Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-tcbk7 Total loading time: 0.247 Render date: 2021-09-17T11:17:07.051Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

New Sources and Methods In the Study of the Nineteenth Century Parliament*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2014

Get access

Extract

The study of the nineteenth century British Parliament cannot be limited to the institution itself, nor to the constitutional relations of its par ts. The great electoral reforms of the century increased the importance of the electorate in political decision-making. Coupled with these changes, the vast transformations of economy and society altered the very functions of Parliament. Thus nineteenth century parliamentary history requires an understanding of the whole political system, as well as the events within the House. Many of the recent works bearing on the history of Parliament reflect these facts. While good narrative history of parliamentary events continues to be needed and produced, the most innovative recent work raises different kinds of problems entirely and is not limited to affairs at Westminster. The newer types of work can be viewed as coming in two waves: first, a detailed analysis of political structure, utilizing traditional kinds of sources; and second, a proliferation of analytical approaches, using new sources and methods. Both waves are basically analytical, but they differ in questions asked and in routes to the answers.

The analysis of political structure has been inspired by the questions, if not the methods and interpretations, of Sir Lewis Namier. The best of many examples are still Norman Gash's Politics in the Age of Peel and H. J. Hanham's Elections and Party Management. The main questions asked in such works are: What was the real, as opposed to the theoretical, framework of politics? How were politics actually conducted outside the House of Commons? How did the various reform acts affect the functioning of the electoral system? These works stress, in Gash' terminology, the “medium” in which the ordinary politician operated. In each case, they seem to emphasize continuity rather than change, and the enduring power of bribery, corruption, and influence. They have added a great deal to what the narratives tell us about Victorian politics, especially in regard to the realities of constituency operations, the origins and workings of party machinery, the problems of party finance, and the cost of elections. Structural investigations of parties, like Conor Cruise O'Brien's Parnell and His Party and E. J. Feuchtwanger's Disraeli, Democracy and the Tory Party have given a new dimension to party history. Perhaps most important, the structural studies have established the crucial significance of local factors and the comparative inconsequence of national issues in most elections.

Type
Research Article
Information
Albion , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , Summer 1972 , pp. 67 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference on British Studies 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Paper read at the Conference on British Studies Sessions, American Convention, New York, December 1971.

References

1 Gash, Norman, Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830-1850 (London, 1953)Google Scholar. Hanham, H. J., Elections and Party Management: Politics in the Time of Disraeli and Gladstone (London, 1959)Google Scholar. Other examples: Gash, , “F. R. Bonham, Conservative ‘Political Secretary,’ 1832-1847,” English Historical Review, LXIII (October. 1948), 500–22Google Scholar. Hanham, , “The First Constituency Party?Political Studies, IX, (1961), 188–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar; British Party Finance, 1868-1880,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, XXVII (May, 1954), 6990Google Scholar; The Sale of Honours in Late Victorian England,” Victorian Studies, III (March, 1960), 277–89Google Scholar; Political Patronage at the Treasury, 1870-1912,” Historical Journal, III (1960), 7584Google Scholar. Gwyn, William B., Democracy and the Cost of Politics in Britain (London, 1962)Google Scholar. O'Leary, Cornelius, The Elimination of Corrupt Practices in British Elections, 1868-1911 (Oxford, 1962)Google Scholar. Smith, E. A., “The Election Agent in English Politics, 1734-1832,” English Historical Review, LXXXIV (January, 1969), 1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Smith, R. W., “Political Organization and Canvassing: Yorkshire Elections before the Reform Bill,” American Historical Review, LXXIV (June, 1969), 1538–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Smith, E. A., “Bribery and Disfranchisement: Wallingford Elections, 1820-1832,” English Historical Review, LXXV (October, 1960), 618–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Ferguson, William, “The Reform Act (Scotland) of 1832: Intention and Effect,” Scottish Historical Review, XLV (April, 1966), 105–14Google Scholar. Patterson, A. Temple, “Electoral Corruption in Early Victorian Leicester,” History, XXXI (September, 1946), 113–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Thomas, J. A., “The System of Registration and the Development of Party Organization, 1832-1870,” History, XXXV (February and June, 1950), 8198CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Vincent, John R., “The Effect of the Second Reform Act in Lancashire,” Historical Journal, XI (1968), 8494CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Blewett, Neal, “The Franchise in the United Kingdom, 1885-1918,” Past and Present, No. 32 (December, 1965), 2756CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Jones, Grace A., “Further Thoughts on the Franchise,” Past and Present, No. 34 (July, 1966). 134–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Whyte, J. H., “Landlord Influence at Elections in Ireland, 1760-1885,” English Historical Review, LXXX (October, 1965), 740–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Jupp, P. J., “Irish Parliamentary Elections and the Influence of the Catholic Vote, 1801-1820,” Historical Journal, X (1967), 183–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Hurst, Michael. “Ireland and the Ballot Act of 1872,” Historical Journal, VIII (1965), 326–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Because of its high analytical content, perhaps Maurice Cowling, 1867: Disraeli, Gladstone and Revolution (Cambridge, England, 1967)Google Scholar, should be included here.

