The Chartists met again in May and completed the petition, which Attwood presented to the Commons.
Extract from the Chartist petition drawn up in 1838:
“We, your petitioners, dwell in a land whose merchants are noted for their enterprise, whose manufacturers are very skilful and whose workmen are proverbial for their industry….Yet we find ourselves overwhelmed with public and private suffering. We are bowed down under a load of taxes, and our workmen are starving. Capital brings no profit, labour no reward; the workhouse is full and the factory deserted. We have looked on every side to find the causes of distress, and we can discover none in nature or in Providence.
It was the fond expectation of the people that a remedy for most of their grievances would be found in the Reform Act of 1832…They have been bitterly deceived…The Reform Act has transferred power from one domineering fraction to another, and left the people as
helpless as before…We perform the duties; therefore we must have the privileges of free men.”(Norman Lowe 1998)
Attwood asked they grant the six points, which was rejected by an overwhelming 235 voted against and 46 for (Edward Royle 1980). This confirmed the thoughts of the extremists, that violence was the only way forward. The extremists called for a general strike, calling it ‘sacred month’. Protest meetings followed, also riots and strikes. The government increased their army by 5000 and set up new police forces to deal with any trouble.
(R. Rees 1990, 1990)
The worst report of violence was in Newport, in Wales. It is now known as the Newport Rising. This was when Frost led 5000 men through the streets of the town, in an attempt to free one of the chartist leaders from Jail. They were met by government troops who had been forewarned in advanced. They were ready and opened fire on the crowd and at least 15 were killed. This resulted in all the chartist leaders being arrested and put into jail; even the ones that didn’t attend the meet. (Jeremy Black, 2001).
The Chartists weren’t very active during the years 1840 – ’41, and it seemed the government had managed to put the working class back in their place yet again. This was mainly due to the fact the economy had picked up and without the prominent leaders to guide them, the chartists seemed lost.
Once the prominent leaders began to emerge from jail, chartist activity started again. They began to gather support for yet another effort. They met again at another national convention. They produced a second petition, containing three and a quarter million signatures. Again it was introduced to the House of Commons, and again it was rejected by 287 votes to 49 (J.Walker 1982). Violence and riots yet again followed the rejection. Even O’Connor who was in favour of using violence to get the point across was horrified by the amount of violence. The Government again sent in troops via the railways, to the troubled spots and hundreds of chartist leaders were thrown into jail. Membership declined and strikers had no choice but to return to work.
It seemed whatever effort the chartists made; it was squashed by the government. O’Connor, who was still a prominent leader of the chartists, turned his thought to a ‘land plan’. They would buy strips of land to farm on and become self sustaining, thus enabling them to be independent. Even this venture failed. Reasons being they were not farmers foremost, the land was of poor condition and each holding was not large enough to support a family. The land plan became another complete failure.
During the same period, O’Connor was elected as MP for Nottingham. Encouraged by this and the success of the revolution in Paris, they created their third petition. They omitted the secret ballot point, leaving only 5 points in the charter. There was to be an open air rally to present the petition, but the government banned the march and only allowed 10 people through to present the petition (Norman Lowe 1998). The petition was stated to of been signed by almost six million people, but on closer inspection it only had as much as two million signatures, and some of those were of names such as –Queen Victoria, Mr Punch (R.A.Rees, 1990). It was seen as a joke and rejected by a huge majority. The chartists finally had been defeated; Support for the chartists declined and they never had the same impact. The failure took its toll on O’Connor and he became insane and had to be confined to an asylum (Norman Lowe, 1998).
So why were the Chartists unsuccessful?
From the beginning the demands of the chartists seemed to be too advanced for the time period. Britain was still governed by the aristocracy, and to of accepted the petition would have been paramount to of handing over power to the middle and working classes.
As displayed in the extract below, the chartists themselves had disagreements amongst their leaders on how to achieve their aims. Some wanted the violence route and some the passive way, there was no real clear cut leadership or opinion.
A quote from a speech by William Taylor, a Lancashire Chartist Leader, in 1839.
We are to be free; though we wade through streams of blood…Do we read in ancient or modern history of any nation in bondage becoming free without the use of physical force?”
Extracts from the objects of the Working Men’s Association, 1839
2. To seek by every legal means to place all classes in possession of their equal political and social rights.
7. To publish our views and sentiments in such a form as shall best serve to create a morals yet energetic public opinion; so as eventually to lead to a gradual improvement in the condition of the working class, without violence or commotion. (Norman Lowe, 1998)
Lack of communication also made unity difficult. O’Connor made the most impact nationally, but he was unstable. He called for violence one time, then drew away from it the next, giving out mixed messages to the members of the movement.
They also failed to get support from the middle classes, although the middle classes felt sympathy for the 6 points, were frightened off by the amount of violence used. The chartists also attacked their wealth and property, thus alienating them. The middle classes were much more interested in placing their efforts and interests into the anti-corn law league. When Lovett tried to bridge the gap between the classes by gaining the support of Joseph Sturge a wealthy corn-miller; O’Conner attacked him and accused him of ‘domesticating the charter’ (Norman Lowe, 1998). This led to a break down in the interaction between the classes. Many of the middle class were also reluctant to share political power with the working classes, as displayed in the Reform Act of 1832 (Norman Lowe, 1998).
The government always seemed to be one step ahead of the chartists. Whenever a gathering was planned the government had already placed their troops and immediately dispersed any crowd. This was mainly possible through the spy network the government had in place. They also had no qualms about using troops to stop the chartists and made use of the rail network to move them around swiftly to any areas of disturbance. The Government also arrested any leaders without provocation, and used the threat of transportation as a means to control the chartists (Norman Lowe, 1998).
Due to Peels reform Acts, trade was also picking up. Bread was getting cheaper and Britain was in an era of prosperity. Living standards were improving and people were moving more towards supporting trade unions or the co-operative movements instead. The Acts seemed to pacify the working class on the whole, and they didn’t feel like rocking the boat, which was what the government had set out to achieve.
The chartists aims also seemed too complicated, not only were they trying to put across the 6 points, they also called for numerous other social and economic changes. They never had a clear cut aim, and it tended to confuse people (Derrick Murphy et al. 1998). The chartists would have achieved a lot more if they had concentrated on getting a voice in the commons and argued their point from within the system.
Although predominately the Chartist movement failed, it was also a great achievement for the working class. It reflected a high degree of organisation from the working classes; mass meeting must have taken a lot of planning and preparation. As most of the meetings passed off peacefully, it displayed a high degree of control from the leadership. It also managed to focus the attention onto the plight of the working class people. As a result it would have been of no coincidence that Peel brought in Factory Acts and Public Health Acts, in an effort to remove the grievances, which had created the chartist movement in the first place.
However the Chartist points were addressed over the next 80 years, and 5 out of the 6 points were achieved:
- 1858 abolition of the property qualification.
- 1872 Introduction of the secret ballot.
- manhood suffrage was achieve in stages:
1867 & 1884 were the Reform Acts
1918 Representation of the People Act
1928 votes form women over 21
These Acts also made the redistribution of seats so constituencies became equal.
- Payment of Mp’s was introduced in 1911.
(Norman Lowe, 1998)
The only point not achieved from their charter was annual elections, but they were however reduced in the 1911 Parliament Act from 7 years to 5 years (Norman Lowe, 1998).
It would seem the Chartists achieved very little in the short term, but it has been argued the origins of the Labour Party can be traced from many experiences within the Chartist movement. It has been claimed that the Chartists represented “the most striking and widespread working-class movement for political reform in the 19th century” (E. Hopkins).
