Following up my piece on what they said about the Speaker in the nineteenth century, here’s what the Quarterly Review wrote in 1830:
There is something in the very atmosphere of the House unfavourable to bold and uncompromising conduct. It is, de facto, a sort of overgrown club. This is the worst part of the business. Things are every day admitted in private among the members, which are studiously denied or concealed in the speeches reported from the gallery. (January 1830, p.271-2)
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
What’s going on with party strategy? (Caron Lindsay)
We do have a two-tier system (Neil Hickman)
Observations of an Expat: NATO Irony (Tom Arms)
What really happened? (Simon Banks)
Why community politics matters (Mark Corner)
Tom Arms Tom Arms 
Ruth Bright 
Tom Bailey 
Alex Macfie 
Knaptoft: The very heart of England
We do have a two-tier policing system but it is not what our homegrown racists think it is.
From Norman settlement to a civic square
2 Comments
……..and in those times there was a great call for reform of “the system”…
…followed by the 1832 Reform Act.
Isn’t that what we need now?
In 1830 there were 658 M.P.s all drawn from the beu monde wealth of mainly England and Wales `Rotten and Pocket Borough’ constituencies.There were 513 M.P.s from England and Wales alone and 100 M.P.s from Ireland.
The idle and filthy rich Tory Duke of Norfolk and Earl of Londsdale, respectively, could boast of 11 and 9 `Pocket Boroughs’ .
Their hegemony was opposed, by the Whig Leaders, including Viscounts Landsdowne and Althorp, whom supported the passage of the Parliamentary Motion entitled:
‘This House must effective Measures for correcting diverse Abuses, that have long prevailed in the choices of Members to serve in the Commons House of Parliament’
Incidentally, in 1830 Totnes, in Devon was one of the Tory `Rotten Boroughs’ .
`Pocket Boroughs’ were where patronage and bribery was the order of the day and where only the titled,or the landed gentry, were either deemed fit for Office or moreover, able to pay sufficient acolytes, to purchase their Seats in Parliament.
The First Reform Act 1832 took 3 attempts and 3 Bills to eventually secure a reluctant passage through Parliament.
There were `Riots’ and withdrawal of a million of gold bullion from the coffers of the Bank of England, at the prospect of giving a mere 550,000 male householders, the vote, out of a UK population of 14 million.
The Reform Act 1832 did increase the voters base by 60% but was a small concession to democracy.
There were no working class voters or representatives or women voters, until 1918.
I shudder to draw the obvious parallel between the corrupt practice of Government in 1832 and present day.
I believe,however, that many voters will ask why has the curtain been pulled over their eyes by this Government, for so long ?
Why has this veil been held over the eyes ordinary voters and so disingenuously,since 1997,by a Government supposedly elected, to represent the worst off members of our community?
I ask is there any difference between the High Tory arrogance of 1832 and the High Labour greedy hubris of 2009?