Welcome to the Victorian Commons

The Victorian Commons blog provides news and highlights from the History of Parliament’s research project on the House of Commons, 1832-68. For details about the project and how to access our work see our About page. The main History of Parliament website can be accessed here with regular blogs here. You can also follow us on Twitter @TheVictCommons and our colleagues @HistParl & @GeorgianLords

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The 1868 Boundary Act: Disraeli’s attempt to control his ‘leap in the dark’?

As part of our series on the 1867 Reform Act, we are reblogging this piece from Martin Spychal on an important associated measure, the 1868 Boundary Act.

The History of Parliament

This year marks the 150th anniversary of the 1868 Boundary Act. As Martin Spychal of the Commons 1832-68 Section discusses in today’s blog, the oft-neglected story of the Act provides several key insights into Britain’s second Reform Act and, in particular, the intentions of Benjamin Disraeli, the Conservative Prime Minister in 1868…

Leap in the Dark The 1867 Reform Act, or Disraeli’s leap in the Dark

It is often forgotten that Benjamin Disraeli intended to mitigate the democratising impact of the 1867 Reform Act’s borough householder franchise through boundary changes and the redistribution of seats. For Disraeli, boundary reform also offered an opportunity to increase Conservative influence over the English electoral system, and the chance to put his increasingly ambitious electoral intelligence network to the test.

The 1868 Boundary Act provided new boundaries to 59 English boroughs as well as 10 Welsh borough districts, and altered the temporary limits that had been assigned…

View original post 1,154 more words

Posted in Constituencies, Legislation | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

MP of the Month: Lord Hotham (1794-1870)

Beaumont-Hotham-3rd-Baron-Hotham

Beaumont Hotham, 3rd Baron Hotham (1794-1870) (c) National Portrait Gallery

Our MP of the Month, Lord Hotham, is one of a small number of individuals who sat for the entire period covered by our 1832-68 project. A Waterloo veteran, he had first been elected to the Commons in 1820 as a Tory MP for Leominster, which he represented – with a brief gap in service in 1831 – until 1841. He then sat for the East Riding of Yorkshire, where he owned extensive estates, until retiring in 1868.

Given his political longevity, it was hardly surprising that Hotham became a well-known character in the Commons. One reason he stood out was his ‘curious and quaint attire’. His old-fashioned clothes included ‘his favourite blue broad cloth coat’ with ‘shining gilt buttons’, ‘a buff waistcoat’, ‘low shoes and gaiters’ and a hat with a curled brim.

Contemporary observers also commented on Hotham’s diligent attendance at Westminster, even into his seventies. William White, the Commons doorkeeper, wrote of Hotham in 1868 that ‘he is as erect as he was when he marched with his regiment of Guards at Waterloo; and to see him run when a division is called you would not deem him to be more than fifty’. In his penultimate Commons speech, Hotham was scathing in his criticism of fellow MPs who did not live up to his standards, objecting to a proposal that Members should be allowed to correct their vote if they had accidentally entered the wrong division lobby:

‘It argued very little for the competence of Members if, when they were told “Ayes to the right, Noes to the left,” they did not know which way to go. If hon. Members were asleep, or on the terrace smoking, or reading newspapers in the vicinity of the House, or, in short, doing anything except what they ought – attending to the Business of the House in their places – that was their own fault, and the matter was, in his opinion, not of such importance as to require special legislation’.

Despite his emphasis on the importance of attending to parliamentary business, Hotham had a lengthy spell of absence from the Commons in the early 1840s. His election address, seeking the votes of the East Riding’s electors in 1841, was written on his sick-bed, and he did not appear on the hustings that July. This did not, however, prevent him being elected unopposed in his absence alongside a fellow Conservative. Hotham’s health worsened after the election and he did not take his seat in Parliament until 1843, when he was still convalescing. Not until 1844 did his name appear again in the division lists.

Hotham later told his constituents that although he had considered resigning his seat when he was ill, he felt that the relative position of the two parties was such that ‘a vote on two on either side was of no importance whatsoever’. Having switched from Leominster to the East Riding, Hotham had the major advantage of representing a seat where he never faced an election contest. Although his political sympathies lay with the Conservatives, he prided himself on his ‘independence’ from party, voting in Parliament on the basis of ‘measures, not men’. He turned down an invitation from Lord Derby to join his ministry in 1858, and was not afraid to vote against his leaders, being one of a handful of Conservatives who divided against the Derby ministry’s reform bill in March 1859.