2 O'Brien, Conor Cruise, Parnell and His Party, 1880-1890 (2d ed.; Oxford, 1964)Google Scholar. Feuchtwanger, E. J., Disraeli, Democracy and the Tory Party: Conservative Leadership and Organization after the Second Reform Bill (Oxford, 1968)Google Scholar. Other examples: Mitchell, L. G., Charles James Fox and the Disintegration of the Whig Party, 1782-1794 (Oxford, 1971)Google Scholar. Ginter, Donald E., ed., Whig Organization in the General Election of 1790 (Berkeley, 1967)Google Scholar. Gash, Norman, “Peel and the Party System,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th Ser., I (1951), 4769CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Reaction and Reconstruction in English Politics (Oxford, 1965)Google Scholar, Chaps. V and VI. Thompson, A. F., “Gladstone's Whips and the General Election of 1868,” English Historical Review, LXIII (April, 1948), 189200CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Herrick, F. H., “The Origins of the National Liberal Federation,” Journal of Modern History XVII (June, 1945), 116–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Clark, G. S. R. Kitson, “Introduction,” in Shannon, R. T., Gladstone and the Bulgarian Agitation, 1876 (London, 1963)Google Scholar. McGill, Barry, “Francis Schnad-horst and Liberal Party Organization,” Journal of Modern History, XXXIV (March, 1962), 1939CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Kellas, James G., “The Liberal Party in Scotland, 1876-1895,” Scottish Historical Review, XLIV (April, 1965), 116Google Scholar. Hurst, Michael, Joseph Chamberlain and West Midland Politics, 1886-1895 (Oxford, 1962)Google Scholar. Fraser, Peter, “The Liberal Unionist Alliance: Chamberlain, Harrington, and the Conservatives, 1886-1904,” English Historical Review, LXXVII (January, 1962), 5378CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Feuchtwanger, E. J., “The Conservative Party under the Impact of the Second Reform Act,” Victorian Studies, II (June, 1959), 289304Google Scholar; J. E. Gorst and the Central Organization of the Conservative Party, 1870-1882,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, XXXII (November, 1959), 192208Google Scholar. Urwin, Derek W., “The Development of the Conservative Party Organization in Scotland until 1912,” Scottish Historical Review, XLIV (October, 1965), 89111Google Scholar. Robb, Janet H., The Primrose League (New York, 1942Google Scholar. Whyte, John H., “Daniel O'Connell and the Repeal Party,” Irish Historical Studies, XI (September, 1959), 297316CrossRefGoogle Scholar; The Independent Irish Party, 1850-1859 (London, 1958)Google Scholar. Macintyre, Angus, The Liberator: Daniel O'Connell and the Irish Party, 1830-1847 (London, 1965)Google Scholar. Thornley, David, Isaac Butt and Home Rule (London, 1964)Google Scholar. Lyons, F. S. L., The Irish Parliamentary Party, 1890-1910 (London, 1951)Google Scholar. See also notes 4, 6, 11, 30, 31, 33, 34, and 35.

3 Perhaps it is unfair to criticize Gash and Hanham for not doing what they did not set out to do. In his Reaction and Reconstruction in English Politics, and Mr, Secretary Peel (Cambridge, Mass., 1961)Google Scholar, Gash deals with many of these topics. And Hanham says, in the preface to Elections and Party Management, that he is writing a volume on the politicians themselves and their pressure groups.

