Why did democracy develop in Britain after 1850?

Introduction

Between 1850 and 1928, through the introduction of a series of acts of parliament, Britain became a democratic country. All the features that would be expected in a democracy were put in place. For example, the franchise was made universal, the constituencies were more or less shared equally across the country, voting was protected and the opportunities for corruption were considerably reduced. Whilst appreciating the effectiveness of these acts, it is necessary to examine the various background factors which encouraged governments and parliament to pass them in the first place. They include social changes such as population growth and movement, education and the growth of a national press that contributed to growing public interest and participation in politics. Background factors also include enlightened political leadership as well as naked political self-interest linked to party self-interest and survival.

Social and Economic Change

In the 1850s, the political system in Britain came under increasing pressure as a result of social and economic change. The nineteenth century saw a rapid growth in the size and movement of population. Industrial areas grew at the expense of country/rural areas but the way that political representation was organized was slow to change. The Industrial Revolution changed where people lived, how they worked and how they saw their position in society.

At a time of large scale industrialization, urbanization and social change, the government was still run by the upper class, elected by a small, male minority. Many in the growing business and trade classes felt their efforts were making Britain rich but that they and the towns/cities in which they lived were under-represented. They believed that the upper class, based on land ownership, should not have all political power but that it should be shared with the middle classes. Faced with this pressure, parliament had little option but to take steps that led to the growth of democracy.

Growing Public Interest in the Political System

By the 1860s, there was growing public interest in the political system. Despite the lack of compulsory education, education levels were growing steadily. Linked to this, was the growth of national newspapers, encouraged by the railway system. These papers focused on national issues such as politics and they were also the main reading materials for many in society.

Through the newspapers, the public learnt of the defects and flaws in the political system. Newspapers triggered interest in events in Europe and the USA, whilst also allowing some comparison between Britain’s system and that of other countries. All of this combined to cause people to realize that there was much wrong with the political system and that change was needed.

Influences from Abroad

The American War of Independence, 1775-1783, The French Revolution of 1789 and the revolutions in Europe in 1848 all influenced the formation of reform societies and pressure groups in Britain. Radical, political ideas such as those of Thomas Paine, set out in his book, ‘The Rights of Man’, were discussed and written about.

In the 1860s, popular enthusiasm for democracy and desire for political reform grew with support for the Northern cause in the American Civil War and the struggle for Italian liberty.

Pressure Groups outside Parliament

Following the Great Reform Act of 1832, demands for further reform continued into the 1840s. The prominent reformist group at this time was the Chartists who believed that only by extending democracy to working class people could living and working conditions be improved. They presented a series of petitions to parliament but failed to persuade the government to agree to their demands (see page 5 of textbook).

The writings of John Stuart Mill in his books, ‘On Liberty’ (1860) and ‘Representative Government’ (1861), served to underline the principles of democracy with the educated classes.

In 1864, the National Reform Union was founded to promote the idea that the middle and working classes had similar political aims and should work together. The radical, John Bright, organized large public meetings. Also formed in 1864, the Reform League, a more radical body, gained support from trade unionists, socialists and former Chartists in its campaign for manhood suffrage and a secret ballot. By 1866, the London Trades Council was beginning to campaign actively for manhood suffrage.

In 1866, the demand for reform intensified, leading to marches, demonstrations and even rioting in Hyde Park. This convinced some politicians that it was better to grant some change rather than to try and hold back the demand for reform.

Political Competition

In 1866, the Liberal Party split over the issue of how much reform should be introduced and the government was forced to resign. The Conservative Party, under Lord Derby and Benjamin Disraeli, formed a government and, in response to the agitation in the country for reform, introduced a bill of their own.

In fact, Disraeli intended to “dish the Whigs” by “stealing the Liberals’ clothes”. In other words, he believed that, if the Conservatives gave the vote to skilled, working class males in the towns, then these men would vote Conservative in future elections. It was “a leap in the dark” (a risky move with unknown consequences).

In 1867, by passing the Second Reform Act, the Conservative Party stole many of the Liberals’ ideas and spoiled their chances of winning support from skilled, working class males. They could now portray themselves as a party of reform.

