Lord Liverpool and the Tories, 1812-1830 Vocabulary

Lord Liverpool and the Tories, 1812-1830

Chapter Overview

By 1812, Pitt's supporters and successors were known as Tories.
The Whig opposition remained out of office until 1830.
1812-1815: Britain concluded the war against France successfully.
1812-1820: The government faced social unrest and used force and censorship (Gagging Acts) against radical reformers.
Peterloo Massacre (1819): The dispersal of a crowd in Manchester gathered to hear reformer Henry Hunt.
The government defended the interests of the propertied classes by introducing the Corn Law (1815) and repressing radical demands.
1820: Public anger over King George IV's treatment of his wife Caroline led to a government crisis and strained relations between the government and the people.
Trade conditions improved, Liverpool changed his cabinet composition, and, from 1822, new ministers implemented policy changes to modernize Britain.
1822-1827: Liverpool's government was known for 'liberal Toryism'.
1828-1830: Important political and religious changes occurred during a period described by some historians as a 'constitutional revolution'.
Historians debate the scope and impact of changes made by 'liberal Tories,' with some seeing more continuity than change.
Peel introduced law and prison reforms, launching a police force in London.
Huskisson further developed Pitt's free trade policies.
Robinson reduced taxes and duties, and Canning pursued a more liberal foreign policy.
Parliamentary reform and Catholic Emancipation were not addressed.
1827: Liverpool resigned, and Canning's tenure was cut short by his death 119 days into the job.
Goderich failed to maintain unity.
1828: The Duke of Wellington became Prime Minister, accepted Catholic Emancipation, and passed this reform in 1829.
1830: Wellington resigned due to a divided party and demands for parliamentary reform, ending a long period of Tory rule.
A Whig government, led by Lord Grey and including liberal Tories, addressed parliamentary reform.

Radical Challenge and Liverpool's Government (1812-1822)

Lord Liverpool became prime minister in May 1812 after the assassination of Spencer Perceval.
Britain had been at war for nearly twenty years and faced internal problems.

Threat of Luddism

1811: Protest against industrial revolution machines began.
Luddism: Traditional craftsmen, especially handloom weavers, protested against new machines.
1812: The government made machine breaking a capital offense.
Economic warfare: The French Continental System (since 1806) forbade British imports into French-controlled territories, affecting British trade.
Britain responded with its own economic blockade.
Machinery expansion threatened domestic industry.
Cities relied on trade, facing periods of unemployment and distress without it.
Bad harvests affected cities and the countryside.
1812-14: War with the USA disrupted trade further.
Luddism may have originated in Nottingham with hosiery and lace workers smashing machines after wage cuts. It might have come from a worker called Ludlam who smashed a machine and developed into a mythical 'General Lud'.
Machine breaking spread to the cotton industry in Lancashire and Cheshire and was violent in Yorkshire's woollen manufacturing areas.
'Croppers' (skilled workers) used large shears to smooth woollen cloth but faced job losses due to new machines.
Manufacturers developed new factories or 'mills'.
January 1812: A mill near Leeds was burned down.
February: New machines were destroyed at Cleckheaton in Yorkshire, followed by widespread machine breaking by armed men.
April: An armed clash occurred between 100 machine breakers and soldiers.
April 28: A mill owner was shot dead in an ambush.
Troops were brought in, and seventeen executions took place in 1813.
Authorities feared secret oaths, night attacks, armed rioters, and secret armies.
The state stationed 12,000 troops in industrial areas due to the lack of an effective police force.
Those punished were victims of informers.
Protests largely died down by the end of 1813, but some incidents occurred in 1814.

Significance of Luddism:

Industrial change caused hardship and unrest.
Organized industrial violence required large numbers of troops to contain it.
Fluctuations in wheat prices and trade created dangerous levels of unrest.
Ordinary people turned to direct protest due to lack of parliamentary voice.
Attacks on ministers' houses occurred in London after the unpopular Corn Law (1815) was passed.

Popular Unrest and Its Causes

1815: Key elements for discontent were in place.
Wheat prices were high.
Rising population and larger industrial workforce were vulnerable to trade fluctuations.
Demand for British products fell due to the end of the war.
Trade was low due to reduced demand for armaments, affecting Britain's iron industry.
Government expenditure fell dramatically, taking up to £40 million out of circulation, affecting demand for manufactures.
Overseas trade was slow to normalize.
Unemployment was severe as more people depended on industry.
Unemployment rose with the increased labor supply.
Population had been rising since the 1760s.
300,000 demobilized soldiers and sailors sought work.
The Poor Law, based on each parish being responsible for its own poor, had not changed much since the early seventeenth century.
Since 1796, help for the poor had been linked to the price of bread, but there was no national system.
Those who moved from their birthplace had to return to get help.
The British state had not adapted to the demands of an industrial society with more mobility for work.

Discontent beyond Poverty

Traditionally, discontent was expressed through local protests, riots, and 'economic' crime.
After 1815, political demands increased.
The radical tradition and ideas from the American and French Revolutions persisted.
The reform movement under Liverpool was more varied and larger than that faced by Pitt.
65,000 troops might not have stopped a nationwide rebellion.
The French monarchy's fall in 1789 served as a warning.
The naval mutinies of 1797 suggested the armed forces could not always be relied on.
After 1815, political discontent was less deterred by war.

The Nature of the Reform Movement

Radicals and reformers had varying aims, from slowing industrial change to revolutionary violence.
The movement faced by Liverpool was more varied and larger than that faced by Pitt.
Had these agitations combined to produce a nationwide rebellion then a government with only 65,000 troops to protect it might have been severely threatened.
The French monarchy was seen as one of the most progressive and powerful in Europe and yet Louis XVI lost authority very rapidly in the Revolution of 1789.

The Hampden Clubs

Major John Cartwright advocated for universal male suffrage, secret ballots, and annual elections and formed the Hampden Club in 1812.
Hampden Clubs formed in various towns, holding meetings and publishing newspapers.
The movement survived government suppression using spies and informers.
The clubs inspired other organizations, especially the Patriotic Union Society in Manchester.

Peterloo Massacre

August 16, 1819: A meeting in Manchester organized by the Patriotic Union.
Henry 'Orator' Hunt spoke about reform.
50,000-60,000 people attended.
Magistrates ordered Hunt's arrest, and the Yeomanry advanced, leading to resistance.
Fifteen were killed, and 400 were wounded in the repression, known as Peterloo.
The event caused national outrage.
Recent research reveals 15 people were killed, including two-year old William Fildes.

Radical Press and Organizers

The emergence of a radical press included newspapers like William Cobbett's Political Register.
Active organizers, like John Johnson and Francis Place, spread the message.
Dynamic speakers like Henry Hunt played an important role.
Radicals were divided on how far democracy should extend and whether property qualifications were needed for voting.
Disagreements existed on policies and methods, and the movement was fragmented by regional differences.
Government legislation barred 'seditious meetings,' and strong-minded radicals did not easily work together.
Political Union societies emerged in 1818, coordinating 2,000 petitions to parliament.

Limitations of the Reform Movement

Clubs depended on working-class distress from trade slumps.
They made little appeal to agricultural workers.
Radical ideas frightened local gentry.
Reformers could not agree on a single program and faced government repression.
March 1817: A protest march of 'blanketeers' on London was broken up by troops.
The Derbyshire Rising in June 1817 was foiled by a government informer.
State repression led to splintering of reform movements and secret conspiracies.
In London, frustrations led to violence and extreme ideas, such as those of Thomas Spence.

Cato Street Conspiracy

A government spy, George Edwards, encouraged London radicals, led by Arthur Thistlewood, to plan to murder the cabinet.
The group was raided in Cato Street, and a struggle ensued.
Five were transported for life, and four were hanged, including Thistlewood.
The case raised issues about radical violence and the use of spies and provocation.

Radical Press Expansion

The radical press grew, including William Cobbett's Political Register, which had a circulation of 40,000.
Newspapers like the Leeds Mercury appealed to the middle classes, advocating for limited voting rights.
The Sheffield Independent and Manchester Guardian called for changes in economic policy and freer trade.

