It is clear that within the period of 1830-1848 that for better or worse there were, fundamental changes in the welfare of the British people and the social systems in effect in Britain.
In 1837 the ‘people’s charter’ was drawn up which comprised of 6 basic principles. The ‘people’s charter’ was a decidedly apt title as its overall aim was to give political power to the working class (the people) and to achieve a fair unbiased parliamentary system. Chartism was comprised of several large organisations. The first two being the London Working Men’s Association founded by William Lovett and the Birmingham Political Union founded by Thomas Attwood. Chartism relied on a combination of peaceful protest and continued pressure on the government but when deemed necessary resorted to show’s of force to make their voices heard. The charter was sent through parliament three times and failed on each occasion but fundamentally eventually all but one of the points raised in the charter was agreed and stands true in modern politics. Chartism at the time, although not entirely successful, was a big feature of the period. In 1839 near 10,000 armed protesters marched on Newport to free Henry Vincent from the local gaol. The troops guarding it were so afraid of the action that they opened fire. While in 1848 when the protest was taken to Kennington common, the national government had to dispatch 4,000 police officers, 7,000 soldiers and 85,000 special constables. Chartism and its leaders may not have succeeded in being directly accountable for passing legislation through parliament but it altered the government’s perception of the lower classes and forced them to acknowledge that inevitably they would have to be listened to. This in turn would encourage thousands more to join the chartist movement and to become more actively involved in politics. Evidently Chartism had a lesser effect on the political system but an effect of truly vast proportion on the social aspect of British life.
Further evidence of political and social change in the period was the formation of the Anti
Corn Law League. In 1815 the British government introduced import taxes on corn so as to
encourage people to buy British corn over foreign produce. It was essentially designed to
keep those growing corn in Britain wealthy and prevent the lower classes from
making money by importing it. However this had harsh consequences for many and in 1838
the Anti Corn Law League was established in Manchester. They campaigned for the repeal of
the acts by peaceful protest and were eventually answered in 1846 with the removal of
import taxes on corn. This triumph for the middle classes was reflective of the new level of
power the middle class had been endowed with and acted to encourage people to be
persistent in protest. This demonstrates a rise in middle class influence in British politics and
fundamental change to the social and political systems in Britain.
While it can be argued that the 1832 Great Reform Act ‘paved the way’ for further reform and change in the political and social systems of Britain principally it achieved very little. It achieved the dismantling of rotten boroughs but that was were the achievements ended. Prior to the Great Reform Act the middle classes and particularly the lower classes were campaigning for reform with passion and energy however when the act was passed and the middle class empowered they left their working class ‘allies’. Despite a majority of support for the act coming from the working classes, the act did very little if anything for them. They had as little political power after the act as they had before. Fundamentally if the Reform Act had accomplished a ‘fundamental’ change in the political system there would not have been further campaigns for change. However in 1836 just four years after the act was passed, the ‘Peoples charter’ was formed. This provides very clear evidence that while the Reform Act may have made minor changes to the political system, there were still many dissatisfied people with their sights set on change and that essentially the reform act made no significant change to the status quo.
The 1835 Municipal Corporation Act is arguably one of the more impressive acts passed between 1830-1848, but under closer inspection could not justifiably be called a ‘fundamental’ change. While it took some power from the aristocrats and prevented a certain level of misdirection of funds it did nothing to empower the working class or to improve conditions in the community. According to the act, the elected council was given the option to invest money in health and poverty. As such, no efforts were made to improve either and so conditions remained the same as they were before, bad. Although local governments were now comprised of elected councils, bribery and corruption was still rife and with no pay given to council members, the role fell to the more wealthy members of society, once again removing any power from the working classes by default. So once again there was essentially no fundamental change, as the working class, who had no political voice before, still had no political voice. The status quo had not changed and as such it can hardly be considered a fundamental change in the state of life in Britain.
The Factory Act, passed by Earl Greys’ Whig government in 1833 was one example of an act of ‘reform’ which in practice achieved virtually nothing. While it allegedly prevented children under 9 from working in factories for health and safety it conveniently overlooked mines and cotton mills, which were two of the most dangerous positions available for children working. And the limits on working hours, while perhaps sound in principle, was in practice a problem for many ‘households’. Many families relied on their children working to provide part of the household income and when children under 9 could not work at all and older children could only work limited shift hours, the families lost a significant amount of income leaving them more destitute than they had been. So when the act was actually in effect it became a financial restraint for many poverty-stricken families but was at least morally agreeable. But fundamentally it was not widely enforced. It simply couldn’t be, as the government allocated only four inspectors for the entire country to ensure there were no children working dangerous positions or longer hours than they should. This combined with the only physical record of peoples date of birth being parish records which were inefficient in themselves it became almost impossible to enforce. It is possible to conclude, therefore that the Factory Act achieved no perpetual change to society, in point of fact, it made very little difference whatsoever.
