Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:33:19.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

IV. Earl Grey's Cabinet and the Objects of Parliamentary Reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

John Milton-Smith
John Milton-Smith
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since the advent of the social sciences, historians have been ploughing up large areas of well-trampled history. Sociology, for example, has lent them an expanding range of hypotheses and interpretations. In particular, studies more concerned with behavioural patterns than with the mere details of what happened have cast the traditional accounts aside. But there are dangers in this rush to produce fresh formulations. The historian, once caught in the tangle of an ingenious general explanation, abandons too easily the normal rigorous standards of historical research. Frequendy, in such cases, he fails to establish the relationship between his evidence and his generalizations. These criticisms often apply when broad concepts from political sociology are used to explain the motives and behaviour of specific politicians and groups of politicians. Any background study of the Great Reform Act is exposed to all these risks.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 1972 , pp. 55 - 74
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Postan, M. M., ‘Fact and Relevance in Historical Study’, Historical Studies, Australia and New Zealand, XIII, no. 51, p. 411.Google Scholar

2 Collingwood, R. G., The Idea of History (London, 1963). See especially pp. 213, 228, 313.Google Scholar

3 Butterfield, Herbert, The Whig Interpretation of History (London, 1963), p. 30.Google Scholar

4 Butler, J. R. M., The Passing of the Great Reform Bill (London, 1914), p. 255.Google Scholar

5 Ibid. p. 183; Trevelyan, G. M., Lord Grey and the Reform Bill (London, 1920), p. 261.Google Scholar

6 See Butler, , op. cit. p. 227, for the various connotations of the term ‘the people’.Google Scholar

7 See, for example, Politics in the Age of Peel (London, 1953), PP. 6, 8, 10, 15, 27–9.Google Scholar

8 Ibid. p. 15.

9 Ibid. p. 4.

10 Moore, D. C., ‘The Other Face of Reform’, Victorian Studies, v, no. i, p. 19Google Scholar; Moore, D. C., ‘Concession or Cure: The Sociological Premises of the First Reform Act’, The Historical Journal, ix, no. 1, p. 47Google Scholar; Moore, D. C., ‘Political Morality in Mid-Nineteenth Century England: Concepts, Norms, Violations’, Victorian Studies, XIII, no. 1, p. 18.Google Scholar

11 ‘Concession or Cure …’, p. 48.

12 ‘The Other Face of Reform’, p. 20.

13 Ibid. p. 25; ‘Concession or Cure …’, p. 48; ‘Political Morality in Mid-Nineteenth Century England …’, p. 17. ‘Concession or Cure …’, p. 46; ‘Political Morality in Mid-Nineteenth Century England …’, p. 15.

14 ‘Concession or Cure …’, p. 39.

15 Marx, Karl, ‘Lord John Russell’, 1 08 1855. in Karl Marx and Frederick Engels on Britain (Moscow, 1962), pp. 452–3.Google Scholar

16 Grey to Grenville, 17 Nov. 1812, H.M.C. Fortescue MSS at Dropmorc, x, 312; Grey to Lambton, 3 Jan. 1820, quoted in Reid, J. Stuart, Life and Letters of the First Earl of Durham (London, 1906), I, 129.Google Scholar

17 Russell to Holland, 28 Dec. 1829, Holland House Papcri, B.M. Add. MSS 51677, fo. 88.

18 See especially the anonymous pamphlet attributed to Brougham, Lord, The Country without a Government: or Plain Questions upon the Unhappy State of the Present Administration (2nd ed., London, 1830), pp. 20–1.Google Scholar

19 3rd Earl Grey, Journal, entry for 14 Feb. 1830, box 219, Grey Papers, Palaeography Department and Diplomatic, Durham University.

20 Russell to Brougham, 30 Jan. 1830, Brougham Papers, University College, London.

21 Grey to Ellice, 28 Jan. 1829, Ellice Papers, E17, fo. 61 (out of order), National Library of Scotland.

22 Ibid.

23 Grey to Holland, 9 Feb. 1830, 24 Mar. 1830, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51555, fos. 467, 470.

24 Althorp to Grey, 19 Feb. 1830, 6 Mar. 1830, Grey Papers, box 52 file 25; 3rd Earl Grey's Journal, entry for 6 Mar. 1830; see also Flick, Carlos, ‘The Fall of Wellington's Government’, Journal of Modern History, XXXVII, no. 1, p. 63.Google Scholar

25 Althorp to Grey, 6 Mar. 1830, Ibid.

26 Mitchell, Austin, The Whigs in Opposition, 1815–30 (Oxford, 1967), pp. 216–7Google Scholar; Machin, G. I. T., The Catholic Question in English Politics 1820 to 1830 (Oxford, 1964), p. 184Google Scholar; Bradfield, B. T., ‘Sir Richard Vyvyan and the Country Gentlemen, 1830–1834’, English Historical Review, LXXXIII, no. 329, p. 729 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27 Bradfield, B. T., ‘Sir Richard Vyvyan and Tory Politics with special reference to the period 1825–46’, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1965, pp. 79–99.Google Scholar

28 Bradfield, B. T., ‘Sir Richard Vyvyan and the Country Gentlemen, 1830–1834’, p. 730.Google Scholar

29 Bradfield, B. T., ‘Sir Richard Vyvyan and Tory Politics …’, p. 87.Google Scholar

30 Ibid. p. 101.

31 Ibid.

32 Ibid. p. 89.

33 Mitchell, , op. cit. p. 217.Google Scholar

34 Russell, to Lansdowne, , 4 01 1829, quoted in Spencer Walpole, The Life of Lord John Russell (London, 1889), I, 147–8.Google Scholar

35 Brougham, quoted in Hobhouse, J. C., Recollections of a Long Life, ed. Dorchester, Lady (4 vols., London, 1910), IV, 7.Google Scholar

36 Mitchell, , op. cit. pp. 238, 240.Google Scholar

37 See especially Holland to Grey, 25 Sept. 1830, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51548, fo. 72.

38 Lord Holland's Political Journals, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51868, Introduction.

39 Grey to Holland, 8 Oct. 1830, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51555, fo. 478; cf. Flick, , op. cit. p. 64.Google Scholar

40 Extract from Palmerston to Charles Grant, 17 Aug. 1830, Broadlands MSS (on loan to N.R.A.) GC/GL/220; see also Mitchell, , op. cit. p. 240.Google Scholar

41 Huskisson to Graham (private), 26 Aug. 1830, Graham Papers, microfilm, Cambridge University Library, Cambridge, microfilm 26.

42 Grey to Holland, 19 Sept. 1830, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51555, fo. 477; Holland to Grey, 25 Sept. 1830, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51548, fo. 72; Duncannon to Brougham, 22 Sept. [1830], Brougham Papers; Melbourne to Brougham, 19 Sept. 1830, Brougham Papers.

43 3rd Earl Grey, Journal, entry for 13 May 1830, Grey Papers, box 219; cf. Flick, , op. cit. p. 64.Google Scholar

44 Grey to Holland, 8 Oct. 1830, op. cit.

45 Grey to Holland, 17 Oct. 1830, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51555, fo. 480.

46 Mitchell, , op. cit. p. 247.Google Scholar

47 Ibid. pp. 246–7.

48 Palmerston to Graham, 4 Aug. 1830. Graham Papers, microfilm 26; see also Durham to Lady Durham, 8 Nov. 1830, Lambton Papers, quoted in Aspinall, Arthur, Lord Brougham and the Whig Party (Manchester, 1927), p. 288.Google Scholar

49 Ibid.

50 E. J. Littleton to Palmerston, 2 Oct. 1830, Broadlands MSS, GC/HA/300.

51 Ibid.; Graham to Brougham, 2 Nov. 1830, Graham Papers, microfilm 26. See also Trevelyan, , op. cit. p. 263.Google Scholar

52 Anglesey to ?, 1 Nov. 1830, quoted in Marquess of Anglesey, , One-Leg (Oxford, 1963), p. 238. See also Brougham to the Duke de Broglie, 15 Aug. 1830, Aberdeen Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 43235, fo. 148 (intercepted and received at the F.O. 15 Aug. 1830); Place to Hume, 1 Nov. 1830, Place Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 35148, fo. 67.Google Scholar

53 Quoted in Marquess of Anglesey, , op. cit. p. 376.Google Scholar

54 Rudé, George, ‘Captain Swing and Van Diemen's Land’, Papers and Proceedings of the Tasmanian Historical Research Association, XII, no. 1, p. 8Google Scholar; Hobsbawm, E. J. and Rudé, George, Captain Swing (London, 1969), passim.Google Scholar

55 The Mirror of Parliament (9 Dec. 1830), IV, 468.Google Scholar

56 Aberdeen to Heytesbury, 17 Oct. 1830, Heytesbury Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 41560, fo. 142.

57 3 Hansard (22 Mar. 1832), xi, 741–2.Google Scholar

58 Mitchell, , op. cit. pp. 4, 14–15, 252Google Scholar; Flick, , op. cit. pp. 62–71Google Scholar; Beales, D. E. D., ‘Parliamentary Parties and the Independent Member, 1810–1860’, in Robson, Robert (ed.), Ideas and Institutions of Victorian Britain (London, 1967), pp. 16–17.Google Scholar

59 Extract from Grey to the Knight of Kerry, n.d., Grey Papers, box 46, Papers on Parliamentary Reform I.

60 3 Hansard (1 Mar. 1831), II, 1140–1Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (3 Mar. 1831), II, 1328, 1330Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (28 Mar. 1831), III, 1018Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (28 Mar. 1831), III, 1062.Google Scholar

61 Extract on Reform, unsigned, n.d., Russell Papers, P.R.O. 30/22/1B, fo. 224; memorandum, unsigned, 4 Apr. 1831, Ibid. fo. 29.

62 Extracts from two letters on the Reform Bill, Russell (?) to Grey, n.d., Clarendon Papers, Bodleian Library, Oxford.

83 Fragment, unsigned, n.d., Russell Papers, P.R.O. 30/22/1B, fo. 211; memorandum, unsigned, 4 Apr. 1831, Ibid. fo. 29. For an important treatment of representation theory, see Goderich to Sir John Colborne, 8 Nov. 1832 (P.R.O.) CO. 43/43, fos. 198–9; Goderich discusses the relative importance of capital, population, interests and geographical area, and emphasizes the role of the latter in restricting the representation of the London metropolitan districts as against ‘the Country at large’ to less than ‘the most perfect nominal equality’.

64 3 Hansard (1 Mar. 1831), II, 1069, 1072, 1086–7, 1089Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (25 Mar. 1831), III, 938Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (28 Mar. 1831), III, 1082–3Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (21 Sept. 1831), XI, 425Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (23 Sept. 1831), VII, 577Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (4 Oct. 1831), VII, 1179, 1182Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (9 Mar. 1832), xi, 80.Google Scholar

65 3 Hansard (8 Mar. 1831), III, 225Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (24 Mar. 1831), III, 853Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (19 Mar. 1832), xi, 716–7. See the Tory plan for ‘reviving the drooping spirits of the Gentlemen of the Country ’ in Wellington to Herries, 8 June 1831, Hemes Papers, vol. in, B.M. Deposit 4345 (not indexed yet).Google Scholar

66 3 Hansard (3 Oct. 1831), VII, 978Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (3 Oct. 1831), VII, 1706–7Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (4 Oct. 1831), VII, 1040–1Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (4 Oct. 1831), VII, 1194Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (22 Mar. 1832), xi, 723–4.Google Scholar

67 3 Hansard (24 Mar. 1831), III, 902–3.Google Scholar See also 3 Hansard (4 Oct. 1831), VII, 1153–75Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (22 Mar. 1832), xi, 742.Google Scholar

68 3 Hansard (24 Mar. 1831), III, 892; Goulburn Memoirs, Goulburn Papers, Surrey Record Office, Kingston-on-Thames.Google Scholar

69 3 Hansard (1 Mar. 1831), II, 1095–6Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (2 Mar. 1831), II, 1163–4Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (28 Mar. 1831), VIII, 983Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (22 Mar. 1832), xi, 723–4Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (22 Mar. 1832), xi, 742.Google Scholar

70 3 Hansard (2 Mar. 1831), II, 1197Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (3 Mar. 1831), II, 1328Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (21 Sept. 1831), VII, 425Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (22 Mar. 1831), III, 770.Google Scholar

71 See Gash, , op. cit. p. 4 ff.; Graham to ? [Grey ?], 17 Feb. 1831, private, Graham Papers, microfilm 26.Google Scholar

72 Grey to Palmerston, 10 Apr. 1831, Broadlands MSS, GC/GR/1973.

73 Durham to Palmerston, 28 Feb. 1831, Broadlands MSS, GC/DU/19.

74 Grey to Holland, 28 May 1831, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51677, fo. 89.

75 Holland's Political Journals, entry for 20 July 1831.

76 Ibid. entry for 21 July 1831 (see also 5 Sept. 1831); Cooper, Leonard, Radical Jack (London, 1959), pp. 100–1, 103, 105. See the 1834 correspondence involving Durham, Grey, Russell, Holland and Taylor on the respective contributions of Durham and Russell in framing the original Bill: Russell Papers, P.R.O. 30/22/IC, fos. 139–143; Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51548, fo. 163, 51677, fo. 140; see also Col. Charles Grey to Brougham, 16 Feb. 1852, Brougham Papers.Google Scholar

77 Graham to Grey, 17 June 1831, Graham Papers, microfilm 26; Holland's Political Journals, entry for 22 July 1831; Richmond to Graham, 2 June 1831, private, Graham Papers, microfilm 26; see also the attitude of Graham's uncle, Lord Galloway, to the Bill in Galloway to Graham, 20 May 1831, Graham Papers, microfilm 26.

78 Holland's Political Journals, entry for 14 Aug. 1831.

The revised borough freeholder clause has been the subject of an interesting but limited debate about the motives of the reforming government; see Hennock, E. P., ‘The Sociological Premises of the First Reform Act: A Critical Note’ and ‘D. C. Moore replies’, Victorian Studies, xiv, no. 3, pp. 321–37.Google Scholar Though it may be scarcely illuminating to say that they disagree about ‘the effective dynamics of nineteenth century political action’, to use Professor Moore's characteristic phrase, they certainly both ignore ‘the effective dynamics’ of Earl Grey's Cabinet. It is true that the Cabinet split over the specifications of the proposed reform was patched up in July. Holland's journal entry for 22 July reveals that the Cabinet declined ‘willingly to alter the bill or vary the proportion we had proposed to establish between land ’ and therefore refused, on the one hand, ‘to grant double representation to 26 boroughs’ and, on the other hand, ‘to admit tenants at will to vote for counties’. However, during the debate of 12 August, Sugden expressed objections to the existing borough freeholder clause and touched off a renewed controversy within the Cabinet. Another uneasy compromise was reached. Holland's journal entry for 14 August explains that ‘the reason for so altering our former determination was a persuasion that we should hardly be able to carry a provision so injurious to the rights of persons connected with town populations’. The Whigs within the Cabinet had succeeded in getting their colleagues to endorse a change in the borough freeholder clause, but it was a victory due more to arguments of strategy than of principle.

No doubt the success of the Chandos Clause later that month put the wisdom of this strategy into question. Ministers were caught off guard by its adoption. Possibly it was a reaction against the ministerial proposal. There is some later evidence to show that Palmerston was in contact with Chandos even at this early stage. Palmerston privately approved of the counter-balancing effect attributed by some to the Chandos Clause. The Whig members of the Cabinet opposed the Chandos Clause not so much because they feared its consequences but because they distrusted its sponsors. Furthermore, both Grey and Russell believed it could only do the landed interest harm. Grey thought it would open the way to secret ballot (3 Hansard (3 Oct. 1831), VII, 939–40) and Russell believed it would increase election expenses enormously (‘Memorandum by Lord John Russell’, 20 Oct. 1831, Grey Papers, box 46, Papers on Parliamentary Reform I).Google Scholar

79 Ibid. entries for 20 and 31 Aug. 1831, 5 Sept. 1831.

80 Ibid. entry for 5 Sept. 1831.

81 Ibid. entry for 8 Oct. 1831.

82 Ibid. entry for 10 Oct. 1831; Palmerston to Grey, 9 Oct. 1831, Holland House Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 51548, fo. 117 (copy).

83 Ibid.

84 Graham to Abercrombie, 6 Sept. 1831, private, Graham Papers, microfilm 26.

85 Melbourne to Palmerston, n Oct. 1831, Broadlands MSS GC/ME/12; Holland's Political Journals, entry for 16 Nov. 1831. See also Melbourne to Taylor, 25 Oct. 1831, in Lord Melbourne's Papers, ed. Saunders, Lloyd C. (London, 1889), p. 134.Google Scholar

86 Grey to Palmerston, 14 Oct. 1831, Broadlands MSS GC/GR/2043; Stanley to Graham, 27 Oct. [1831], Graham Papers, microfilm 26; George Grote to Grey, 14 Oct. 1831, copy, Place Papers, B.M. Add. MSS 35149, fo. 111 (see also io. 112).

87 See especially Stanley to Graham, Ibid. Their private correspondence and public speeches suggest that the ministers did not distinguish very often between the various causes of unrest. The labourers' riots of 1830, and the reform riots which became more frequent towards the end of 1831, mostly were treated as part of a general phenomenon. Parliamentary reform was assumed to be the ‘first’ measure for restoring general confidence and harmony; see Althorp's election victory dinner speech reported in The Northampton Mercury, 23 Mar. 1831, in which he stresses the common interest of ‘the peasant and the peer’ in parliamentary reform. For the actual causes of the various riots, see Hobsbawm, and Rude, , op. cit. pp. 87–9, 219, 296–7.Google Scholar

88 Palmerston to Richmond, 8 Nov. 1831, Broadlands MSS GO/RI/II; Stanley, to Graham, , op. cit.Google Scholar; Stanley to Palmerston, 28 Oct. 1831, Broadlands MSS GC/DE/61; Butler, op. cit. p. 300.

89 Greville Memoirs, ed. Reeve, Henry (London, 1889), II, 220, 223Google Scholar (entries for 22 and 23 Nov. 1831); Hobhouse, J. C., op. cit. p. 147 (entry for 5 Nov. 1831) (see also entry for 6 Nov. 1831, p. 153).Google Scholar

90 Stanley to Grey, 22 Nov. 1831, Grey Papers, box 11, file 8; cf. Graham's Memorandum on Reform, 25 Nov. 1831, Graham Papers, microfilm 26.

91 Palmerston to Melbourne, 20 Nov. 1831, Lord Melbourne's Papers, p. 134. See also Butler, , op. cit. p. 321.Google Scholar

92 3 Hansard (28 Mar. 1831), III, 998–9Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (3 Oct. 1831), VII, 976–7.Google Scholar See also Mitchell, , op. cit. p. 251.Google Scholar

93 The Times, 19 and 22 Aug. 1831; Holland's Political Journals, entries for 11 Dec. 1831, 19 and 29 Nov. 1831.

94 Wharncliffe to Grey, 24 Nov. 1831, Grey Papers, box 46, Papers on Parliamentary Reform 11; Holland's Political Journals, entries for 5 Mar. 1832, 9–14 Apr. 1832, 7 May 1832; Palmerston's Memorandum, n.d. (1831), Broadlands MSS CAB/B/5.

95 Palmerston, ‘Memorandum on the Reform Bill’, 29 Nov. 1831, Broadlands MSS CAB/B/6.

96 Holland's Political Journals, entry for 4 Mar. 1832; Butler, , op. cit. p. 318.Google Scholar

97 Ibid., entry for 9 May 1832.

98 Ibid., entries for 10–14 May 1832.

99 Palmerston to Sir Robert Adair, 14 May 1832, quoted by Bell, H. C. F., Lord Palmerston, 2 vols. (London, 1936), I, 107.Google Scholar

100 3 Hansard (21 Sept. 1831), VII, 438.Google Scholar See also 3 Hansard (23 Sept. 1831), VII, 575Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (3 Oct. 1831), VII, 979.Google Scholar

101 3 Hansard (1 Mar. 1831), II, 1143Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (23 Mar. 1831), III, 826Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (28 Mar. 1831), III, 1019Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (21 Sept. 1831), VII, 430–1Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (4 Oct. 1831), VII, 1228Google Scholar; 3 Hansard (22 Mar. 1832), xi, 771.Google Scholar

102 Russell, , ‘Earls Grey and Spencer’, Edinburgh Review, LXXXIII (01 1846), 257Google Scholar; Holland's Political Journals, Holland House Papers, entry for 28 Dec. 1837, B.M. Add. MSS 51872; Gash, , op. cit. p. 4.Google Scholar

103 ‘Lord Althorpe's (sic) Plan of Reform’, n.d., Grey Papers, box 46, Papers on Parliamentary Reform I.

104 ‘Report on the State of the Representation’, 14 Jan. 1831, Grey Papers, box 46, Papers on Parliamentary Reform I.

105 3 Hansard (28 Mar. 1831), III, 1020. My emphasis.Google Scholar

106 3 i (23 Mar. 1831), III, 832.Google Scholar

107 3 Hansard (3 Oct. 1831), VII, 979.Google Scholar

108 3 Hansard (4 Oct. 1831), VII, 1228–9.Google Scholar

109 ‘Draft for a Parliamentary Speech’, n.d., Russell Papers, P.R.O. 30/22/IC fo. 81.

110 ‘Extracts from Speeches of Lord Grey and Lord Althorp on the Finality of the Reform Bill’, Dec. 1838, Russell Papers, P.R.O. 30/22/IC, fo. 95.