Changing Political Attitudes

By the 1850s, Liberal leaders such as Lord John Russell and William Gladstone favoured political reform as a step towards other change, to satisfy skilled workers and to avoid unrest. In 1866, there was a good deal of popular demand for reform, underlined by marches, demonstrations and even rioting in Hyde Park, London.

Gladstone believed that moderate, educated, skilled workers deserved the vote as a moral right. The setting up, organization and successful running of trade unions based on democratic principles, was evidence of this. The future Prime Minister became the focus for attention in 1864 when he declared that “Every man who is not presumably incapacitated by some consideration of personal fitness or of political danger is morally entitled to come within the pale of the Constitution, provided this does not lead to sudden or violent or excessive, or intoxicating political change.”Thus in 1866, Gladstone supported attempts to secure reform and in 1884 his government introduced the Representation of the People Act (Third Reform Act).

Gladstone’s Liberal Government introduced this act for the following reasons:

(i). To grant equal voting rights to males in the counties in line with those enjoyed by males in the boroughs.(ii). To recognise that working class males were becoming increasingly educated and literate and should be included in the political process.(iii). To include more working class males in the political system in order to reduce discontent and negate the appeal of new radical/revolutionary doctrines e.g. Socialism.

Most of the reasons for the introduction of the Representation of the People Act, 1918 (Fourth Reform Act) were connected with World War I:

(i). The residency qualification for voters had to be abolished. It was politically unacceptable to tell men, who had just returned from the War, that they had lost the right to vote because they had not been resident at their property for some time.(ii). Women had taken over jobs normally associated with men and had kept the home front going during the War. This gained them respect and persuaded those in power to introduce limited female suffrage.

Conclusion

The growth of democracy between 1850 and 1928 can be explained by many reasons. The Acts that increased democracy are of some significance but they would never have become law unless there were other pressures or reasons for change. Of greater significance are the various factors that existed in the nineteenth century. The changing nature of politics, the self-interest of the political parties, the growth and movement of population, the influence of newspapers, the better education levels of the working class, the growth of trade unions and the fear of socialism all contributed in different ways and to different extents toward making governments and parliament more prepared to pass reform and to allow democracy to grow in the period.

How democratic was Britain by 1928?

“Democracy is the government of the people, for the people, by the people.” (Abraham Lincoln, President of the USA 1860-1865)

Introduction

For any country to be called democratic, certain conditions have to exist. Firstly, all adults should have the right to vote but the right to vote did not in itself make Britain democratic. Between 1850 and 1928, other features of a democracy were created. These features included a fair system of voting, a choice of who to vote for and access to information to make an informed choice. It should also be possible for people from all backgrounds to become Members of Parliament themselves and parliament should be accountable to the voters. By 1928, all of these conditions had been met and consequently, Britain had become democratic.

Conditions for Democracy

The Vote – Probably the most important right is the right to vote. The right to vote is also called the franchise and without it, the people of a country cannot influence political decisions.

Fairness – A country is not democratic if people are scared to vote because of intimidation or if they can’t vote for the person or party they support. There should also be a fair distribution of parliamentary seats amongst the population of a country so that people are represented as equally as possible.

Choice – A country is not democratic if voters have no choice, even if they can vote in secret.

Accountability – Parliament should reflect the wishes of the voters and be answerable to them.

Participation (the opportunity to become an MP) – In a democracy, people who want to be involved in politics, should be able to participate.

Access to Information – People have to be able to access and understand information in order to make a choice in an election.

How democratic was Britain in 1850?

In 1850, the state of democracy in Britain had been set by the Great Reform Act of 1832 (First Reform Act). The Act had introduced improvements in two areas of the democratic process – it increased the number of men who could vote in a general election and it redistributed parliamentary seats so that there was a more equal ratio of MPs to constituents. However, Britain was still far from being democratic:

The right to vote was linked to the ownership of property. Consequently, only 7% of the adult population of Britain had the vote. Working class men and all women were excluded from the franchise i.e. they were not allowed to vote.

Voting took place in public at the hustings (no secret ballot). Bribery, corruption and intimidation were quite common during elections.

General elections were only held every seven years.

The distribution of seats was still unequal. MPs still represented county and borough constituencies with great variations in size of population.

The Tory dominated House of Lords was not elected. It could stop the elected majority in the House of Commons getting bills through parliament.

