeoisie, on the other.
The fight for electoral reform. After the end of the Napoleonic Wars, the English economy experienced a temporary recession. Exports of goods from England decreased significantly, and this led to a reduction in their production and increased unemployment.
In addition, prices for bread and other agricultural products fell. Landlords feared that the import of grain from abroad would further reduce prices and lead to a fall in land rent. In an effort to ensure that they would continue to receive large incomes, the landlords insisted on the adoption by Parliament of Corn Laws in 1815, which prohibited the import of grain into England if the price of grain in this country fell below 80 shillings per quarter (a quarter equal to 1.1012 dm 3) . Subsequently, Parliament reduced the ceiling price of grain to 66 shillings per quarter. The access of grain to England from other countries remained virtually closed. Industrial and agricultural workers began to fight against the Corn Laws, hoping that their repeal would lead to cheaper bread. The English industrial bourgeoisie was also hostile to these laws, since high grain prices prevented further reduction of workers' wages and enriched the landlords, thereby strengthening their dominance in Parliament.
England was gripped by popular unrest, in which workers, farm laborers, and the bankrupt petty bourgeoisie took part. In 1817, the government temporarily suspended the Habeas Corpus Act and resorted to repression. But when this law came into force again the following year, popular unrest resumed.
The petty bourgeoisie and workers demanded the democratization of the political system and the introduction of universal suffrage. The movement for electoral reform was also supported by the industrial bourgeoisie.
Electoral reform of 1832 and its significance. In the 1920s, with the emergence of new markets in South America, trade revived and production began to grow in a number of industries. Salaries began to rise. A number of reforms were carried out. In particular, in 1824 the law prohibiting workers' unions was repealed. As a result, trade unions began to appear - associations of workers in their specialties to develop common working conditions and provide assistance to union members. Since the late 20s, the movement for electoral reform began again. The first blow to the old electoral system came in 1829, when Catholics were admitted to parliament and public office. The next Parliamentary Reform Bill was prepared in 1830 by the Whigs. It was a very moderate project, in which the main attention was paid to the issue of redistribution of seats: only the large and middle bourgeoisie could apply for seats in parliament. However, the Tories called the project revolutionary and did not let it pass. The reform became possible only thanks to the active actions of workers who took to the streets with weapons, ready to fight for electoral reform. The House of Lords had to give in, and in June 1832 the Reform Bill was approved.
The law on parliamentary reform deprived 56 “rotten towns” of the right of representation in parliament, and 30 “rotten towns” could henceforth send one deputy to parliament instead of two. Large industrial cities received the right of parliamentary representation. Thus, as a result of the reform, mandates were redistributed.
The Reform Act granted suffrage to men who had reached the age of 21, paid the poor tax and owned property (in counties - land, in cities - buildings) providing at least £10 an annual income. As a result of the reform, land tenants (until that time deprived of the right to vote) with an annual rent of at least 50 pounds sterling received the right to vote. A residency requirement was also established - 6 months.
As a result of the reform, the number of voters increased to 652 thousand. However, the workers and petty bourgeoisie, who fought so hard for voting rights, did not receive them. Inequality of constituencies was not eliminated, and open voting was maintained. The parliamentary reform of 1832 ensured the representation of the industrial bourgeoisie in parliament. This reform was the result of a compromise between the landowning aristocracy and the industrial bourgeoisie.
The reform of 1832 was a significant event in the life of England. She ended the feudal traditions of representation and contributed to the transformation of the House of Commons into a bourgeois parliament. The reform ensured the access of the industrial bourgeoisie to parliament, thus including it in a compromise with the aristocracy.
Changes in the composition of the House of Commons allowed the cabinet to finally get rid of royal dependence, since the aristocracy standing behind the king could not provide the cabinet with the necessary majority in the House of Commons. At this time, the crown lost its last vestiges of power, and the royal prerogative was effectively transferred to the cabinet. The principle of government responsibility, developed in the 18th century, was strengthened: ministerial power mechanically passes into the hands of the party that has a parliamentary majority. Giving way to the leaders of the new majority, the cabinet takes the position of head of the parliamentary opposition. In connection with the concept of responsible government, during this period a principle emerged that determined the position of the crown: the king reigns, but does not rule. This conditional, unwritten rule is the most important basis of English parliamentarism.