As an army veteran, who had served in the Coldstream Guards, Hotham took a perennial interest in military matters, where no detail was too small to escape his attention. In 1857 he raised concerns that the families of recipients of the Order of the Bath were expected to return their relatives’ insignia after their death. He also complained that the ‘star’ which formed part of this insignia was of poor quality, made of ‘pasteboard, tinsel and spangles’. Hotham did not let this matter drop, and in 1859 received assurances from the Secretary for War that the star would in future be made from silver, rather than embroidered, and would not have to be surrendered when the holder died. More significantly, Hotham served on several committees on military questions, and chaired the royal commission on army recruitment which sat in 1859-60 and made an extensive set of recommendations in 1861.

Hotham’s parliamentary interests went beyond his obvious expertise in military matters, especially as he became one of the longer-serving members of the House. ‘Precise and somewhat punctilious, but always courteous’, he often intervened on procedural points, and was concerned about issues which might affect the dignity and reputation of the Commons. He formed an unlikely alliance with the Radical MP Joseph Hume in 1840 to ensure that in future the judge of the admiralty court would not be allowed to be a Member of Parliament. The holder of this post, Stephen Lushington, was MP for Tower Hamlets, and Hotham felt it was inappropriate for him to be sitting as a judge one day, and ‘on the next engaging as a partisan in the House of Commons’. Hotham and Hume failed in a later attempt to prohibit other judges, including the master of the rolls, from being MPs. Hotham did, however, score another success in 1858 when he carried a motion to prevent MPs from promoting or advocating any measure or proceeding in the Commons for which they had received ‘any pecuniary fee or reward’. Essentially this was an attempt to tackle the problem of lobbying.

Having spent almost half a century in the Commons, Hotham retired at the dissolution in 1868, at the age of 74, concerned that he might no longer be able to offer the ‘close and constant attention’ which his parliamentary duties deserved. He died in December 1870, when he was remembered as ‘a most devoted, independent, influential representative of the people’.

Further details of Hotham’s pre-1832 career can be found in our 1820-32 volumes, available here. His 1832-68 biography will be available shortly on our preview site.

Posted in MP of the Month | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Call for papers: ‘From “Old Corruption” to the New Corruption? Public Life and Public Service in Britain, c. 1780–1940’

Our assistant editor, Kathryn Rix, will be one of the keynote speakers at a 2 day conference entitled ‘From “Old Corruption” to the New Corruption? Public Life and Public Service in Britain, c. 1780–1940’, to be held at Oxford Brookes University, 24-25 January 2019. The conference is also supported by Newman University, Birmingham, and the History and Policy Unit, King’s College, London.

Further details can be found in the call for papers. The deadline for the submission of abstracts is 27 July 2018.

Posted in Conferences and seminars, Corruption, Forthcoming events | Tagged , | Leave a comment

MP of the Month: Joseph Locke (1805-1860)

Our Victorian MP of the Month is Joseph Locke (1805-1860), who represented Honiton from 1847 until his death. With Isambard Kingdom Brunel (1806-1859) and Robert Stephenson (1803-1859), Locke formed the ‘triumvirate of the engineering world’, who laid the architecture of Britain and Europe’s nineteenth-century railways. Unlike Stephenson and Brunel, however, Locke has remained a marginal figure in histories of nineteenth-century Britain, partly due to his political standing at the time of his death.

Joseph Locke was born in Attercliffe, near Sheffield, in 1805, but had relocated to Barnsley by 1810, where his father was a colliery manager. After receiving his education at a local grammar school, Locke was apprenticed at the age of 14 as a colliery viewer in Durham, and later under his father in Barnsley. As a gifted mining engineer, Locke caught the eye of family friend and ‘father of the railways’, George Stephenson, who employed him as an engineer at his locomotive works in Newcastle-upon-Tyne from 1823.

