• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10
  11. 11
  12. 12
  13. 13

How repressive was Lord Liverpool's Tory government in dealing with the crises facing it in (1815-1821)?

Extracts from this document...


How repressive was Lord Liverpool's Tory government in dealing with the crises facing it in (1815-1821)? The measures taken by the Tory government were most definitely repressive; however, if their repression was measured against the crises that were facing it, we can clearly justify most of their actions as necessary. In this essay, I am going to examine the oppressive nature of this British government and explore the reasons as to why they were given the title "harsh", or in some cases, "reasonable". To understand the Tory government's reasons for their actions, it is worthwhile to consider the disturbances of the time and some background knowledge, which led up to such measures being introduced during the period I am going to write about in this paper. Lord Liverpool's government had been in office since 1812. The occurrence of the French Revolution in 1789 had created some impact on the British population. The French Revolution was thoroughly a very radical change in that no other country before that time had had its people rise against a lawful monarch, overthrown him and his family, and eventually publicly executed them. Although the French Revolution did not "introduce" radicalism in Britain, as it had previously existed before, it most definitely encouraged it. There was talk of abolition of the monarchy; people wanted to hold a free general election and; a fair representation in the government from all the classes, was proposed. ...read more.


This disgraceful event provided moral support to the people to press for Parliamentary reform. Furthermore, between 1811 and 1817, the Nottinghamshire Luddites were responsible for organising attacks on factories and machine wrecking and conspirators met in Cato Street (London) to devise a plan to assassinate all the members of the Liverpool's Cabinet. These crises were the outline of the problems facing Lord Liverpool's government. Next, the Liverpool's government had no choice but introduce measures against the disturbances. They introduced the system of 'agent provocateurs', who were informers who caused unrest in order to find the real troublemakers. The suspension of the Habeas Corpus meant that anyone could be arrested without any evidence. Finally, the high point of the Tory government repression came when they introduced the Six Acts: The Training Prevention Act prohibited civilian bodies from training in the use of weapons. This piece of legislation hardly seems out of place in the modern world, let alone in the period of disaffection of the 18-teens. It also limited the activities of the agents provocateurs. - This was probably an important and necessary measure taken by the government. Having weapon always means that the person has the potential to either take his own or another person's life. Learning how to use these weapons simply meant that he would be willing to someday use them against somebody. Common people training to use weapons could lead to an armed revolution. ...read more.


On the whole, this was a rather repressive Act. The measures that Lord Liverpool and his cabinet ministers took were very harsh, if looked at without understand the problems facing the government to start off with. I feel that during that era, repression was looked upon as an order and they measures, do seem cruel and harsh, when looked at with modern eyes, but 1800s people took them on as if it was nothing out of the ordinary. They were simply "more rules" by the government that one had to follow. The Newspaper and Stamp Duties act, for example, was a very cruel Act, which meant that the lower classes were unable to think radically and not comprehend the extent of exploitation they were faced with, by the government. I think that the government blew up the idea of 'radicalism'. It was certainly true that the French Revolution had awakened 'radicalism' in masses - it had not penetrated entirely into the society. The drastic measures taken by Lord Liverpool and his cabinet ministers are seemingly harsh, but taking into account the problems/radical changes they thought the French Revolution and Thomas Paine's impact would create, my view changes and I can now justify most of their actions. The primary duty of any government is to maintain law and order. The police force had not been established until the late 1820s, which meant that the two other options were the magistrates and the army. In order to increase the limited power of the magistrates, the Six Acts were passes, which now seem oppr�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0�0??�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??�0??p�0??�0??�0??��0??p�0??��0??p�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??��0??�0?? ?�0??p�0???�0??��0?? ?�0??�0??p�0??p�0??p�0??p�0 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays

  1. How successful was Lord Liverpool in responding to radical challenge from 1812-1822?

    The concept was not new. A similar law had been introduced in 1804 but to guarantee 80 shillings a quarter (�4.00) per quarter tonne or �16 per tonne for producers before foreign grain was permitted to enter the British market seemed to government critics a little excessive.

  2. "The Colonisation of Africa was Inevitable in the Late Nineteenth Century" Discuss.

    There also existed socio-cultural reasons, which favoured the colonisation of Africa. Many moral-guided Europeans regarded it as their duty, being the 'enlightened' and advanced ones, to bring civilisation, progress and the 'true' religion to the backward peoples. Since, Asia, the Americas and Australia were already being sufficiently "lectured" on the

  1. How close did Britain come to revolution between 1815 and 1821?

    The Luddites were hand-loomers made unemployed due to industrialisation. To express their anger and discontent with the government they rioted and caused violence in the streets. The Luddites never benefited from their riots but the government did. The government sent magistrate spies amongst the crowds to insight violence so that the government could class the Luddites as revolutionary and had justification for repression.

  2. Malta at the turn of the 19th Century.

    However Maitland was more interested about the problems he head about the sanctuary and the Church of St. John. He threatened to abolish the right to sanctuary if this fact over-involved the administration. He was ready to retain the church power in its authority, if the latter didn't go against the British policy.

  1. How effective were the social reforms of the Labour Government of 1945-1951 in dealing ...

    One of Labour's key promises was to tackle the issue of social insurance provision in Britain. The Liberals' inadequate National Insurance system from 1911 was still in place at the time. Beveridge recommended its replacement with a system that would cover everybody in Britain 'from the cradle to the grave', although he thought the amounts shouldn't be too generous.

  2. Why did Britain have no '1848 revolution'?

    This focuses on the economy and on living standards and is similar to the interpretation of the continental revolutions mentioned above. However, it ignores the roots and history of the radical tradition in Britain dating back to the seventeenth century that some historians feel deserve more credit.

  1. 'Repressive and Unpopular'. Is this a fair assessment of Lord Liverpool's government?

    With hindsight it is clear that any criticism of the government, related to the incident at St. Peters Field, is unjust, as the 'massacre' occurred despite rather than because of Home Office advice. The Manchester magistrates decided to send yeomanry into the peaceful crowds at St.

  2. jeffersonian republicanism

    He wanted peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations without forming alliances with any. He proposed that a peoples' militia would be implemented to protect the country rather than an army or navy; Jefferson felt a country, so isolated as America, needed little defence.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work