4 Mitchell, Austin, The Whigs in Opposition, 1815-1830 (Oxford, 1967)Google Scholar. Norman Gash has criticized Mitchell's views of the relative cohesiveness of parties in a review in the English Historical Review, LXXXIV (April, 1969), 407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Aydelotte, W. O., “Voting Patterns in the British House of Commons in the 1840's,” Comparative Studies in Society and History, V (January, 1963), 134–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Berrington, Hugh, “Partisanship and Dissidence in the Nineteenth Century House of Commons,” Parliamentary Affairs, XXI, (Autumn, 1968), 338–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar. T. W. Heyck and William Klecka, “British Radical M.P.'s, 1874-1895: New Evidence from Discriminant Analysis,” forth coming in The Journal of Interdisciplinary History. There is also an analysis of voting records in the Appendix to Conacher, J. B., The Aberdeen Coalition, 1852-1855 (Cambridge, England. 1968).Google Scholar

7 Ostrogorski, M., Democracy and the Organization of Political Parties, Vol. I (New York, 1902).Google Scholar

8 Beales, Derek, “Parliamentary Parties and the ‘Independent’ Member, 1810-1860,” in Robson, Robert, ed., Ideas and Institutions of Victorian Britain (New York, 1967), 119Google Scholar. See also: Foord, A. S., “Whigs into Liberals,” Government and Opposition, Vol. 3 (Spring, 1968), 243–48 —CrossRefGoogle Scholar a review article of Mitchell's Whigs in Opposition. Robbins, Caroline, “‘Discordant Parties:’ A Study of the Acceptance of Party by Englishmen,” Political Science Quarterly, LXXIII (December, 1958), 505–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Aspinall, Arthur, “English Party Organization in the Early Nineteenth Century,” English Historical Review, XLI (July, 1926), 389411CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Large, D., “The Decline of the ‘Party of the Crown’ and the Rise of Parties in the House of Lords, 1783-1837,” English Historical Review, LXXVIII (October, 1963), 669–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Close, David, “The Formation of a Two-Party Alignment in the House of Commons between 1832 and 1841,” English Historical Review, LXXXIV (April, 1969), 257–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Aydelotte, W. O., “Parties and Issues in Early Victorian England,” Journal of British Studies, V (May, 1966), 95114CrossRefGoogle Scholar. There is, however, nothing as yet to match Jackson's, R. J. study of the years from 1945 to 1964: Rebels and Whips: An Analysis of Dissension, Discipline and Cohesion in British Political Parties (New York, 1968).Google Scholar

9 Beales, , “Parliamentary Parties and the ‘Independent’ Member,” pp.10, 11Google Scholar; Berrington, , “Partisanship and Dissidence in the Nineteenth Century House of Commons,” pp. 344–46.Google Scholar

10 See notes 18 and 19.

11 H. J. Hanham, Elections and Party Management, Chap. 7; Barry McGill, “Francis Schnadhorst and Liberal Party Organization,” passim; McKenzie, R. T., British Political Parties (London, 1953), Chaps. IV and VGoogle Scholar; E. J. Feuchtwanger, Disraeli, Democracy and the Tory Party.

12 Fraser, Peter, “The Growth of Ministerial Control in the Nineteenth-Century House of Commons,” English Historical Review, LXXV (July, 1960), 444–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cromwell, Valerie, “The Losing of the Initiative by the House of Commons, 1780-1914,” Transactions of The Royal Historical Society, 5th Ser., XVIII (1968), 123CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also: Hughes, Edward, “The Changes in Parliamentary Procedure, 1880-1882,” in Pares, Richard and Taylor, A. J. P., eds., Essays Presented to Sir Lewis Namier (London, 1956), 289319Google Scholar. Hanham, H. J., “Opposition Techniques in British Politics, 1867-1914,” Government and Oppposition, Vol. 2 (January, 1967), 3548CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Thornley, David, “The Irish Home Rule Party and Parliamentary Obstruction, 1874-1887,” Irish Historical Studies, XII (March, 1960), 3857CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Chester, D. N. and Bowring, Nona, Questions in Parliament (Oxford, 1962)Google Scholar. Leys, Colin, “Petitioning in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries,” Political Studies, III (February, 1955), 4564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Mackintosh, John P., The British Cabinet (2d ed.; London, 1968).Google Scholar

14 Foord, A. S., “The Waning of ‘The Influence of the Crown,’English Historical Review, LXII (October, 1947), 484507CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Pares, Richard, King George III and the Politicians (Oxford, 1953)Google Scholar. This theme is explored brilliantly in Norman Gash, Reaction and Reconstruction in English Politics, Chap. 1.

15 Roberts, David, Victorian Origins of the British Welfare State (New Haven, 1960)Google Scholar. MacDonagh, Oliver, A Pattern of Government Growth, 180060: The Passenger Acts and their Enforcement (London. 1961)Google Scholar; Delegated Legislation and Administrative Discretions in the 1850's: A Particular Study,” Victorian Studies, II (September, 1958), 2944Google Scholar. Macleod, Roy, “The Akalai Acts Administration, 1863-84: The Emergence of the Civil Scientist,” Victorian Studies, IX (December, 1965), 85112Google Scholar; The Frustration of State Medicine, 1880-1899,” Medical History, XI (January, 1967), 1540Google Scholar; Social Policy and the ‘Floating Population’: The Administration of the Canal Boats Acts, 1877-1899,” Past and Present, No. 35 (December, 1966), 101–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

These works are a part of a larger controversy over the Victorian “revolution in government,” some aspects of which shed light on the changing function of Parliament: MacDonagh, Oliver, “The Nineteenth Century Revolution in Government: A Reappraisal,” Historical Journal, I (1958), 5267CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Parris, Henry, “The Nineteenth Century Revolution in Government: A Reappraisal Reappraised,” Historical Journal, III (1960), 1737CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Hart, Jennifer, “Nineteenth Century Social Reform: A Tory Interpretation of History,” Past and Present, No. 31 (July, 1965), 3961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Heasman, D. J., “The Emergence and Evolution of the Office of Parliamentary Secretary,” Parliamentary Affairs, XXIII (Autumn, 1970), 345–65Google Scholar. Willson, F. M. G., “Routes of Entry of New Members of the British Cabinet, 1868-1958,” Political Studies, VII (October, 1959), 222–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Elton, G. R., “Studying the History of Parliament,” British Studies Monitor, II (Summer, 1971), 414.Google Scholar

18 Guttsman, W. L., The British Political Elite (London, 1963).Google Scholar

19 Woolley, S. F., “The Personnel of the Parliament of 1833,” English Historical Review, LIII (April, 1938), 240–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Aydelotte, W. O., “The House of Commons in the 1840's,” History, XXXIX (October, 1954), 249–62.Google Scholar

20 Thomas, J. A., The House of Commons, 1832-1901: A Study of Its Economic and Functional Character (Cardiff, 1939)Google Scholar. Also: Thomas, J. A., “The House of Commons, 1832-1867: A Functional Analysis,” Economica, V (1925), 4961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 For the political conflict between Anglicanism and Dissent, see: Gash, Reaction and Reconstruction in English Politics, Chaps. III and IV. Clark, G. Kitson, The Making of Victorian England (Cambridge, Mass., 1962)Google Scholar, Chaps. VI and VIII. R. T. Shannon, Gladstone and the Bulgarian Agitation. For other works bearing on collective biography see: Judd, G. P., Members of Parliament, 1734-1832 (New Haven, 1955)Google Scholar. W. O. Aydelotte, “The Business Interests of the Gentry in the Parliament of 1841-47,” Appendix to G. Kitson Clark. The Making of Victorian England. Hanham, H. J., “Some Neglected Sources of Biographical Information: County Biographical Dictionaries, 18901937,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, XXXIV (May, 1961), 5566CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Laski, H. J., “The Personnel of ihe English Cabinet, 1801-1924,” American Political Science Review, XXII (1928), 1231CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Punnett, R. M., “The Parliamentary and Personal Backgrounds of British Prime Ministers, 1812-1963,” Quarterly Review, 302 (July, 1964), 254–66Google Scholar. Pumphrey, R. E., “The Introduction of Industrialists into the British Peerage: A Study in Adaptation of a Social Institution,” American Historical Review, LXV (October, 1959), 116CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Francis, Wayne L., “The Role Concept in Legislatures: A Probability Model and A Note on Cognitive Structure,” The Journal of Politics, Vol. 27 (August, 1965), 567–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 Moore, D. C., “The Other Face of Reform,” Victorian Studies, V (September, 1961), 734Google Scholar; Concession or Cure: The Sociological Premises of the First Reform Act,” Historical Journal, IX (1966), 3959.Google Scholar

23 For other attempts to relate sociological analysis of the M.P.'s to voting in the House, see: W. O. Aydelotte, “The House of Commons in the 1840's”; The Country Gentlemen and the Repeal of the Corn Laws,” English Historical Review, LXXXII (January, 1967), 4760CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Clark, G. Kitson, “The Repeal of the Corn Laws and the Politics of the Forties,” The Economic History Review, 2d Ser., IV (1951), 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 W. O. Aydelotte, “The Business Interests of the Gentry in the Parliament of 1841-47”; “The House of Commons in the 1840's”; A Statistical Analysis of the Parliament of 1841: Some Problems of Method,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, XXVII (November, 1954), 156–89Google Scholar. In his article, “The Repeal of the Corn Laws and the Politics of the Forties,” G. Kitson Clark studies the reverse of economic determinism — i. e., the influence of party politics upon economic thought and policy.

