AN ELITE’S RESPONSE TO DEMOCRACY: HOW THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY ADAPTED TO EXTENSIONS OF THE FRANCHISE; AND COPED WITH ENSUING POLITICAL REPERCUSSIONS 1867-1914. GRAHAM J. RAYMOND BA (Hons.). MA. A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the University of Wolverhampton for the degree of Master of Philosophy MAY 2008 This work or any part thereof has not previously been presented in any form to the University or to any other body whether for the purposes of assessment, publication or for any other purpose (unless otherwise indicated). Save for any express acknowledgments, references and/or bibliographies cited in the work, I confirm that the intellectual content of the work is the result of my own efforts and of no other person. The right of Graham J. Raymond to be identified as author of this work is asserted in accordance with ss.77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. At this date copyright is owned by the author. Signature……………………………………….. Date…………………………………………….. ABSTRACT OF THESIS. This thesis investigates how the Conservative party coped with the far-reaching effects of democratic reform between 1867 and 1914. It analyses the performance of successive party leaders through their exploitation of high politics; and how ideology influenced their policy, and decision making. It also examines how the party’s organization was periodically revised to manage changing political circumstances. The relationships between these three elements, high politics, ideology, and organization are then analysed to explain the Conservative party’s appeal for electoral support during the period of study. The respective contributions made by the three elements to the party’s electoral performance are considered in relation to each other. Using this approach the thesis explains how the Conservative party managed to improve upon its dismal electoral record between 1832 and 1874; how it achieved electoral dominance between 1886 and 1906; and why its electoral fortunes declined so dramatically thereafter. The conclusions reached are threefold. Firstly, the importance attached to high politics by the Peterhouse school of thought may, in some respects, be exaggerated, certainly regarding elections. High politics, by its very nature seeks to exert influence at a level far removed from the mass electorate. Political rhetoric has obvious uses during elections, not least in the field of extra-parliamentary speech-making. But in the absence of any reliable indicators of what the electorate actually felt or desired, the effectiveness of political rhetoric could not be gauged a priori. The results of political manoeuvring at the highest levels may have been apparent to voters, but was of little concern to them. At worst, they were ignorant of it, and at best, ambivalent to it. Secondly, party leaders, whether knowingly or unknowingly, exploited the flexibility of Conservative ideology in their quest for votes. However, the core concepts of that ideology remained inviolable, only contingent values were successfully subjected to re-appraisal and revision to attract the voters. When ideological core values were misunderstood or misinterpreted the party suffered accordingly. Thirdly, the value of the Conservative party’s organization has been underestimated. High politics and ideology may have combined to produce a Conservative message for the voters, but the appeal of that message was unknowable. On the other hand, the party’s organization, when empowered to do so, adroitly and effectively utilized all the tools available to them to manage and maximize all potential Conservative support. Organization may be viewed as a make-weight, but like all make-weights it possessed the power to tip the electoral scales one way or the other. TABLE OF CONTENTS. INTRODUCTION-----------------------------------------Page 1 Chapter One HIGH POLITICS IN NINETEENTH- CENTURY BRITAIN------------------------------------Page 14 Chapter Two WHAT DID CONSERVATIVES STAND FOR IN THE PERIOD 1867-1914?--------------------Page 29 Chapter Three CONSERVATIVE ORGANIZATION AND RE-ORGANIZATION----------------------------Page 57 Chapter Four THE CONSERVATIVE APPEAL FOR ELECTORAL SUPPORT--------------------------------Page 94 Chapter Five CONCLUSION--------------------------------------------Page 143 Bibliography-----------------------------------------------Page 167 AN ELITE’S RESPONSE TO DEMOCRACY: HOW THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY ADAPTED TO EXTENSIONS OF THE FRANCHISE; AND COPED WITH ENSUING POLITICAL REPERCUSSIONS 1867-1914. INTRODUCTION. Democracy was not the progenitor of the British Constitution; rather democracy was incrementally wedded to a pre-existing, elitist parliamentary system. Unsurprisingly