Queen Caroline Affair

George III died in 1820, and his son, the prince regent, became King George IV.
George IV wanted to divorce his wife, Queen Caroline, who had been living abroad and had taken lovers.
Caroline returned to England to claim her right to be queen.
The Whig opposition, radicals, and popular opinion supported the Queen.
The bill to end the marriage failed due to popular protest.
The public mood changed, and there were no protests when she was barred from the coronation in July and little mourning for her death in August 1820.
This episode, the Cato Street Conspiracy, and improving economic conditions led to a decline in radical movements.

Government Repression

Liverpool and his ministers were aware of radical threats and followed Pitt's measures.
Machine breaking was made a hanging offence.
The government used spies and agents and directed the armed forces to deal with unrest.
Habeas Corpus was suspended in 1817.
Local magistrates were authorized to ban public meetings.
The Six Acts were introduced after the Peterloo Massacre of 1819.
The Government supported the action of the Manchester magistrates and troops and passed a number of measures in November and December 1819.
Britain did not become a police or military state, and the government relied on existing legislation and local authorities to deal with unrest.
Repressive legislation was debated and passed by parliament.
The numbers punished were relatively small compared to the repression in France.

The Six Acts, 1819

The Training Prevention Act: Made attending gatherings for training or drilling liable to arrest, with transportation for seven years.
The Seizure of Arms Act: Gave magistrates the power to search property or people for weapons.
The Seditious Meetings Prevention Act: Prohibited public meetings of more than 50 people without consent from a sheriff or magistrate.
The Misdemeanours Act: Reduced delays for bringing those convicted of treasonous acts to trial.
The Blasphemous and Seditious Libels Act: Provided stronger punishments, including banishment, for publishing writings against the Church or state.
The Newspaper and Stamp Duties Act: Put a duty on journals and newspapers, even those only containing opinion, hitting low-cost radical publications.

Danger of Revolution after 1812?

Armed gangs, radicals believing in violent overthrow, economic discontent, and limited state resources caused fears.
Unlike France, the central government was not weak, and the countryside did not rise against landlords.
The Government used a variety of legal powers and was effective against radicals.
Landowners maintained influence in rural areas.
London was restless but not the center of revolutionary activity like Paris.
Radicals were often members of nonconformist religious sects, reducing the likelihood of violent opposition.
Unrest coincided with economic downturns.
In the 1820s, the reorganization of Liverpool's cabinet and liberal reforms widened the gap between middle-class reform objectives and those of the lower orders.

The Corn Law of 1815

The Corn Law of 1815 was designed to protect British wheat growers from foreign competition.
Corn Laws had been passed in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, with the most recent in 1804.
A House of Commons committee in 1813 suggested excluding foreign corn until British corn reached 80s a quarter.

Rationale behind Legislation

Keep grain affordable for poorer people but profitable for farmers.
Lower food prices would depress wages and the purchasing power of land workers.
Restrictions on imports betrayed Adam Smith's ideas.

Context of the Law

During the Napoleonic Wars, foreign grain imports had fallen, causing wheat prices to increase.
Landowners feared a drop in prices after peace returned.
Parliament passed an Act prohibiting foreign corn until British corn reached 80s a quarter.

Reactions to the Corn Law

Rioting in London occurred.
It was viewed as keeping bread prices high to maintain the lifestyle of the elite.
There were fears that high bread prices would keep wages high and threaten trade.
The duty on corn would burden urban areas as poor relief was linked to the price of bread.
The measure contradicted free trade ideas.
It symbolized class domination, favoring landed classes over trade and industry.
The Corn Law seemed more appropriate for an older, agricultural Britain.
It made Britain uncompetitive and showed the results of an outdated parliamentary system.
Many saw it as a cause of radical agitation.

Counter Arguments

If wheat prices fell, land would go out of cultivation, leading to a permanent shortage.
Low bread prices meant that wages would also fall.
Land had been ploughed up for corn production, so landowners and rural workers would be hit.
A rising population needed a guarantee of home-grown wheat.
Without the Corn Law, there might have been severe unrest.
Britain had not been self-sufficient in corn since 1760, so ensuring a steady supply was reasonable.

Complexities of the Corn Law

It was not purely class legislation.
- David Eastwood: The Corn Law is perhaps the most misunderstood piece of legislation in modern British history.
Landlords feared the rise of manufacturing, while the middle class thought their interests were being sacrificed.
Emotions were raised by predictions of famine among the poor.
The Corn Laws were seen as part of a larger picture of corruption and repression, along with game laws and foreign policy favoring monarchies.
The Corn Laws were also seen as attempts to use Parliament for their own interest, as in the thousands of individual enclosure acts passed since the late eighteenth century which allowed individual landowners to fence off land and consolidate their holdings, often at the expense of smallholders and those who used common grazing land.

Practical Impact

Historical Developments made the Corn Laws less important than argued.
The price of corn did not rise above 80s after 1816.
In 1828, the legislation was modified by creating a sliding scale.
The 1815 Importation Act was a continuation of existing policy.
It may not have been necessary, as bad harvests affected other European sources and the USA had not yet opened up corn-belt areas.
The issue continued until the 1840s, becoming a symbol of an older Britain under threat from a newer one.

Liberal Toryism and Policy Changes After 1819

Pre-1822 Policies

Liverpool followed policies common under Pitt, especially the repression of radicalism.
He acted in the interests of the landed classes through the Corn Laws and the repeal of Pitt's wartime income tax in 1816.
The government relied on indirect taxes that hit the poor harder.
Liverpool did not adopt free trade policies or support Catholic Emancipation.

Cabinet Changes and Liberal Toryism

In 1822, the cabinet composition changed due to better economic times.
Key figures like Peel, Huskisson, and Robinson offered more modern policies.
Liverpool remained prime minister, but the new ministers transformed the Government into 'liberal Toryism'.
This accepted change and progress, paving the way for a new form of Tory Party.

Challenges to Liberal Toryism

Some historians argue that 'liberal Toryism' is a myth and that it was a more sophisticated form of conservatism aimed at preserving the status quo.

Robert Peel at the Home Office

Problems inherited

Rising crime rates due to population growth and urbanization.
No established police force existed.
Legal penalties for crimes were extreme.

Peel's Reforms;

Peel saw the need for change and greater flexibility but was not a humanitarian.
The death penalty was removed for offenses involving 40s (£2) of property and other trivial crimes, such as impersonating a Chelsea pensioner, in 1823.
$Juries Regulation Act 1825$ : Regulated qualification for jury service to make it uniform through England and Wales.
Laws from 1826-28 standardized procedures in criminal justice trials.
Judges were paid salaries rather than fees to ensure fairness.
Between 1825 and 1828, 278 laws relating to criminal offenses were repealed and replaced by eight new laws which consolidated them.

Limitation to Peel's Reforms;

Many offenses still carried the death penalty.
Executions averaged 63 a year between 1822 and 1828, similar to 1805-12.
Reforms aimed at carrying out approved penalties, but this worked out only fitfully.
Judges often showed mercy, as did the King and Privy Council.
Transportation to Australia also reduced the number of executions.

Prison Reform

In 1823, a new Gaols Act required all counties and major towns and cities to maintain a prison.
JPs were required to hold inspections and to report findings to the Home Office.
There was medical care and some education to be available to prisoners
The main aim was to ensure prisoners were treated equally and there was no excessive leniency in some prisons.

Metropolitan Police Force

Peel set up a parliamentary committee in 1822 to debate the possibility of the creation of a new police force but the committee decided change was unnecessary.
Another committee in 1828 favored change.
In 1829, the Metropolitan Police Force was formed with distinct uniforms and jurisdiction within ten miles of the City of London.
Peel's view was that more effective professional policing would have a deterrent effect and reduce the number of death sentences.
The new Act proved successful.
The Metropolitan Police organization became the model for police forces in other urban, and rural, areas.

Changes to Trade and Finance in the 1820s

Liverpool's Priorities

Liverpool prioritized expanding income from trade.

Trade Liberalization

Though he spoke in favor of 'unrestricted freedom of trade' in 1820, the Government was very cautious about removing duties on imports as this would not be popular with all merchants.
As trade revived after 1822, changes to financial and economic policy moved Britain closer to free trade.

William Huskisson and the Board of Trade

The new president of the Board of Trade, William Huskisson, aimed to promote trade.
$The Trade Reciprocity Act of 1823$ : Facilitated commercial agreements with other countries, resulting in lowering duties on imports.
The maximum duty on imported goods was set at 30 percent.
Foreign ships were allowed cheaper and easier access to British ports to encourage more trade in imported products from 1823.
The Navigation Acts were changed to allow colonies freer trade with foreign countries.
Trade with newly independent countries in South America was encouraged.

Results

Customs revenue increased by 64 percent in the period 1821-27.
Business confidence was boosted by measures taken to control the issuing of paper currency and to allow joint stock companies to be formed for the first time since 1720.
The most significant piece of restrictive legislation of this period was the Corn Law.
This was modified first in 1822 and more radically in 1828 with the introduction of a sliding scale of duties on imported corn (see page 47).

Taxation Reforms

Frederick Robinson as chancellor of the exchequer complemented these policies by tax reductions.
The objective here was characteristically 'liberal'.
Robinson hoped to rely more on free trade, reduce prices and stimulate home demand.
Excise duties were reduced on iron, hemp, coal, spirits, books, and porcelain.
The budget was balanced as a result of increased trade leading to higher revenue.
Reductions in indirect taxation helped the cost of living.

Banking Crisis, 1825

Encouraged by the easing of restrictions and by increased trade and production in 1823 and 1824 there had been a rise in the promotion of new companies and a boom in investments. The Government had liberalised the currency by allowing £1 and £2 notes to be circulated.
In addition to having more money in circulation, the new and increasingly heady interest in South American trade led to the formation of 600 new companies.
Banks lent money to a large number of dubious companies, When investors began to suspect that these were unsound or when they failed, the created the conditions which saw 80 regional banks collapse in a matter of weeks.
They could not meet the demands for hard cash from depositors demanding a return of their money. The crash, which began in late 1825, created panic.
To restrict the money in circulation, £5 became the minimum value note.
At a crucial time, unrestricted free enterprise could not cope and the Government had to intervene to secure a degree of financial stability.

Consequences

More than 1,500 bankruptcies registered in the first half of 1826 alone.
Once more there was unrest and the Government had to relax duries on imported corn as a one-off measure. Troops were called out in industrial districts.
It is likely that only economic revival, which began towards the end of 1826, prevented a recurrence of the unrest of 1816-20.

Repeal of the Combination Acts, 1824

The Combination Acts, which dated from 1799 and 1800, forbade people from combining in organizations which might interfere with trade and commerce.
- They were intended to stop workmen meeting together to force up wages or discuss political change, although both these activities were already illegal under the criminal law of the country which forbade 'conspiracies' to restrict trade.
- The new Acts established trial without jury for these activities, but oddly offered less severe penalties than existing laws.
Demands for their repeal were led by the radicals Francis Place and Joseph Hume MP.
*A select committee of the House of Commons in 1822 found that the Combination Acts only increased the possibility of agitation and violence.
Hume's bill for repeal was carried with little opposition in 1824.
- This was a time of trade expansion and relative social calm so there was less fear of unrest.

Response to Repeal

However, when workers took advantage of favourable conditions to unite to strike and force their fellow workers to join in protests and stoppages, the Government responded quickly.
Huskisson introduced an Act in 1825 to strengthen existing laws against criminal conspiracies.
This Combinations of Workmen Act is more typical of the Liverpool Government.
Rather like Peel's changes, there were 'liberal' elements but the need to maintain control over the masses remained the Government's priority.

Repeal of Test and Corporation Acts and Roman Catholic Emancipation (1828-1830)

Importance of the Events

The late 1820s saw two major changes which ended political restrictions on those who were not members of the Church of England.
Contemporaries saw this as amounting to a virtual 'constitutional revolution', changing the way that Britain was governed.

The repeal of the Test and the Corporation Acts, 1828

In 1661 the Corporation Act was passed by the so-called 'Cavalier Parliament' after the restoration of Charles II and in reaction to the previous regime, when Britain had been briefly ruled by Puritan dissenters.
It forbade anyone from taking any part in the running of the corporations or city and town councils unless they were members of the Church of England and took Anglican communion.
- The new law excluded both nonconformists and Catholics.
The 1673 Test Act required all officers of the crown and members of government and parliament To swear an oath confirming that they accepted the doctrines of the Church of England.

Restrictions

Nonconformists still had to pay taxes to the Anglican Church in the form of titles -
theoretically a 'tax' of 10 per cent on agricultural produce or its equivalent.
Only Anglican ministers were able to conduct marriage services.
There were restrictions on the burial of nonconformists and Catholics.
The universities of Oxford and Cambridge still insisted that all applicant undergraduates and teachers agreed to the 39 Articles of the Church of England.
Catholics could not hold office or become Members of Parliament

Catholic Emancipation, 1829

The major Issue had been a contentious issue since the Union of Ireland which Pitt passed in 1800.
Matters came to a head when O'Connell, who was not eligible to take his seat if elected, stood as candidate for a by-election at County Clare and won.
In March 1829 Peel reluctantly introduced Catholic Emancipation and Catholics were allowed to become MPs if they swore an oath rejecting the power of the pope over anything but religious affairs, to support the Protestant religion and accept the property settlement of the realm, i.e. to accept that the changes of the Reformation were permanent.

Extent of Change between 1822 and 1830

Historical Views and Debates

There were old restriction lifted and new freedoms granted as well as more free-trade and freedom from excessive taxation.
There were still inequalities, corruption and brutality as well as a failure to modernize.
There were key decision taken in 1819 that Britain should follow a policy of sound finance, with its currency convertible
to gold and its debt reduced
Hilton believes, 'liberal Tories' were driven by moraland religious considerations.

Liverpool as Prime Minister Compared to Successors

Challenges

prevent damaging splits and quarrels among his ministers, many of whom had powerful personalities and further political ambitions themselves
ensure that 'new men' were given opportunities to develop their own policies and avoid the Government becoming stuck in the past
maintain the support of the prince regent, later king, something his modern counterparts do not have to worry about
keep his support in parliament without the benefit of a party organisation
deal with the problems of war against France and then handle the problems which peace brought
maintain internal security against rising social and political discontent, which reached severe levels
ensure that the currency was sound while reducing taxes and promoting conditions conducive to prosperity

Criticisms

Disraeli famously called him an 'arch mediocrity', meaning a person of
little flair, dynamism or clear vision.
He relied heavily on more energetic and characterful colleagues, particularly
Viscount Castlereagh (see page 78) who dominated
foreign policy. When Castlereagh killed himself in 1822, Liverpool
was distraught.
He was led into supporting the King against Queen Caroline, which
made his Government unpopular.

Strengths

To stay in office for so long required political skill and there is evidence for this. Liverpool kept the most contentious issues as 'open questions'. For example, Catholic Emancipation would never have had the support of the King and would have divided both cabinet and party. Pressure for change in Ireland was growing by Liverpool avoided responding.
By avoiding difficult areas of policy, he managed to keep his colleagues together.
He also accepted the need for change and was open to Whig ideas, for
example over penal reform. This undercut the appeal of the Whigs as reformers.
While being open to new ideas, Liverpool's policies helped to maintain the interests of the propertied classes who dominated politics.

Successors Assessment

Canning had been the driving force in the government before Liverpool died, but found it difficult to form
a ministry.
Goderich ministry was short lived as the King didn't want to see Wellington or Peel as Prime Minister so he turned to unwilling and unconfident Frederick Robinson
During Wellington's leadership problems and the issues he was forced to deal with where those that had been avoided by Liverpool's Ministry.