25 For reconsiderations of the influence of constituencies on their M.P.'s: Wahlke, John C., “Policy Demands and System Support: The Role of the Represented,” British Journal of Political Science, I (July, 1971), 271–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Aydelotte, W. O.. “Constituency Influence and the Parliament of the 1840's,” unpublished paper delivered to the Conference on British Studies, Chicago, October, 1971Google Scholar. For class ideology: Perkin, Harold, The Origins of Modern English Society, 1780-1880 (Toronto, 1969).Google Scholar

26 Vincent, J. R., Pollbooks: How Victorians Voted (Cambridge, England, 1967)Google Scholar. For a brief critique, see: Nossiter, T. J., “Recent Work on English Elections, 1832-1935,” Political Studies, XVIII (December, 1970), 525–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Vincent is more successful with The Electoral Sociology of Rochdale,” The Economic History Review, 2d Ser., XVI (August, 1963), 7690Google Scholar. Other good uses of pollbooks are in: Guttsman, W. L., “The General Election of 1859 in the Cities of Yorkshire,” International Review of Social History, II (1957), 231–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Drake, Michael, “The Mid-Victorian Voter,” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, I (Spring, 1971), 473–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27 Moore, D. C., “Social Structure, Political Structure, and Public Opinion in Mid-Victorian England,” in Robson, Robert, ed., Ideas and Institutions of Victorian Britain, 2057.Google Scholar

28 Tholfsen, Trygve, “The Transition to Democracy in Victorian England,” International Review of Social History, VI (1961), 226–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

29 For other good sociological analyses, see: Briggs, Asa, “The Language of ‘Class’ in Early Nineteenth Century England,” in Briggs, Asa and Saville, John, eds., Essays on Labour History (London, 1960), 4373CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Middle-Class Consciousness in English Politics, 1780-1846,” Past and Present, No. 9 (April, 1956), 6574CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Jones, I. G., “The Election of 1868 in Merthyr Tydfil: A Study in the Politics of an Industrial Borough in the Mid-Nineteenth Century,” Journal of Modern History, XXXIII (September, 1961), 270–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also notes 36, 37, 38, and 39.

30 Cornford, James P., “The Parliamentary Foundations of the Hotel Cecil,” in Robson, Robert, ed., Ideas and Institutions of Victorian Britain, 268311Google Scholar; The Transformation of Conservatism in the Late Nineteenth Century,” Victorian Studies, VII (September, 1963), 3566.Google Scholar

31 Vincent, John R., Formation of the Libeial Party, 1857-1868 (London, 1966).Google Scholar

32 Trygve Tholfsen, “The Transition to Democracy in Victorian England”; The Origins of the Birmingham Caucus,” Historical Journal, II (1959), 161–84Google Scholar. Harrison, Royden, “The British Working Class and the General Election of 1868,” Parts I and II, International Review of Social History, V (1960), 424–55, and VI (1961), 74-109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33 Southgate, Donald, The Passing of the Whigs, 1832-1886 (New York, 1962).Google Scholar

34 Glaser, John F., “English Nonconformity and the Decline of Liberalism,” American Historical Review, LXIII (January, 1958), 352–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35 Heyck, T. W., “British Radicals and Radicalism, 1874-1895: A Social Analysis,” in Bezucha, R. J., ed., Modern European Social History (Lexington, Mass., 1972), 2858.Google Scholar

36 Thompson, E. P., The Making of the English Working Class (London. 1963)Google Scholar. Rudé, George, The Crowd in History (New York, 1964)Google Scholar; Wilkes and Liberty (Oxford, 1962)Google Scholar. Williams, Gwyn A., Artisans and Sans-Culottes (New York, 1969)Google Scholar. Also: Rudé, George, Hanoverian London, 1714-1808 (Berkeley, 1971), Chaps. 8 and 9Google Scholar. Rose, R. B., “Eighteenth-Century Price Riots and Public Policy in England,” International Review of Social History, VI (1961), 277–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37 Briggs, Asa, “The Background of the Parliamentary Reform Movement in Three English Cities (1830-2),” Cambridge Historical Journal, X (1952), 293317CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thomas Attwood and the Economic Background of the Birmingham Political Union,” Cambridge Historical Journal, IX (1948), 190216Google Scholar. Rudé, George, “English Rural and Urban Disturbances on the Eve of the First Reform Bill, 1830-1831,” Past and Present, No. 37 (July, 1967), 87102.Google Scholar

38 Briggs, Asa, ed., Chartist Studies (London, 1959)Google Scholar. Wilson, Alexander, The Chartist Movement in Scotland (Manchester, 1970).Google Scholar

39 See note 32. Also: Harrison, Royden, Before the Socialists (London. 1965).Google Scholar

40 Thompson, Paul, Socialists, Liberals and Labour: The Struggle for London, 1885-1914 (Toronto, 1967).Google Scholar

41 Pelling, Henry, The Origins of the Labour Party, 1880-1900 (Oxford. 1965)Google Scholar; Popular Politics and Society in Late Victorian Britain (New York. 1968).Google Scholar

42 A point emphasized by Epstein, Leon D., “British Class Consciousness and the Labour Party,” Journal of British Studies, I (May, 1962), 136–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

43 McCallum, R. B., “The Study of Psephology,” Parliamentary Affairs, VIII (Autumn, 1955), 508–13Google Scholar. The latest example is Butler, David and Pinto-Duschinsky, Michael, The British General Election of 1970 (London, 1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

44 Lloyd, Trevor, The General Election of 1880 (London, 1968).Google Scholar

45 Some of these criticisms are made by Nossiter, T. J. in “Recent Work on English Elections,” 525–26.Google Scholar

46 Other psephological studies: Lloyd, Trevor, “Uncontested Seats in British General Elections, 1852-1910,” Historical Journal, VIII (1965), 260–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Dunbabin, J. P. D., “Parliamentary Elections in Great Britain, 1868-1900: A Psephological Note,” English Historical Review, LXXXI (January, 1966), 8299CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Sanderson, G. M., “Swing of the Pendulum in British General Elections, 1832-1966,” Political Studies, XIV (October, 1966), 349–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

47 Kinnear, Michael, The British Voter: An Atlas and Survey Since 1885 (London, 1968)Google Scholar. Pelling, Henry, Social Geography of British Elections, 1885-1910 (New York, 1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Morgan, Kenneth O., Wales in British Politics, 1868-1922 (Cardiff, 1963)Google Scholar, might also be included in this category. Others: Morgan, Kenneth O., “Cardiganshire Politics: The Liberal Ascendancy, 1885-1923,” Ceredigion, V (19641967)Google Scholar. Jones, I. G., “Cardiganshire Politics in the Mid-Nineteenth Century,” Ceredigion, V (19641967)Google Scholar. McCord, Norman and Carrick, A. E., “Northumberland and the General Election of 1852,” Northern History, I (1966), 92108CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Howarth, Janet, “The Liberal Revival in Northamptonshire, 1880-1895: A Case Study in Late-Nineteenth Century Elections,” Historical Journal, XII (1969), 78118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

48 This statement is true even though comparative politics is a flourishing field. The best examples of comparative parliamentary and political studies bearing on the nineteenth century are: Williams, Gwyn A., Artisans and Sans-Culottes (New York, 1969)Google Scholar. Kelley, Robert, The Transatlantic Persuasion (New York, 1969)Google Scholar. Lipset, Seymour M., “Value Patterns, Class and the Democratic Polity: the United States and Great Britain,” in Lipset, Seymour M. and Bendix, Reinhard, eds., Class, Status and Power (2d ed.; New York, 1966), 161171Google Scholar. Lipset, Seymour M. and Rokkan, Stein, eds., Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives (New York, 1967)Google Scholar, especially Chaps. 1 and 3. Almond, Gabriel A. and Powell, G. Bingham, Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach (Boston, 1966).Google Scholar

1
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

New Sources and Methods In the Study of the Nineteenth Century Parliament*
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

New Sources and Methods In the Study of the Nineteenth Century Parliament*
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

New Sources and Methods In the Study of the Nineteenth Century Parliament*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *