Why was The Great Reform Act passed in 1832 ?

Authors Avatar
Why was The Great Reform Act passed in 1832 ?

Since the Industrial Revolution the population of Britain was growing rapidly. The census figures were 12,000,000 in 1811, over 14,000,000 in 1821, 16,500,000 in 1831, and, in 1851 over 21,000,000. The causes of the massive increase were not clear to contemporaries and indeed are still in doubt. There was one definite reason for the soaring population after 1760. This was that, in comparison with the fearful infant mortality rates in earlier centuries, a much smaller proportion of children now died at birth or before they were six years old. The saving of these lives explained why, despite some decades when there was a fall in the birth rate, the population began steeply increasing. There were also fewer deaths in childhood, early youth and middle aged people, mainly because they were better fed, better clothed, more temperate in their habits than in the days of cheap gin, and less likely to catch diseases like smallpox which had been endemic in earlier times.

As well as the population rising, the growth of the towns was also quite great. This surge in the population and size of towns occurred pretty much over the whole of the United Kingdom. Liverpool had grown from 82,000 in 1801 to 202,000 in 1831, and Leeds from 53,000 in 1801 to 123,000 in 1831. Sheffield and Birmingham doubled in size during the same period; Manchester and Salford increased from 95,000 to 238,000 and Glasgow from 77,000 to 193,000. The up and rising population of these cities, including London, came largely from neighbouring counties, but there was also a movement of population from Ireland, and the mass amount of Irish immigrants entering the country. In 1835 there were 100,000 Irish living in Lancashire alone. The growth of the towns was caused because the population was growing rapidly and so there was a much bigger demand for industrial goods. This meant that there were plenty of jobs for workers in factories, so many farmers and labourers were migrating from the countryside to larger towns to get a sense of working class identity. Also, because British agriculture was becoming more efficient at this time, more food was being provided, so the labourers were not needed as much and there was space for them to migrate. Since the working class were all together in the same towns and not spread out across the country like they were before the industrial revolution they began noticing they were all united in their feeling of the current political system. This meant they was more of the chance of riots because they could plan them together and they felt they could make a change now they were all living together in the big Industrial towns. Considering this, the movement of people migrating from the agricultural farms and villages to the industrial towns and cities had an influence in the passing of the great reform act of 1832.

How could it be that the fastest growing towns of the nation such as Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds and Sheffield were not represented in Parliament? The government was able to manage the affairs of the country, but how could the government properly represent the nation in the House of Commons and the House of Lords if they did not have representatives from the leading Industrial towns? The country as a whole had a promising future because of the changes and effects of the Industrial Revolution, but until the most important industrial towns and cities were represented in Parliament, the country could not possibly move forward as a nation. The men whose untiring application and enterprise had created the country's wealth and industrial prosperity were not represented to give their significant views in the House of Commons. There was an obvious case here that there was something wrong with the country's political system and there was a desperate need for a change.

In the 18th Century, only 558 MPs were elected to the House of Commons. In most cases, two MP's represented each constituency. These constituencies or voting districts were divided into two groups: counties and boroughs. Most MPs were generally wealthy because not only did they have to have an annual income of £600 (£300 for borough MPs) but also they did not get paid a wage.

The second argument now comes suggesting that there was a definite need for a change of the current political system. This was because the boroughs had originally been towns but most of them had turned into no more than villages by 1800. So how could important industrial towns not be represented in the House of Commons, yet boroughs, no more than villages, have two representatives in Parliament? Especially when in some boroughs, where only a small number of citizens were allowed to take part in elections, MPs were elected by less than ten people.

As well as the political system being substantially incorrect it was also corrupt. Candidates would use a variety of different methods and approaches to ensure and persuade people to vote for them. Some candidates paid electors money or bribes, some bought electors gifts or offered them jobs. Other candidates would use threats. Considering that most candidates were wealthy landowners they might warn tenants that they could be evicted if they did not vote for him or for his candidate. Sometimes people such as shopkeepers, trades people, solicitors and doctors were threatened with an organised boycott of their business if they did not vote for who they were told to. Also because elections were 'open' not secret, it was possible for the wealthy people to check whether people did vote for their candidates. Constituencies that came under the control of a wealthy individual became known as 'rotten' or 'pocket' boroughs. There needed to be a change in the current political system to stop elections becoming corrupt.

Reform was wanted because it would share the places in Parliament and the House of Commons around, so the country was represented by representatives from all major towns and cities. At the current time in 1815 small boroughs were represented in Parliament, however, major industrial towns were not. The middle class wanted the pocket boroughs in which the number of representatives had been controlled by aristocratic landowners to be disenfranchised along with the rotten boroughs which had no or very small population. Also, the middle class and most of the general public wanted many more representatives in Parliament and the House of Commons on the whole, because the tiny 558 MPs that were currently being elected into the House of Commons were not matching the soaring population of around 13,000,000. If this reform was passed it would result in the transfer of the political power from the agricultural south-west to the industrial north-west and to the hard working middle-class.
Join now!


The working class caused a number of protests and conflicts across the country. From 1811 to 1813 and again in 1816 there were a number of violent incidents occurring in textile areas around the country. The attacks were caused because of general unrest combined with the opposing of the new machinery supposedly threatening their jobs. These were hard years for the country as the grain shortages caused high food prices, and in 1816 a depression in industry caused unemployment and low wages. Textile workers hit out at new machinery that seemed to be threatening their jobs. Factories were ...

This is a preview of the whole essay