resulting from the philosophical writings of Bentham and the active work of his disciples in almost every field. Thus England put her stamp of disapproval upon slavery, while through the work of Robert Owen, she received her first constructive teaching with regard to the treatment of factory workers and her first definite knowledge of their condition. The work of Romilly began the final effort for the reform of criminal law, while from many sources, came the first definite suggestions with respect to administrative reform and the reform of the suffrage.

Through the great maze of practical reform runs the thread of the idea of liberty, a liberty as conceived by Bentham, very much broader and more comprehensive in its scope than the earlier conception. Thus it is that we approach the crisis of this era of the Reform Bill of 1832, through a gradually expanding horizon. The new conception is seen to depend upon a new organization of the government which represents and administers it. "The Reform Bill of 1832 has been called the greatest political fact of the nineteenth century in the history of the British people. But it is more than that; it is one of the most important liberty documents in the history of the world, and is worthy, in importance, to be placed alongside Magna Carta. The Reform Bill severed the last chain which bound England of the nineteenth century to the Middle Ages. It was the final and complete cleavage between a modified form of slavery or servitude and those free conditions which allow the development of each individual member of the nation by giving him a share in the government. It was based on the fact that all men are equal in the sight of the law, that all men, irrespective of accidents of birth and lineage, of name or wealth, are alike equally entitled to protection both as to their lives and their property." 2

The Presenting of the Bill of

1832.

.

The purpose of the Bill is splendidly set forth in the speech of Lord John Russell, a long time advocate of reform, who presented it to a House crowded by members "breathless with expectant silence." "The object of the ministers," he said, "has been to produce a measure with which every reasonable man in the country will be satisfied-we wish to take our stand between the two hostile parties, neither agreeing with the bigotry of those who would reject all reform, nor with the fanaticism of those who contend that only one plan of reform would be wholesome or satisfactory, but placing ourselves between both, and between the abuses we intend to amend and the convulsion we hope to avert.'

2 Chatterton, (E. K.,) Britain's Record, pp. 63-68.

"The ancient constitution of our country declares that no man shall be taxed for the support of the state, who has not consented, by himself or his representative, to the imposition of these taxes. The well known statute de Tallagio non concedendo, repeats the same language; and although some historical doubts have been thrown upon it, its legal meaning has never been disputed. It included 'all the freemen of the land,' and provided that each county should send to the Commons of the realm, two knights, each city two burgesses, and each borough two members. Thus about a hundred places sent representatives, and some thirty or forty others occasionally enjoyed the privilege, but it was discontinued or revived as they rose or fell in the scale of wealth or importance. Thus, no doubt, at that early period, the House of Commons did represent the people of England. Therefore if we look at the question of right, the reformers have right in their favor. Then, if we consider what is reasonable, we shall arrive at a similar result. A stranger who was told that this country is unparalleled in wealth and industry, and more civilized and more enlightened than any country was before it; that it is a country that prides itself on its freedom, and that once in every seven years it elects representatives from its population, to act as the guardians and preservers of that freedom,―would be anxious and curious to see how that representation is formed, and how the people choose those representatives, to whose faith and guardianship they entrust their free and liberal institutions. Such a person would be very much astonished if he were taken to a ruined mound, and told that that mound sent two representatives to Parliament-if he were taken to a stone wall, and told that three niches in it sent two representatives to Parliamentif he were taken to a part where no houses were to be seen, and told that that part sent two representatives to Parliament; but if he were told all this, and were astonished at hearing it, he would be still more astonished if he were to see large and opulent towns full of enterprise, and industry, and intelligence, containing vast magazines of every species of manufactures, and were then told that these towns sent no representatives to Parliament. Such a person would be still more astonished, if he were taken to Liverpool, where there is a large constituency, and told, 'here you will have a fine specimen of a popular election.' He would see bribery employed to the greatest extent and in the most unblushing manner; he would see every voter receiving a number of guineas in a box, as the price of his corruption; and after such a spectacle, he would no doubt be much astonished that a naA statute defining feudal taxation. This statute was passed in the reign of Edward I.

tion whose representatives are thus chosen, could perform the functions of legislation at all, or enjoy respect in any degree. I say then, that if the question before the House is a question of reason, the present state of representation is against reason.

"The confidence of the country in the construction and constitution of the House of Commons is gone. It would be easier to transfer the flourishing manufactures of Leeds and Manchester to Galton and old Sarum, than to reëstablish confidence and sympathy between this House and those whom it calls its constituents. If therefore, the question is one of right, right is in favor of Reform; if it be a question of reason, reason is in favor of Reform; if it be a question of policy and expediency, policy and expediency are in favor of Reform."4

Terms of the

Bill of 1832.