An important consequence of the reform of 1832 was the transformation of political parties. The previous names of the parties lost their meaning, and the Tories were renamed the Conservative Party, the Whigs - the Liberal Party. Over time, liberalism and conservatism turned into powerful political movements that marked a whole period in the development of bourgeois society and the state.
Chartist movement. The reform of 1832 did not satisfy the working people of Great Britain, who took an active part in the struggle for its implementation. In 1836-1838 The English economy was once again shaken by a crisis of overproduction, which caused a new deterioration in the situation of workers. This gave rise to the emergence of a political labor movement in England - Chartism.
In 1836, an association of workers was created in London, which put forward the following demands: 1) universal suffrage for men who have reached the age of 21 and have lived in a given parish for at least 6 months; 2) abolition of the property qualification for candidates for parliamentary deputies; 3) equal representation and equalization of electoral districts; 4) annual parliamentary elections; 5) remuneration for the work of deputies; 6) secret ballot. These demands were very popular among workers, who believed that by winning universal suffrage they would be able to achieve a radical change in their working and living conditions.
In addition to the workers, bourgeois liberals also advocated the democratization of the political system.
Participants in the movement decided to present their demands to parliament in the form of a petition for a people's charter (charter), which gave the name to the entire movement.
In 1838, the Chartists produced the first national petition for a people's charter, containing six demands put forward by the London Working Men's Association. The House of Commons rejected this petition, using repression against the participants in the movement. In the autumn of 1839, a temporary decline in the Chartist movement began.
The beginning of the 40s was marked by a new rise of Chartism, accompanied by increased revolutionary sentiment among the workers. In May 1842, the Chartists introduced a second petition for a people's charter to Parliament, which was signed by 3.3 million people. The basis of this petition was the same six demands that were contained in the first petition for a people's charter. The English Parliament rejected this petition too.
The third time the Chartists tried to storm Parliament in 1848. They decided to submit a petition to Parliament on April 10, 1848 and hold a massive popular demonstration in London on the same day in its defense. But the government, calling in troops, disrupted the demonstration. In July 1848, Parliament once again rejected the petition for a people's charter, and the government moved on to massive repression against the Chartists. Soon, the economic boom alleviated the severity of many social problems, and the Chartist movement faded away.
Chartism played an important role in English history. The political reforms of subsequent decades were prompted to a certain extent by the struggle of the working class.
The fight for new electoral reform. In the 50-60s of the XIX century. The political dominance of the industrial bourgeoisie was established in the form of classical bourgeois parliamentarism. House of Commons by the middle of the 19th century. sidelined the House of Lords and minimized the political influence of royal power. However, as a result of the reform of 1832, only the top of the industrial and commercial bourgeoisie gained access to parliament, which was not interested in radically breaking the laws and customs inherited from the Middle Ages.
At the end of the 40s of the XIX century. There was a split in the Conservative Party, which led to its decline, and the liberals strengthened in power for a long time. This party was led by major statesmen who knew how to make the necessary concessions to broad layers of the middle and petty bourgeoisie in a timely manner. Nevertheless, they stubbornly resisted further expansion of suffrage.
Disparate forces have united in the struggle for electoral reform. The bourgeoisie, having become a powerful economic force, came to the decision to take full political power in the country into its own hands, expanding the scope of the first parliamentary reform.
With the defeat of the Chartist movement, the labor movement in Great Britain lost its independence for some time and was directed towards the legal struggle for purely economic demands. Trade unions hoped that an increase in the number of worker voters would strengthen their influence in the House of Commons, which would ensure the effectiveness of the economic struggle with entrepreneurs. At the same time, the political rights of workers were not linked to their access to parliament.
Both parties, frightened by the popular movement, understanding the need for reform, challenged each other on the initiative to implement it. In the end, the project proposed by the head of the Conservative cabinet, B. Disraeli, was adopted, with amendments put forward by the radical part of the liberals.
Electoral reform of 1867. The reform of 1867 provided for a new redistribution of deputy seats: 11 “towns” were completely deprived of the right to elect deputies to the House of Commons, and 35 “towns” retained the right to choose only one deputy. The vacant mandates were transferred to the largest industrial cities and counties.
The new law significantly changed the suffrage of city residents: it was granted to all owners or tenants of houses paying a tax to the benefit of the poor, and to tenants paying at least 10 pounds sterling rent per year (with a residence requirement of one year).