the marriage was not always a happy one. Nevertheless it has become a commonplace to assume that once the missile of democratic reform was launched, in the shape of the 1867 Reform Act, it would travel unerringly to its target viz. universal suffrage, and liberal democracy. But this was not the case. Opinions vary on the impetus available. For example, R. B. McCallum writes that ‘in 1851 Lord John Russell had made an attempt to alter the parliamentary franchise, and from that moment the finality of the Act of 1832 was disavowed.’1 Whereas Maurice Cowling is of the opinion that ‘there was nothing inevitable about the course they followed. If a restrictive Act could have been passed on a conservative basis they would have passed it. If party conditions had been suitable, they would have persisted in March 1867 with a restrictive proposal.’2 Gertrude Himmelfarb rightly adds that ‘it was during the debate over this Act [1867] that the case for and against democracy was most cogently argued. But once this first step was made, no one seriously doubted that others would follow,’ but she cogently adds that ‘this was not an orderly, planned, or even coherent progression, to claim so does violence to the reality, imposing order upon chaos, necessity upon contingency, and principle upon expediency.’3 Thus 1 R. B. McCallum writing in Elie Halevy, (1951) Victorian Years (Incorporating The Age of Peel and Cobden). Ernest Benn Ltd, London, p.440. 2 Maurice Cowling, (1967) 1867: Disraeli, Gladstone, and Revolution. Cambridge University Press, p.310. cf. Contemporary evidence supports this opinion. For example, St Paul’s Magazine of March 1868 said, ‘ if vote by ballot had existed in Parliament, surrounded by inviolable secrecy, time after time Mr. Disraeli’s household suffrage measure would have been thrown out by overwhelming majorities.’ 3 Gertrude Himmelfarb, (1975) Victorian Minds, Peter Smith, Gloucester Massachusetts, pp.333-335. 1 although the path of democratic reform can be closely followed its trajectory is much harder to track. One of the main forces influencing that trajectory was the debate over democracy itself, as referred to by Himmelfarb above. However, that debate was not stilled by the passage of the 1867 Act, in fact evidence suggests that the debate actually intensified post 1867. ‘Victorians did not claim that their system of government was democratic, a term that smacked of continental abstraction and implied an excess of equality characteristic of American society, rather it produced effective government, it guaranteed liberty, and it was representative.’4 The debate coalesced around several key interrelated themes, representation (including proportional representation), the actual nature of the franchise (right, trust, privilege etc.), liberty (the swing from negative to positive liberty), equality (characterized by the rise of meritocracy) and whether democracy should be seen as an ideal or as a workable system of government. Although the debate can be seen as ongoing, certain issues brought one or other of these themes into prominence. For example, the passage of the Ballot Act in 1872 highlighted differences of opinion over the nature of the franchise; or the Northcote Trevelyan report on the Civil Service influenced attitudes towards equality. Post 1884-5 the debate over ideal or policy shifted, significantly, into the realm of the practicability of democracy rather than idealism. Similarly it has become a commonplace to contend that the dominant ethos of Victorian Britain was Liberalism. The core value of liberal ideology, liberty, became the determinant of both political philosophy and policy. J. S. Mill’s On Liberty published in 1859 set out the concept of “negative” liberty in unequivocal terms ‘the object of this essay is to assert one very simple principle, as entitled to govern absolutely the dealings of society with the individual in the way of compulsion and 4 Martin Pugh, (1982) The Making of Modern British Politics: 1867-1939, Blackwell, Oxford, p.2. 2 control, whether the means used be physical force in the form of legal penalties, or in the moral coercion of public opinion. That principle is that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of any of their number is self protection.’5 He could hardly have been more assertive, the only justification for interference of any kind in the affairs of anyone was to prevent harm to oneself or to others. Nevertheless, even though nineteenth century Britain may not have been a democracy ‘it was a free society in which the ideas bubbling out of the controversy of public opinion fashioned and re-fashioned the form of the state’;6 and it was this idea, that society possessed its own dynamic, an underlying sense of a common interest,