22
Stuart Britain and the Crisis of Monarchy, 1603-1702
________________________________________________________________
SECTION FOUR The Establishment of Constitutional Monarchy, 1678-1702
Topic 22 Division within the Political Nation: Whigs and Tories
Key Question: What were the most significant divisions between Whigs and Tories by the end of the 17th century?
The Emergence of Whigs and Tories as ‘Parties’
The Glorious Revolution exacerbated the differences between Whigs and Tories. For the Whigs, James II had broken his ‘contract’ with the Political Nation, and therefore deserved to be deposed as King. For the Tories, James had abdicated, or chosen to ‘resign’ from his position as sovereign, but he remained the legitimate monarch.
Four other factors can be used to explain why party divisions continued to increase from the reign of William III onwards.
1. Parliamentary sessions became a more regular feature of government after 1689. This facilitated greater cooperation among MPs of similar interests.
2. There were more frequent general elections after 1689, and more seats were actively contested (from around 60-70 in the period 1660-89, to over 100 thereafter). This created a necessity for candidates to align themselves along party lines to increase their chances of being elected.
3. The franchise had become more sophisticated and better informed over the course of the 17th century. By 1688, it numbered some 200,000 people (around 4.5% of the population). An electorate with broader backgrounds and wider interests naturally led to more conflict between the more ‘radical’ MPs (generally the Whigs) and ‘moderate’ politicians (generally the Tories).
4. The lapsing of The Licensing Act in 1695 marked the formal end of Church and State censorship. Independent political journalism could now flourish among a more volatile electorate. For this reason, the period from 1695 and into the 18th century is often described by historians as ‘the rage of party’.
The main differences between the Whigs and Tories during the period 1689 to 1702 is summarised in the table below.
Key issues | Whigs | Tories | |
|---|---|---|---|
Organisation | Structures of the parties | Activities were coordinated by a ‘Junto’ of moderates who came together in 1693-94 to support William’s war with France. They held daily meetings during parliamentary sessions and convened with other Whigs in taverns and coffee-houses. | Loosely structured: meetings were held for backbenchers, but correspondence mostly took the form of private letters. |
The Royal Succession | Theoretical position. | Believed in a contract between Crown and subject. Monarchs could be removed if the contract was broken, with Parliament as the key check on the Crown. | Believed in Divine Right, with subjects practising passive obedience and non-resistance. |
The Royal Succession | Death of Queen Mary, 1694. | Quickly accepted William as sole sovereign. | Concerned about the legitimacy of William’s right to rule alone. |
The Royal Succession | The Oath of Association, 1696. | Insisted all government office holders acknowledge William and Mary as the ‘rightful and lawful’ monarchs. | Twenty Tory Lords and ninety MPs refused the oath, as they felt William and Mary were only the de facto monarchs. |
The Royal Succession | The Act of Settlement, 1701. | Advocated that the Crown could only pass to a Protestant – in this case Sophia of Hanover (after Anne). | Despite some vocal objectors, the vast majority accepted the Act as a political necessity. |
The Royal Succession | The Abjuration Act, 1702. | Insisted that all office holders, MPs, clergymen and professionals denounce the claim of James II’s son, James Edward Stuart. | Acknowledged that the Act was a necessary addition to The Act of Settlement for purposes of national security. |
Foreign Policy and Finance | Financial status. | Tended to be rich businessmen or financiers from the City of London who had made their fortunes in trade and commerce. | Tended to be from the more traditional, established aristocracy and landed gentry. |
Foreign Policy and Finance | England’s entry into the Nine Years’ War with France, 1689. | Fully supported the Crown’s decision to go to war against France, by any means necessary. | Supported only a limited naval war against France. |
Foreign Policy and Finance | Military Strategy. | Advocated a policy of challenging the armies of France in mainland Europe. | Advocated a policy of using the navy to oppose French commercial interests at sea (the ‘blue-water strategy’). |
Foreign Policy and Finance | The Million Loan Act, 1693 and the establishment of the Bank of England, 1694. | Backed the scheme for William to receive two loans of over £1 million, with guaranteed repayments from parliamentary taxation (the Whigs stood to benefit financially from providing future borrowing services for the Crown). | Were dismayed by the escalating cost of the war, and unenthusiastic about the Crown’s borrowing policies (mainly because they worked in favour of the Whigs). |
Religion | Religious toleration. | Wanted an extension of The Toleration Act of 1689 to broaden the Church of England and encompass more Protestant dissenters within it. | Tories were mostly strict Anglicans who wished to defend the Church of England and prevent the extension of any further religious toleration. |
Politics | The powers of the Crown and Parliament. | Believed that Parliament should ultimately be the sovereign body in England, and therefore (subtly) tried to erode the monarch’s power where possible. | Stressed that the royal prerogative still gave the monarch ultimate executive authority in the State. |
Development of ‘Party’ Divisions
Historiography of the split between the Tories and the Whigs is roughly divided into two schools of thought:
1. Traditional view: Earlier historians tend to perceive political divisions as primarily linked to economic interests, as the Glorious Revolution’s financial settlement made Whig moneylenders very wealthy. This new class of ‘monied men’ involved in loans, bonds, and credit usurped the political influence of the traditional Tory landowners, who were further marginalised by the imposition of heavier land taxes on their estates.
2. Revisionist view: More recent historians stress that the party split can be traced back to the unresolved religious issues from the Restoration Settlement of 1660. Whigs wanted greater toleration for dissenters, whereas and Tories staunchly defended the narrow Anglicanism of the Church of England.
Although the development of Whig and Tory ‘parties’ is often strongly associated with William III’s reign (1689-1702), it is important to recognise that the King himself took a mostly ambivalent attitude to this development:
he realised that the Whigs had been instrumental in securing his ascent to the throne, but also suspected that they sought to diminish his prerogative, an aspiration which he found utterly abhorrent;
he remained unconvinced of the loyalty of the Tories, but had no desire to exclude them from office, for fear of driving them into the camp of James II (there existed an ‘underground’ Jacobite movement, both in England and across Europe, which was quietly committed to restoring the Stuart monarchy);
as a foreigner, whose priorities lay in foreign policy, William found party divisions vexatious, and had little patience for parliamentary conflict – he therefore did his best to remain above it.
It could even be argued that William cleverly used the party divisions as a lever with which to control Parliament, much in the same way as MPs used finance to control the monarchy.
The Parliament of 1690 consisted of 225 Whigs and 206 Tories. On becoming King, William immediately formed a Privy Council of his own choosing, although he was cautious to include a balance of Whigs and Tories within it. However, when he left England to confront James’s invasion in Ireland later that year, William appointed mainly Tories to run the country in his absence. Although the Whigs had been more enthusiastic in embracing the Glorious Revolution, William quickly became frustrated by their repeated attempts to limit the powers of the Crown. He therefore naturally favoured Tories, who showed more respect for the royal prerogative.
The situation altered somewhat following William’s victory at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690. Tories now found themselves being gradually eased out of key government positions in favour of Whigs, who were more willing to fully support the King’s war with France. As part of this process, there was a realignment of the previous ‘party’ division back towards more traditional ‘court’ and ‘country’ positions:
‘new’ Whigs (labelled Junto Whigs) became a central part of the government, thus representing the ‘court’;
Tories now stood somewhat opposed to William and Mary’s government, thus were more clearly representing the ‘country’.
Due to the onset of the Nine Years’ War, a strange reversal of roles therefore seems to have taken place in party attitudes from 1689. It was now the Whigs who were more likely to defend the royal prerogative through their close association with the ‘court’, while the Tories became associated with the old ‘country’ suspicions of a government intent on centralising its power.
From around 1695 onwards, parliamentary politics was dominated by a group of politicians known as the Whig Junto – Sir John Somers, Thomas Wharton, Admiral Edward Russell (the Earl of Orford), Charles Montague (the Earl of Halifax), and Charles Talbot (the Duke of Shrewsbury). As they had been handpicked by the King, historians recognise the Junto as the first official ‘ministry’ in English history, with decision-making taking place within what would come to be known as a ‘cabinet’ (rather than a Privy Council). The power and influence of the Whig Junto was derived from their ability to gain supply from parliament to fund the war with France. Their chief aim seems to have been to extend their own influence, and control royal patronage and government offices (in the same way that Danby had operated in the 1670s under Charles II).
With the rivalry between Whigs and Tories stronger than ever, party politics during the final years of William’s reign played out in the following way:
The Triennial Act, 1694: A second Triennial Bill, stating that a Parliament could not last longer than three years, was reluctantly given royal assent in January 1694 (William had vetoed an initial bill to the same effect a year earlier). General elections now had to be held more frequently, ensuring the continuance of ‘parties’.
1695 Elections: The Whigs performed strongly, cementing their dominance over both Parliament and the Privy Council.
Assassination Plot, 1696: When a plot to assassinate William was discovered, the Whigs quickly rallied round the King, who was forced to become more reliant on their support than ever. Both Houses adopted the publication of a Whig-orchestrated Oath of Association that acknowledged William’s right to rule alone and was signed by most MPs (over 100 Tories refused).
Limitations on the Army, 1697-98: When The Treaty of Ryswick (temporarily) ended the conflict with France in 1697, the Tories seized their chance. The discovery that William intended to maintain a large standing army, despite the onset of peace, led to a short-term alliance of Tories and some disaffected, anti-administration (or ‘country’) Whigs. Accordingly, a vote was passed to limit William’s army to 10,000 men. This alliance of opponents to the Whig Junto was based on a wish to return power to the landowning gentry, who resented high taxation on land and the growing interference of central government in local affairs. In 1698, they secured passage of a bill that further limited William’s army, this time to 7,000 men.
The Act of Resumption, 1699: A commission investigating confiscated lands in Ireland found that William had made excessive grants to his most loyal courtiers (who had mostly been Whigs). Parliament therefore passed an Act of Resumption that illegalised any grants of Irish land given to members of the Privy Council. This was another blow to the power of the Whigs.
Impeachment of leading Whigs, 1701: With the Tories now in the ascendency, the latter years of William’s reign saw a reduction in taxation on land ownership, the removal of some of William’s Dutch advisers, and the impeachment of the leading Junto Whigs: Sir John Somers, the Earl of Orford, and the Earl of Halifax. This created favourable political circumstances for Queen Anne (1702-14), who strongly aligned herself with the Tories and did her best to marginalise the Whigs.
While the last two years of William’s reign saw the Whig-Tory conflict become more prevalent in parliamentary politics, the 1690s had demonstrated the flexibility and fluidity of political divisions. Of course, these ‘parties’ did not yet possess anything like the centralised administration or unity that would characterise British politics from the 19th century onwards. Yet the very fact that MPs were now increasingly grouped together according to their shared acceptance of a set of broad political principles (entrenched support for hereditary monarchy and the Church of England in the case of the Tories, and emphasis upon parliamentary sovereignty in the case of the Whigs), represented a significant development in the nation’s political landscape.