B1981.25.2698

‘Opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway’, Isaac Shaw, 1830, Yale Centre For British Art

In 1826 Locke was appointed assistant engineer to Stephenson on the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, and with Robert Stephenson (George Stephenson’s son) was crucial in ensuring the use of locomotives on the railway. In an episode that haunted him for the rest of his life, Locke was driving the Rocket at the line’s opening ceremony in 1830 when it fatally injured William Huskisson, the leading Canningite and former minister. Although some felt he was culpable for Huskisson’s death on account of the excessive speed at which the Rocket was travelling, Locke was never officially blamed for the incident.

The episode did little to hamper Locke’s upward trajectory in the burgeoning field of railway engineering. He was appointed chief engineer of the Grand Junction Railway in 1835 and subsequently enjoyed an illustrious career overseeing, among others, the London to Southampton, Sheffield to Manchester, Paris and Rouen, and Rouen and Le Havre lines, as well as railways in Spain and Holland. As an engineer, Locke developed a reputation for his innovative, efficient designs, which allowed for railways on steeper gradients. The apparent simplicity and cost-effectiveness of his work partly explains the subsequent lack of public recognition for his engineering career.

iln-27-mar-1842.jpg

The impressive Barentin Viaduct, part of the Paris Le-Havre Railway. Locke was the railway’s chief engineer, ILN, 27 March 1847

It was a railway project that brought Locke into Parliament. In August 1846, he purchased the manor of Honiton for £80,000 (roughly £7 million in today’s money) to aid the London and South Western Railway’s attempts to build a line between Exeter and Yeovil. The tenancies owned by the manor effectively provided Locke with a safe seat for the notoriously corrupt borough of Honiton. He was first returned at the 1847 election, labelling himself a ‘Liberal in politics’, and calling for a transformation in the social and moral condition of the country at a rate akin to that with which the railways had revolutionised travel since the 1830s.

Honiton

Locke represented the venal borough of Honiton from 1847 until his death (PP 1831-2 (141) xl.)

He held his seat until his death in 1860, and from 1857 struck an increasingly radical, anti-Palmerstonian tone. The railways featured prominently in all of his election campaigns. And, when he criticised the Conservative’s government’s international diplomacy during the 1859 election, his opponents suggested that his radicalism and involvement in continental railway development had been a covert attempt to support a much feared French invasion.

It was on one of his trips to France in 1856 that Locke sustained a knee injury during railway construction. This left him with a limp for the rest of his life and led to doctors’ orders that he be accompanied at all times by an ‘assistance-pony’. Unfortunately, we have found no proof of him using the donkey in Parliament.

Locke maintained a regular attendance in the Commons, where he usually sided with radicals on issues like the ballot, shorter parliaments and the abolition of the income tax. He was a regular presence in the committee rooms and made a number of speeches during his career, with one contemporary recording that he spoke ‘with much effect’ and that his ‘easy elegance’ was ‘equalled by his choice of language’.

During his first Parliament Locke tried to assume the role of figurehead for the railway interest at Westminster. This boosted his national profile a little, particularly when his 1849 attempts to secure the Sunday opening of railways inadvertently pushed him to the forefront of the anti-Sabbatarian lobby for the restoration of Sunday post-office deliveries in 1850. However, the forty or so MPs connected with the ‘railway interest’ proved difficult to manage, and Locke failed in his major aim of introducing legislation to prevent fraudulent practices in railway companies, a move he had hoped would restore investor confidence in the railways following a recent collapse in share prices.

Joseph-Locke-J.F.Mayall-(1855)

Engraving of 1855 photograph of Joseph Locke by John Mayall, from Devey, The Life of Joseph Locke (1862).

After dispensing with the idea of representing the railway interest, Locke turned to the scrutiny of publicly funded engineering and building projects from 1852. While his regular interventions were generally ‘well heard’ in the House, his efforts to effect a cultural shift in parliamentary attitudes towards the costing and planning of projects proved generally fruitless.  He was highly critical of the management of the rebuilding of the Houses of Parliament, the Thames embankment, the National Science Museum and the Scottish Ordnance Survey.

His activities meant that by the end of his parliamentary career he was regarded as Westminster’s foremost engineering expert, particularly following the death in 1859 of his friend and former colleague, Robert Stephenson, who had sat as MP for Whitby. This prompted rumours that Locke would succeed Henry Fitzroy as first commissioner of works in January 1860. However, he was disregarded by Palmerston on account of his unpopularity with the Cabinet, his lack of loyalty to the Liberal party and his reputation for outspokenness.

mw232527

Albumen print of Carlo Marochetti’s statue of Joseph Locke, c. 1865, Camille Silvy, NPG

Locke died suddenly of appendicitis (after complaining of ‘considerable pain in the bowels’) in September 1860 while shooting in Scotland during the parliamentary recess. He was a wealthy man and left around £350,000. Following his death, the Institute of Civil Engineers commissioned a statue of Locke which was proposed to be placed in St Margaret’s, Westminster. It was intended to complement Robert Stephenson’s statue in Euston Square, and Isambard Kingdom Brunel’s in Embankment gardens. However, the Liberal government refused the application, probably as a result of Locke’s parliamentary independence. The statue was instead installed in Locke Park, Barnsley, and a replica was also erected in 1951 at Barentin in France, where Locke had overseen the construction of the impressive Barentin Viaduct.

For a brief period Locke had a memorial window in Westminster Abbey. However, after being in storage ‘for many years’, it was purchased by Barnsley town council in 1952 and is currently held by Cannon Hall Museum, Cawthorne.

The full biography of Joseph Locke MP is on our free preview website. For details of how to obtain access to this or any other of our completed articles please click here.

Posted in MP of the Month | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Upcoming event: Victorian Elections & Political Culture Workshop

Keble College: home to the Research Centre in Victorian Political Culture

On Friday 20 April 2018 the Research Centre in Victorian Political Culture, led by Professor Angus Hawkins, will be hosting a workshop on Victorian politics aimed at graduate students in the Jean Robinson Room, Keble College, Oxford OX1 3PG. The seminars will consist of 30 minute papers on some key topics followed by 45 minutes of questions and discussion.

Timetable:

9.15  Philip Salmon (Editor, The History of Parliament, 1832-1867), Victorian Elections 1832-1867

10.30 Coffee break

11.00  Simon Skinner (Balliol College, Oxford), Elections and Confessional Politics

12.15  Sandwich lunch

1.00  Alex Middleton (Corpus Christi College, Oxford), The Impact of Foreign Autocracies on mid-Victorian Political Culture.

To register please email Professor Angus Hawkins and include details of any dietary or access requirements.

Posted in Conferences and seminars, Forthcoming events, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

MP of the Month: John Barton Willis Fleming (1781-1844)

With modern electioneering tactics currently attracting so much scrutiny at home and abroad, our Victorian MP of the Month focuses on a notorious election fixer or ‘boroughmonger’, whose activities increasingly pushed the boundaries of acceptable behaviour. His refusal to answer questions when he was summoned before a parliamentary inquiry led to demands for his arrest and scuppered his chances of an expected peerage. Disowned by the political establishment, within two years he was dead and insolvent.

The political career of John Fleming MP serves as an important reminder of the extraordinary lengths to which some election activists were prepared (and able) to go in the past, especially in the period before the introduction of the secret ballot (1872). Born John Barton Willis, Fleming had changed his name on inheriting the ‘very large fortune’ and Hampshire estates of his cousin John Fleming MP (1743-1802). By 1818 he had become the leading organiser of Hampshire’s Tories and an ‘intimate friend’ of his new ‘celebrity’ neighbour the Duke of Wellington, and had started work on a huge Grecian mansion at North Stoneham Park. Elected for the county two years later, he sat as a loyal Tory MP for Hampshire until 1831, when the popularity of the Whigs’ reform bill, to which he was staunchly opposed, made him unelectable.

North Stoneham House: seat of John Fleming MP

Furious at having to give up his Commons seat, Fleming became determined to leave nothing to chance in future. He was one of the first campaigners to fully exploit the new yearly voter registration system, employing lawyers to lodge objections to the votes of political opponents and help enrol supporters and the tenants of local Tory landlords. With would-be electors having to pay a registration fee, prove their legal entitlements if objected to, and face disqualification for various technical reasons, such as receiving charity or getting into arrears with their rates, the new system was ripe for abuse. In Southampton, where Fleming owned ‘considerable’ property, his behind-the-scenes shenanigans helped to get a Tory MP get elected in 1832, only for the result to be overturned after evidence came to light of fraudulent voting. Fleming’s activities in the county were not enough to get himself and the Duke of Wellington’s son elected in 1832, but in a shock result three years later, Fleming defeated and ousted the future Liberal prime minister Lord Palmerston, who accused him of threatening to evict tenants and of bribing supporters with tithe rebates.

Building on his personal triumph and the victory of two Tory MPs at Southampton, where Fleming now ‘ruled the electors with a rod of iron’, Fleming was instrumental in establishing the South Hampshire Conservative Society (and its various sub-committees) to collect local intelligence about voters and their families for use in the registration courts and during election campaigns. In London, meanwhile, he began to host lavish ‘grand dinners’ for the party leaders at his Pall Mall residence. ‘Fiercely partisan’, he was not beyond using his influence with Wellington, Hampshire’s lord lieutenant, to promote exclusively Tory appointments in local administration, from the bench to the board of guardians. Many of these positions involved the management of local rates, upon which the 1832 Reform Act’s household voting qualification depended.

John Fleming MP: © The Willis Fleming Historical Trust

Fleming’s activities did not go unnoticed by his political opponents in Parliament. Indeed their accusations prompted most of his rare contributions to debate. In one highly revealing episode in 1837, he was charged with manufacturing ‘faggot’ votes on the Isle of Wight, by parcelling up land and making ‘gifts’ of 40s. freeholds to non-residents (a practice later used to great effect by the Anti-Corn Law League). Even if this ‘was not against the letter of the law’, protested the local Liberal MP, ‘it was at least against its spirit, and contrary to the constitutional rights of the electors’. In response, Fleming insisted on his ‘right to dispose of his property as he pleased’.

Most of Fleming’s other speeches focused on his role in the highly controversial Southampton election contest of 1841. Charged in a petition with targeting and ‘corrupting’ vulnerable voters, Fleming was summoned to appear before an election inquiry. ‘Striking his hand energetically upon the table’, however, he refused to give details about the Conservatives’ election expenses and ‘betray the names’ of those involved. The attorney-general ruled that he must answer or face arrest. Called again the next day, he was expected to be committed to the sergeant-at-arms, only to be conveniently spared further questions when the committee decided it already had enough evidence to overturn the result. Concerned that so many ‘foul transactions’ had taken place, as one local paper put it, the Conservative prime minister Sir Robert Peel intervened to delay the issue of a new writ, against Fleming’s wishes, and backed the appointment of an inquiry into whether Southampton should be disfranchised. After finding insufficient evidence, however, the committee eventually allowed the delayed double by-election to go ahead.

Shortly after helping two new Tory MPs get elected for Southampton in 1842, Fleming resigned as an MP for Hampshire South and took himself off on his yacht Syren. He ‘retires in disgust, having been rumped by Sir Robert Peel’, reported a local paper, adding that he would now ‘give a few years to foreign travel’.

Fleming died two years later of ‘malignant fever’ whilst sailing in the Mediterranean. His vast estate was declared ‘insolvent’. According to one obituarist, the costs associated with his electioneering activities in Hampshire after 1832 had ‘averaged’ a staggering £18,000 per year. His ‘splendid mansion’ at North Stoneham, meanwhile, though never completed, was reckoned to have cost £100,000.

The full biography of John Fleming MP is on our free preview website. For details of how to obtain access to this or any other of our completed articles please click here.

Further info and reading:

The Willis Fleming Historical Trust

David Brown, Palmerston, South Hampshire and Electoral Politics, 1832-1835 (2003)

P. Salmon, ‘Electoral reform and the political modernization of England’, Parliaments, Estates, and Representation, xxiii (2003), 49-67 VIEW

Ruscombe Foster, The Politics of County Power: Wellington and the Hampshire Gentlemen 1820-1852 (1990)

A. Temple Patterson, A History of Southampton 1700-1914 (1966)

Posted in Biographies, Corruption, Elections, MP of the Month | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

MP of the Month: Andrew Carew O’Dwyer (1801-1877)

Many of our recent posts have focused on the way barriers to the franchise were gradually removed in the 19th century, but it is worth noting that there were also many barriers to becoming a Victorian MP. One of these was the property qualification for MPs that existed until 1858. The last MP to be unseated under this rule, Edward Glover, found himself in Newgate prison as a result of making a false declaration about his qualification.

Since 1711 membership of the Commons had been restricted to those receiving an income of £600 a year from land for county MPs, and £300 a year for borough MPs. This could prove a particular obstacle for Irish parliamentary candidates with backgrounds in trade or the professions who, although not without means, did not possess, as one Irish viceroy put it, ‘a shovelful of land’, and therefore had to make often hasty arrangements to meet the necessary property qualification.

Daniel O'Connell

Daniel O’Connell

One such MP was Andrew Carew O’Dwyer, an Irish barrister and follower of Daniel O’Connell, who sat for the Liberal borough of Drogheda from 1832 to 1835. Described as one of the ‘band of stout and brawling patriots, who had, in 1834, formed the hope of trusting Ireland’, O’Dwyer had been a late convert to O’Connell’s Repeal campaign. In January 1831 he had still been an advocate for the Union, albeit on the basis of ‘equal participation in British laws’. However, once he embraced Repeal he became one of its most determined advocates. One of the earliest and most active members of the Reform Club, he was a man of strong opinions and was not afraid to differ with O’Connell over the need for an Irish poor law. He was one of the most conspicuous of Ireland’s young ‘patriots’ and made more than one hundred contributions to debate in the 1833 session alone, speaking even more frequently than Sir Robert Peel. However, he was not well liked at Westminster. The Whigs’ election manager, Denis Le Marchant, thought there was something ‘of the ruffian’ about him, while other critics claimed that he prided himself ‘upon a total disregard for truth’.

This did little to diminish his popularity in Ireland, and he faced only token opposition at the 1835 general election. A petition was soon presented against his return, however, and an election committee decided that owing to a mistake that O’Dwyer had made in his declaration regarding his property qualification, the election was void. Since the deed for the land in question had been hastily conveyed to him, his uncertainty as to his new property’s precise location was perhaps understandable. The seat was re-contested that April, when the Conservatives, confident that they would be able to prove that O’Dwyer had no legal claim to his property, fielded an opponent. Although O’Connell assured Drogheda’s Liberal electors that O’Dwyer was ‘certainly qualified in point of property’, O’Dwyer’s victory at the poll was immediately contested. In June another committee concluded that O’Dwyer’s title to his property was not valid. He was unseated once more and his opponent was seated in his place.

The verdict proved controversial because the committee had been composed of ten Conservatives and one Liberal, and their decision had required the casting vote of the chairman, Henry Goulburn, a man O’Dwyer described as ‘a bitter political partisan, and a virulent opponent of mine’. In July O’Connell presented a petition to the Commons on behalf of O’Dwyer, which called for a more liberal regulation of the property qualification, and by 1838 the rules had been amended to include income from personal as well as landed property.

Orlagh House

Orlagh, near Dublin (via www.buildingsofireland.ie)

In the meantime, O’Dwyer was still without a seat, and as Drogheda had been earmarked by the ministry as a safe berth for Sir William Somerville, a future chief secretary of Ireland, O’Dwyer benefited from the ‘bonanza of jobbery’ which accompanied the Whigs’ administrative reforms in Ireland. In February 1837 he was appointed to the lucrative legal post of filacer of the Irish court of exchequer, and in 1841 was promoted further. When his office was abolished in 1845 he was granted a generous pension, which enabled him to purchase an estate at Orlagh, near Dublin.

Now free from office and a man of property, O’Dwyer made several unsuccessful attempts to revive his political career. At the 1852 general election he offered for the borough of Waterford, but retired in favour of the Catholic bishop’s preferred candidate, and in 1857 he came bottom of the poll. In 1859 he tried again at Drogheda, but resigned in favour of the Liberal Member. Without hope of returning to Parliament, O’Dwyer retired from politics and spent the rest of his days in London, where he died in November 1877.

Posted in Biographies, Elections, Ireland, MP of the Month | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment