P ARLIAMENTARY R EFORM IN THE E RA OF G LADSTONE AND D ISRAELI OWED MORE TO POLITICAL MANOEUVRING THAN PRINCIPLE. (E XPEDIENCY VS P RINCIPLE )

Image and reality Disraeli became associated with ‘Tory democracy’ Gladstone became champion of popular rights – moral sense of the masses over aristocratic establishment Disraeli led Conservatives in Commons – second in command to Earl of Derby. Gladstone moved from Conservatives to Liberals – leader in commons

The Political Context Politicians operated within framework of 1832 Reform Act – Collapse of Chartism 1840’s – but w/c reform still on the agenda. Debate about how far to extend franchise.

Conservative calculations Maintenance of aristo government a primary concern for Disraeli. Held trad. view of politics. Larger boroughs would remain Liberals – Conservatives would hold counties. FB Smith says D. indifferent to enfranchisement of workers. Wanted to see boundaries of borough seats extended to suburban areas so Liberal voters would not influence county constituencies Act gave 25 seats to counties.

D. approached reform determined to further Con party interests D wanted as small a measure as he could get away with – eg 1859 Bill = ’partisan fiddling’ 1867 was radical but it was not original intention. Dis and Derby seized upon household suffrage to differentiate their bill from Libs 1866 Bill. – excluded compounders. Bill transformed because of situation in the commons and Hyde Park Riots FB Smith (Historian) said popular activity persuaded Con MP’s to accept the measure. Cowling (Historian) downplays role of agitation. Pragmatism persuaded Disraeli to pass a more radical bill. This would bring Radical Liberals from Liberal party to vote with Cons.

Gladstonian principle and Pragmatism Gladstone has been seen as more principled than Dis on reform. Is this true? Until 1860’s he was against changes to elec system. Changed views in – ‘respectable skilled working class were demonstrating worthy qualities. And could be entrusted with political responsibility.’ Gladstone idealised upwardly mobile charac of working man. But did not want full-scale democracy Lib Bill wanted £7 annual rental voters. No further or it would give town constituencies to ‘working class. Gladstone similar to Dis over concern with party management. Probs with Adullamites over 1866 lib Bill and with radicals over 1867 Bill.

Conclusion Quinault (historian) says Gladstone was Radical and did favour democracy BUT he wanted a decisive resolution of a controversial question. Agrees with Shannon (Historian) who depicts Gladstone as a politician who sought to harness public support for his own style of Government. Both Glad and Dis nervous of working class enfranchisement. Both believed in govt by propertied elite and avoid mass democracy. The conflict between them was more about personal and party rivalry than fundamental philosophical differences.