Only wealthy men could stand as candidates for election as there was a property qualification and MPs were not paid a salary.

The Demand for Further Reform

Clearly, the 1832 Reform Act did nothing for the vast majority of people who remained powerless. Thus demands for further reform continued in the 1830s and 1840s. The prominent reformist group at this time was the Chartists who believed that only by extending democracy to working class people could living and working conditions be improved. They presented a series of petitions to parliament but failed to persuade the government to agree to their demands. However, gradual social and economic change combined to make further political reform not only desirable but inevitable.

1). The Vote

The Second Reform Act, 1867

Voting Qualifications

Boroughs CountiesAll male householders over the age of 21 Men who owned property worth £5 per yearMale lodgers who paid £10 per year in rent Men who rented property worth £12 per year (£14

per year in Scotland)

Effects of the Act

The number of men who qualified for the vote was increased from 1.5 to 2.5 million. 1 in 3 adult males could now vote (1 in 7 in 1833). 16% of the adult population now had the vote.

The franchise was extended to skilled, male town workers and well off farmers.

The electorate in some of Britain’s newer towns increased dramatically.

The largest increases in the number of voters were in the large, industrial boroughs e.g. Manchester and Leeds.

Criticisms of the Act

Many working class men, particularly in the counties (countryside), were still not entitled to vote e.g. farm labourers, craftsmen in small, country towns, soldiers in barracks, male domestic servants living in, adult sons living at home.

Women could still not vote in general elections.

The right to vote was still based on the ownership of property.

There was still no secret ballot and bribery, corruption and intimidation were rife.

Representation of the People Act, 1884 (Third Reform Act)

Voting Qualifications

This act gave the vote to male houseowners, lodgers and tenants who had lived in a house valued at £10 for at least a year (rateable value).

Effects of the Act

The number of men who qualified for the vote was increased from 2.5 to 5 million. 2 in 3 adult males could now vote. 29% of the adult population now had the vote.

The franchise was extended to male farm workers.

Voting qualification in the boroughs and counties were now identical.

Criticisms of the Act

Many working class men (40% of adult males in Britain) were still not entitled to vote e.g. soldiers in barracks, male domestic servants living in, adult sons living at home, paupers on poor relief and those who failed to pay their rates.

Women could still not vote in general elections.

The right to vote was still based on the ownership of property.

Also, plural voting still existed. This meant that a man could have many votes if he owned property in different constituencies.

Universities still elected Members of Parliament.

Representation of the People Act, 1918 (Fourth Reform Act)

Voting Qualifications

The vote was given to:

All men over 21 years of age (an exception was made to serving members of the armed forces who were under 21)

Women over 30 years of age who were householders or wives of householders or graduates of a British University.

Also, general elections were henceforth to be held on one day.

Effects of the Act

21 million adults in Britain now had the vote (8.5 million were female). 74% of the adult population now had the vote.

Male suffrage (the right to vote) was no longer linked to the ownership of property.

For the first time, the industrial working class became the majority in a mass electorate – this led to the growth of the Labour Party.

Criticisms of the Act

Women under 30 years of age and poor women over 30 still did not have the vote.

Many of those who had worked hard and risked their lives in munitions factories were mostly single and in their 20s.

Parliamentary Reform Act, 1928 (Fifth Reform Act)

This Act extended the franchise to all women over the age of 21.

97% of the adult population of Britain now had the vote.

N.B. In 1969 the voting age was reduced to 18 years of age.

2). Fairness

Dealing with Corruption

Bribery, corruption and intimidation were still very much part and parcel in elections in the late 1860s.In an effort to get rid of this, the Liberal Prime Minister, William Gladstone passed two laws:

(i). The Ballot Act, 1872 – this introduced the secret ballot which allowed working class people to vote as they really wanted. However, corruption was not completely wiped out.

(ii). The Corrupt and Illegal Practices Act, 1883 – Candidates’ election expenses were determined by the size of the constituency. It was made clear what campaign money could be spent on. Election agents had to account for their spending. A detailed definition of illegal and corrupt practices was set down. A breech of the law disqualified a candidate for seven years. Active involvement in corruption was punishable by a fine or imprisonment.