The most important innovation of the reform was the clause that the direct payer of taxes in favor of the poor is considered to be the one who, like all the numerous tenants of small apartments, pays this tax not himself, but through his landlord, who until now was considered as the only taxpayer. Thanks to this, not only homeowners, but also all their residents were included in the electoral lists. Thus, the electoral rolls expanded to include the petty bourgeoisie, artisans and workers.
As a result of the reform of 1867, the total number of voters increased by more than a million. However, 2/3 of the male population of England (the bulk of the workers, not to mention women) were still deprived of voting rights. Until 1872, open voting was maintained. The old, uneven distribution of electoral districts also remained.
The reform of 1867 summed up the thirty-year development of English constitutionalism, which led to the growth of the real political power of industrial capital.
Through electoral reforms, there was a redistribution of power within the ruling elite, and the industrial bourgeoisie came to power in an evolutionary way, without any serious upheavals. Liberals and conservatives strengthened their positions and prevented an explosive situation.
End of the 19th century.
Political parties. The political system of Great Britain consisted of two large parties - liberals and conservatives, alternately replacing each other in power. Both parties represented the interests of the propertied classes, and there were no fundamental differences in their policies, but they differed in their class composition.
The liberals represented the interests mainly of the big bourgeoisie, enjoyed the support of the petty bourgeoisie and had significant influence on the top of the working class.
Until the 80s of the XIX century. The Conservative Party was inferior to the Liberals in its strength and influence. It relied mainly on landowners, large farmers and the Anglican Church.
The heyday of the English liberal state can be called the 70s of the 19th century. While in power for more than 10 years, the Liberals implemented a number of reforms in an effort to attract the votes of the mass voter.
End of the 19th century was marked by an intensification of the labor movement and an increase in the number of trade unions due to the emergence of new industries and, accordingly, new layers of workers. Meanwhile, the current legislation deprived workers' unions of the rights of legal personality and made it impossible for trade unions to support striking workers. However, after the reform of 1867, the struggle for workers' votes led to the recognition of trade unions. In 1871, the Liberals passed a law allowing trade unions to appear in court represented by their representatives. In 1875, the Conservative cabinet made a number of concessions to workers: collective agreements were legalized and assistance as such to strikers from trade unions and their organizations ceased to be criminalized.
In 1906, the British Labor Party was formed, which, in essence, was a federation of various organizations: trade unions, independent labor party, social democratic federation, etc. The goal of this party was to get its own deputies into parliament. The petty bourgeoisie and the labor aristocracy acquired decisive influence in the new party. In 1906, Labor won 29 seats in parliament for the first time. Initially, Labor represented only the left wing of the liberals. But subsequently they formed a permanent independent faction that competed with liberals and conservatives.
Electoral reforms of the late 19th century. At the end of the 19th century. A number of laws were adopted aimed at democratizing voting rights.
In 1872, the Liberal government, in an effort to end the very common practice of bribery of voters, passed a law on secret ballots. However, this measure had little success. The 1883 law, which limited election costs and required election agents to report publicly, established a list of election crimes and increased penalties for them.
In 1884-1885 a third electoral reform was carried out, designed to correct the shortcomings of the first two reforms, in particular, to eliminate the diversity of electoral qualifications.
The law of 1884 abolished the property qualification in cities, and in the counties small tenants received the right to vote under the conditions imposed on city residents by the reform of 1867. As a result of this reform, the number of voters was doubled.
The law of 1885 made a new redistribution of seats: 105 “towns” with less than 16 thousand inhabitants were deprived of independent representation; cities with a population of less than 57 thousand residents received one place each; For larger cities, the number of mandates was increased. Cities and counties were divided into districts (the district covered 50-54 thousand inhabitants), which elected one deputy each.
Reform 1884-1885 did not eliminate many significant shortcomings of the electoral system: the disproportion between the number of voters and the number of mandates remained; persons who occupied premises in several districts that gave the right to vote received several votes, while a large part of the population did not have voting rights. In addition, voter registration procedures were complicated. Elections did not take place on the same day throughout the country. The deputies did not seek remuneration. The majoritarian election system was maintained: if candidates did not achieve an absolute majority, the one who received a relative majority won.
Local government and court reforms. The next stage of reforms is associated with the Conservative Party. In 1888 they carried out a reform of local government in the counties, extending to them the system of self-government established in 1835 in cities. All administrative power was transferred to the elected councils created in the counties. Magistrates retained only judicial functions. In parishes with a population of more than 300 inhabitants, elected councils were also created. As a result of the reform, local government passed from the aristocracy to the bourgeoisie.