The struggle over the Bill was long and bitter. In the House of Commons although there was little difficulty in finding a majority for the Bill, it was necessary to dissolve Parliament and appeal to the country, which strongly supported the reformers. The House of Lords, however, refused emphatically to admit the measure, until the King was forced by Earl Gray, the prime minister, to agree to appoint enough additional members of the Upper House to give the Bill a majority. In the face of this threat a hundred lords absented themselves from the House, thus permitting the Bill to pass and to go to the King for his signature.5 The Bill as it was finally passed disenfranchised fifty boroughs and took from thirty small boroughs one member each. The 141 seats thus vacated were distributed among the large towns, twenty-two receiving two members each and twenty-one one member each. The county membership was increased from ninety-four to one hundred fifty-nine, while the remaining thirteen members were given to Scotland and Ireland. The Bill moderately extended and equalized the franchise. In the boroughs the vote was given to all householders paying a rental of £10 a year. In the counties the forty shilling freeholder already voting was allowed to keep his vote, but a £10 qualification for freeholders, copy holders, and lease holders for sixty years, was added. A £50 qualification was fixed for the short term lease holder and for tenants at will. The Bill was received with great joy by the people at large and with much misgiving by the landed classes. Its great effect was to extend the franchise to the commercial classes. About 500,000 voters were added, but "five out of six of the people were still without a vote." 6 'Quoted in Molesworth, The History of the Reform Bill, pp. 103-119. 'The King may create new peers and in order to secure the consent of the Lords to the Bill, Earl Gray persuaded the King to thus coerce the House of Lords. 6 Green, History of the English People, p. 853.

Results of the Reform Bill of 1832.

"The Revolution of 1688 had transferred the chief power from the sovereign to the landed aristocracy. The Reform Bill shifted the balance (that is transferred the power) to the commercial and industrial class." Its effect on government was instantaneous and decisive. "The system of cabinet government became a reality for the ministers henceforth represented a popular majority in the House of Commons and not one manipulated by the sovereign and the land owning magnates who had so long controlled the old pocket boroughs. The passage of the measure had demonstrated, too, that in a crisis the House of Lords could not defy the popular will. Furthermore the triumph was an indication that the principle of change which had been struggling for expression during the past decade was going to prevail." 7

'Cross, History of England and Greater Britain, p. 917.

SUGGESTED READINGS

Cheyney, A Short History of England, Ch. XIX, XX.

Hayes, A Political and Social History of Modern Europe, Vol. II, pp. 90 ff.

Hazen, Europe since 1815, Ch. XVIII-XXI.

Hazen, Modern European History, Ch. XXV.

Robinson and Beard, Development of Modern Europe, Vol. II, Ch. XXV-XXVI. Slater, The Making of Modern England.

Schapiro, Modern and Contemporary European History, Ch. XIII.

CHAPTER V

ENGLISH DEMOCRACY SINCE 1832

The Reform Period after 1832.

"ENGLAND has acted on the world as a principle of release for freedom, sometimes by irritating it into activity, as with the American colonies, sometimes by coöperating with it, as in Canada and Australia. The balance of power has departed from England to a wider area. But the principle of government which creates and directs that power continues to be an English principle. It is the principle of democratic control." 1

fruitful in reform legislation.

When the great democratic revolution of 1832, heralded by the Reform Bill of that year, had been made the possession of Englishmen by being inscribed upon the statute books, the nation set to work through its new Parliament to bring about religious, economic and social reforms which had all waited for the settlement of the parliamentary reform movement. The first reform Parliament was very Relief was given to the Irish Catholics by limiting the number of Sees of the Church of England throughout Ireland and levying an income tax upon the higher English clergy for the benefit of the parish clergy. Slavery was abolished in the colonies as the result of the strong wave of moral sentiment which swept over England. The charters of the East India Company were modified in the interests of the Indian people. The first great factory act was passed in the interests of the workers, and the old system of the poor laws, existent in the time of Elizabeth, was destroyed and the foundations were laid for the modern methods of caring for the poor.

The activity of Parliament could not, however, satisfy the poor people, much as was done for them. They had, through public sentiment, petitions and public meetings, forced the Act of 1832 upon Parliament; now it seemed to them that the great gains had all gone to the middle class. As they reasoned the matter, they had only increased the number of the aristocracy. One of the chief benefits of the peace of 1815 to the working man was the fall in the price of provisions. Grain fell from 100 shillings a quarter 2 to sixty-five shillings. Three classes conceived that they had an interest in the Corn Law of 1815 (passed by Parliament because of the rapid fall in prices) and its successors the parson, whose tithe varied with the price of corn, the tenant farmer, and the landlord. These classes had 'Gleason, Inside the British Empire, p. 3.

2A quarter-8 bushels, a shilling 25 cents of our money.