Creating Equal Constituencies

(i). In addition to extending the franchise, the 1867 Reform Act also improved the distribution of seats:

Many smaller boroughs lost one or both of their MPs and these MPs were redistributed to areas of the country that were under-represented e.g. 5 seats were allocated to Scottish constituencies.

(ii). Redistribution of Seats Act, 1885 – this aimed to construct constituencies of approximately equal size. The effects were as follows: 79 towns which had a population of under 15,000 lost both their seats. 36 towns which had a population of 15,000 to 50,000 lost one seat. Towns which a population of 50,000 to 165,000 kept two seats. Universities kept two seats. The remainder of the country was divided up into single member constituencies. The total number of MPs was increased from 652 to 670.

(iii). In addition to extending the franchise, the Representation of the People Act, 1918 also provided for a redistribution of seats, with the aim of creating uniform constituencies, each of about 70,000 voters.

3). Choice

Socialist groups eventually joined with the Trade Union movement to form the Labour Representation Committee which in 1906 became known as the Labour Party. This party claimed to represent the interests of the working class and campaigned for direct government involvement to tackle the social problems within Britain. As a result, the electorate now had a genuine choice between parties with different ideologies i.e. Conservative, Labour and Liberal. With the passing of the 1918 Representation of the People Act, the industrial working class became the majority in a mass electorate – this led to the growth of the Labour Party.

4). Accountability

The Parliament Act, 1911

In 1909, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, David Lloyd George, introduced his famous ‘People’s Budget’. This aimed to finance social reforms e.g. pensions, as well as naval rearmament through increased taxation of the better off. It was rejected by the Conservative dominated House of Lords. The Liberals regarded this as an attack on democracy. After two general elections and the threat of a mass creation of Liberal peers, a Parliament Bill was finally passed in 1911. This Act made the following changes:

The Lords could no longer stop bills to do with taxation or government spending. The Lords could only delay other bills for two years (cut to one year in 1949). General elections were to be held at least every five years instead of seven.

This made the elected house i.e. the House of Commons, even more accountable to the voters.

5). Participation

Payment of MPs, 1911

In 1858, the property qualification for election candidates had been abolished. In 1911, an act of parliament established a salary of £400 per year for Members of Parliament. This enabled anybody to have the right to be a representative as well as an elector. It made it possible for working class men to seek election for parliament.

6). Access to Information

The Education Act, 1870 (1872 in Scotland) helped to increase literacy within the country so that information about political parties and their policies became more accessible to the mass of the population.

Political meetings, public libraries and daily, national newspapers became vital sources of information.

The development of the railways from the 1850s was also crucial to the spread of information, either through the spoken or written word.

National Party Organisation – as the number of voters in a constituency increased, party leaders had to find ways of persuading the electors to vote for their candidate. They came up with three methods of doing this:

(i). Each political party issued a programme or manifesto which contained a series of measures or policies which they promised to carry out if the voters returned enough of their candidates to give them a majority in the House of Commons.

(ii). Each political party developed a national organisation with a party headquarters and full time paid staff e.g. Conservative Central Office (1870) and the National Liberal Federation (1877).

(iii). In each constituency, local party workers, under the guidance of a professional party agent, undertook fundraising activities. At election time, they campaigned by putting up posters, delivering leaflets and organising meetings at which their candidate would speak. National political figures such as William Gladstone began to actively campaign in elections, addressing large, public meetings in various constituencies e.g. Midlothian Campaign, 1880.

How democratic was Britain in 1928?

By 1928, Britain had become a democratic country. All the features that would be expected in a democracy were in place. The franchise was universal, the constituencies were more or less shared equally across the country, voting was protected and the opportunities for corruption had been considerably reduced. Payment of MPs and restrictions on election spending made it possible for working class candidates to stand for election. The elected house was finally dominant over the un-elected house, though the latter still retained considerable powers. There was a genuine choice for voters from different backgrounds of three main political parties. Access to information was much greater than it had been in 1850. However, there were still those who criticized the democratic system e.g. without proportional representation, many people argued that it was very difficult for new or small parties to get a foothold in parliament.

Why did some women gain the vote in 1918?

Importance of the Suffrage Movement

The Suffragists (NUWSS)In 1897, a number of local women’s suffrage societies came together to form the National Union of Women’ Suffrage Societies (NUWSS), under the leadership of Millicent Fawcett. The NUWSS believed in peaceful tactics to win the vote, preferring to try to persuade and educate, always working within the law. Suffragists wrote pamphlets, distributed leaflets and posters, sent letters and articles to newspapers, held meetings, organized petitions and lobbied their MPs. By 1914, it had about 500 branches and 53,000 members.

Although criticized for not being forceful enough for the government to take notice, recent research suggests that the NUWSS was important in attracting support for the ‘cause’. Membership of the NUWSS remained high in the years leading up to World War I. When the Suffragettes became more violent, particularly between 1912-1914, the membership of the NUWSS rose as women left the WSPU.

The Suffragettes (WSPU)The Suffragettes were born out of the Suffragist movement in 1903. In that year, the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) was set up by Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughters, Christabel and Sylvia. It was mainly a middle class movement but it got a lot of support from working class women, impatient with the lack of progress from the NUWSS. Many younger women were attracted by its motto, “Deeds, not words”. From 1903-1906 the Suffragettes adopted similar tactics to the NUWSS. However, the failure of the newly elected Liberal Government to introduce women’s suffrage provoked a militant campaign from 1906 onwards. Unlike the Suffragists, the Suffragettes were prepared to break the law as part of their campaign for votes for women. Suffragettes interrupted Liberal Party meetings, chained themselves to railings at the House of Commons, smashed windows and attacked government ministers eg. Asquith (Lossiemouth Golf Club). In 1907, a group of women split from the WSPU and formed the Women’s Freedom League (WFL). Some refused to pay taxes as a protest at not having the vote. In the period 1912-1914 (‘the wild period’), the Suffragettes became even more militant, resorting to more violent protest methods such as slashing paintings, firebombing business premises and cutting telegraph wires.

It can be argued that the WSPU kept the issue of women’s suffrage to the forefront as violent tactics eg. firebombing property, attacking politicians etc… made big headlines at a time when there were other issues in the news eg. Irish Home Rule. The Suffragettes gained a high level of publicity and promoted a greater awareness of the issue of women’s suffrage. It could also be argued that extreme militancy embarrassed the Government as they were unable to control the situation.

From 1909, many Suffragettes went on hunger strike in prison as a protest at being treated as criminals and not political prisoners. The Government ordered them to be force-fed (liquid food via throat or nostrils). This backfired on the Government as the Suffragettes gained sympathy and support, both in the press and with the public, which their tactics had previously lost them.

The Government hit back with the Prisoners’ Temporary Discharge Act of 1913 (nicknamed ‘the Cat and Mouse Act’ by the Suffragettes). This allowed for the release of women on hunger strike when their health started to suffer. After a week or two, they would be brought back to continue their sentence. This was meant to demoralize the Suffragettes but only strengthened their resolve.

When Emily Wilding Davison committed suicide by throwing herself in front of the King’s horse at the 1913 Derby, the Suffragettes turned her funeral into a massive propaganda exercise.

The decision of Mrs Pankhurst to suspend the militant Suffragette campaign for the duration of the War meant that the Government could grant the vote to women without appearing to give in to violence.

Changing Position of Women in British Society

Historian, Martin Pugh, argues that by 1900 it was very hard to justify not giving the vote to women. By 1900, women, especially middle class women, were much better educated than previously, in many cases up to university level. They could vote and even stand for office in local council and school board elections.

Women were also increasingly important in the trade union movement (Women’s Trade Union League). Changes in the law had improved women’s social position eg. Married Women’s Property Acts 1870/1882. Therefore, it is not true to say that in 1900 women were second class citizens, treated as their husband’s property. That attitude was common in 1850 but had changed by 1900.

International Pressure

New Zealand, South Australia, certain states in the USA and a state in Canada had already given the vote to women. The question then was why Britain, as the leading democratic nation in the world, should not do likewise.

The Trend towards Democratic Reform

Some historians believe that women were on their way to getting the vote in 1914 and that the War interrupted this progress. As evidence of this, they cite the introduction of a series of bills in parliament between 1910-1912 as evidence that the Liberal Government was willing to address the issue of women’s suffrage.

During this period, two bills (‘Conciliation Bills’) were drawn up by an all-party Commons Committee in response to Prime Minister Asquith’s promise for a free vote in Parliament on a Bill for Women’s Suffrage. The first of these bills was eventually passed in 1910 but unfortunately parliament was suspended and further discussion was prevented. A second bill was introduced in 1911 which proposed giving voting rights to women whose husbands were already voters. This would have removed the fears of Liberal and Labour politicians about the prospect of creating more Conservative voters by confining the qualification to single or propertied women. Unfortunately, this bill failed to get a majority.

In 1912, Asquith brought in a Bill to widen the franchise to all men and proposed that the Commons could introduce an amendment to it in order to add votes for women. This was also rejected by parliament.

In the early summer of 1914, Asquith agreed to receive a deputation from the East London Federation of Suffragettes. Asquith seems to have recognized that these women had genuine social grievances which could have been more effectively tackled if they had the vote. Although the PM was not going to change his mind on the question of women’s suffrage overnight, there is a good deal of evidence

that in time he would have brought in a bill to provide for universal adult suffrage. War, however, intervened and the whole movement immediately scaled down its activities in the face of a greater threat to the nation.

Therefore, there is evidence that, prior to World War I, the Liberal leadership were ready to make women’s suffrage part of its party programme and that “in many ways the War may have delayed the franchise, rather than expedited it.” However, it has to be said that negotiations between the Government and the suffrage movement had taken place before but had never led to votes for women. There is no guarantee that this would have been the case on this occasion.

The Importance of World War I

Women’s contribution to the War Effort When war broke out in August 1914, the Suffragettes ended their militant

campaign and supported the war effort. Suffragette leaders now diverted their energy into recruiting women for war work. They hoped that the war would give them a chance to show what women could really do.

Although the Government was initially reluctant to use women for war work, by 1915 a serious shortage of supplies for the armed forces drove them to recruit women, first of all into the munitions industry, then into many other sectors of the economy.

Thousands of women worked in the munitions factories, often in dangerous conditions (‘canaries’), making guns, shells and bullets. Women joined the Land Army (WLA) to help grow the nation’s food. They drove buses and trains, worked as police officers and as posties. Many joined nursing organizations such as VAD (Voluntary Aid Detachment). In 1917 they joined the newly formed women’s branches of the Army, Navy and Air Force to work as drivers, nurses and office staff eg. WAAC (Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps).

There is no doubt that the sight of women ‘doing their bit’ for the war effort gained them respect and balanced the negative publicity of the pre-war Suffragette campaign. The responsible actions of women and their contribution to winning the War resulted in a change in attitude towards their demands for the vote. By 1916, even Prime Minister Herbert Asquith was agreeing that women could no longer be denied the vote.

Other Factors concerned with the War The setting up of a coalition government (Liberal/Conservative/Labour) in May

1915 helped the women’s cause. There were no longer the rigid party divisions which in the past had hindered the cause of women’s suffrage (see earlier notes).

In December 1916, Prime Minister Asquith, who had been the main opponent of the Suffragettes, was replaced by David Lloyd George who was more willing to accept change. As the War went on, more men, who were in favour of women’s suffrage, came into the Government.

Britain’s war propaganda, much of which was directed at the USA, stressed the fact that the allies (Britain/France/Russia) were fighting for democracy which implied universal suffrage. The Government therefore had to be seen to be acting in this direction.

By 1917/1918, there were plans to change the rules about voting as they applied to men eg. No property qualification, and, as the rules were changing anyway, it was suggested that “some measure of women’s suffrage should be conferred.”

Why did the Liberal Government of 1906-1914 introduce a series of Social Welfare Reforms?

Pressure from Reports on Poverty

One of the most famous investigations into poverty was carried out by Charles Booth. He conducted extensive research in London and presented his findings as hard, statistical facts – not opinions. He showed that poverty had causes often beyond the control of the poor themselves. What could any individual do about low pay, unemployment, sickness and old age?

Another investigation into poverty was made by Seebohm Rowntree in York and was even more shocking. The Rowntree report showed that 28% of the population of York lived in extreme poverty. People realized that if York, a relatively small English city, had such problems then so would other British cities – the problem of poverty was therefore a national problem (for more details, see textbook, pages 50 & 51).