The following year, in 1834 parliament passed the Poor Law Act. Although it could be argued that it did alter the distribution of relief for the destitute. It had a negative effect. While before the poor were given ‘outdoor relief’ whereby the wealthier families would donate their belongings and money to a charity of sorts which then redistributed it to the poor families, giving them relief on their doorstep. The government deemed this highly inefficient and so devised the new Poor Law Amendment Act, which made it as hard as physically possible for people to obtain ‘relief’. It implemented a network of workhouses where poor people could go to gain relief. However in order to be illegible for the workhouses you had to be particularly poor, as the level was set by the poorest man the government could find in Britain. This combined with the very poor living conditions in the workhouses themselves gave a wholly unattractive proposition, taken up by only the most desperate and impoverished members of ‘society’. As such it is hardly fair to say that the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834 achieved any ‘fundamental’ or lasting change to society or the political infrastructure.
From 1830-1848 there was much change made to political systems and with it some changes to society. However ‘fundamental’ change is perhaps too far. While the 1832 Reform Act abolished rotten boroughs and the Municipal Corporations Act removed absolute power in local governments from the aristocrats they made no real lasting changes to the status quo. But in essence the acts passed changed very little. When the middle class gained some power after the Great Reform Act they promptly left their working class allies who gained little if any power throughout the whole period and so became disenchanted with the political system and at odds with the social complex in place. Though the Chartists were prominent throughout the period and were set on changing the political ‘make up’ of the country for the good of the working classes, for all their action they actually achieved nothing. Though eventually almost all of the points set down in the charter were completed, they were not done before 1848 when the Chartists had the most influence and they were not done as a result of the Chartist movement. It was merely coincidence that points of the Charter were sound in reasoning and were later adopted for that reason rather than pressure from the Chartist organisations. Chartism was fundamentally a huge failure. While it protested vigorously and stood for what it considered important it brought about no actual change, and certainly could not be considered to have brought fundamental change. The Poor Law Act caused widespread protest, but the protesters did not persist. They soon saw the amendment of the Poor Law Act as a permanent change to Welfare policy and adjusted to the new system. This purveys a temporary feature to the uprisings of the 1830’s and 40’s. And re enforces the notion that while people were not happy with the situation they were prepared to adjust to it as they felt they had no alternative. This in itself demonstrates a definite lack of social or political change. Overall while there were some instances of significant reform to systems, the class barriers were still clearly in place and apparent. Few fundamental aspects of life had changed throughout the period.
The period of 1830-1848 played a significant role in defining the pattern of evolution in the political and social systems of the British government. It saw government’s passing numerous allegedly significant reform acts to bring about certain changes and to rectify area’s that the government felt where in need of altering. The Poor Law Amendment Act being a good example, while it did not improve conditions for the poor and destitute it did provide a more efficient system which ‘wasted’ less money on the poor. Despite that the middle class gained a degree of power and influence within the political system and the lower classes became involved in protesting for a more equal distribution of power. Fundamentally the period saw very little that could be defined as perpetual or fundamental. They bore down to minor modifications, which had little effect on the status quo or the systems governing the status quo. Prior to 1830 the working class had no real political power. And while throughout the period they were active in trying to increase that power. In 1848 the working class still had no real political power. As such it is possible to conclude that while significant changes did occur they were often not fundamental and that the underlying structure of British civilisation remained the same throughout the period.
Supporters of Change: The Whigs were generally ‘for’ reform as they saw it as a pragmatic response to avoid social upheaval. The Utilitarians/Benthamites supported change because they believed it would lead to a more efficient and useful society. The Humanitarians were also pro change as they wished to improve the working conditions of the average worker. The Evangelicals also sought change, their interest was primarily religious.
Rotten Boroughs and Pocket Boroughs: "rotten borough" referred to a parliamentary borough or constituency in Great Britain and Ireland which, due to size and population, was "controlled" and used by a patron to exercise undue and unrepresentative influence within parliament.
Pocket Boroughs were a borough constituency with a small enough electorate to be under the effective control (or in the pocket) of a major landowner.
Outdoor Relief was the principal component of the Elizabethan Poor Law act of 1601, which gave food money and clothes to the poor on their ‘doorsteps’ hence outdoor relief. It was a system that easily provided poor people with provisions.
The Peoples charter demanded: universal male suffrage – over the age of 21. Annual parliaments (so that MP’s would face re-election every 12months as opposed to every 7 years). Equal electoral districts- so that each constituency was of equal size. Abolition of property qualifications for MP’s. The secret ballot and Payment for MP’s.