While Booth and Rowntree were using careful investigation to define and quantify urban poverty, several other writers had been publicizing, in more colourful and emotive language, the squalor in which much of the working class existed e.g. Charles Dickens and Elizabeth Gaskell. The cumulative effect of all this literature was to create a greater awareness of poverty amongst the middle class.

The Changing Economy

Unemployment had always been seen as a major cause of poverty. Until the 1870s, it had always been assumed that economic growth would lead to an increase in employment. It was only the unwilling or inadequate, it was argued, who would therefore need some limited public support.

The Great Depression of 1873-1896 changed that view as foreign competition caused mass unemployment. Individual charity and the workhouse (poorhouse in Scotland) could not accommodate the huge number of genuine workmen involved. The Liberals, while in opposition, committed themselves to some degree of intervention on behalf of the unemployed.

Worries about National Efficiency

By the end of the 19th Century, Britain was no longer the world’s strongest industrial nation and was facing serious competition from new industrial nations such as Germany and the USA. It was believed that if the health and educational standards of Britain’s workers got worse, then Britain’s position as a strong industrial power would be threatened even further.

In Germany, a system of welfare benefits and old age pensions had already been set up in the 1880s. If a main competitor could afford to do it, why could Britain not do likewise?

Worries about National Security

When the Boer War started in 1899, volunteers rushed to sign up but almost 25% of them were rejected on the grounds that they were not fit enough. If men of military age were so unfit for service, the government worried about Britain’s future ability to defend itself against a stronger enemy.

The poor performance of the British Army in South Africa and the fact that other countries such as Germany and the USA were overtaking Britain in economic growth, were considered by many as proof of British decline. One response to this problem was to argue for social reforms which would make for a healthy population and improve National Efficiency/Security.

A Committee of Physical Deterioration was set up to look into the health of potential army recruits. Their report, published in 1904, recommended a number of social reforms such as medical inspections of children in schools, free school meals for the very poor and training in mothercraft. These recommendations were very importanat in shaping the future Liberal Reforms.

New Liberalism (Key Individuals)

A new generation of Liberal politicians believed that the government had a responsibility to help the poor. The ‘Old Liberal’ Prime Minister, Campbell-Bannerman, died and was replaced by Herbert Asquith in 1908.

‘New Liberals’ with new interventionist ideas such as David Lloyd George and Winston Churchill were given important jobs (see top of page 55). These appointments are among the main reasons why so many reforms were introduced from 1908 onwards.

Both Lloyd George and Churchill were aware of the effects of social reform in Germany under Chancellor Bismarck which had successfully limited the growth of socialism. Lloyd George actually visited Germany in 1908 to see for himself the welfare schemes that had been introduced there.

Political Advantage

Many historians believe that the Liberal reforms were passed for very selfish reasons. Since 1884 (Third Reform Act), most working class men had the vote and the Liberals wanted to attract these voters. However, by 1906, a new party, the Labour Party, was competing for the same votes.

If the Liberals were seen as unsympathetic towards the poor, what might happen in an election in the future? It was therefore to the political advantage of the Liberal Government to offer social reform even if they did not fully believe in the principle of government intervention.

How effective were the Liberal Social Welfare Reforms of 1906-1914 in tackling the problems of poverty?

Introduction

At the beginning of the 20th Century, evidence from the work of Booth and Rowntree, recruitment for the Boer War and a number of small scale social studies indicated that Britain had a number of serious social problems needing urgent action. During the period 1906-1914, the Liberal Government brought in a series of new laws directed towards ‘the Young’ and ‘the Old’. It insured many of those in work against unemployment and sickness and improved conditions for millions of vulnerable workers. It is necessary to examine the key social reforms undertaken during these years and attempt to gauge their significance as steps on the road to the Welfare State. To establish a Welfare State, the Liberal Government would have had to deal with a number of areas affecting the lives of British people – social security, health care, unemployment, housing and education. Any measures introduced, would have had to have been on the basis of being available to all in society according to their need.

The Young

By 1906, education was compulsory. It became obvious to the education authorities that large numbers of children were coming to school hungry, dirty and/or suffering from ill health. Under parliamentary pressure from the new Labour Party, the Liberal Government introduced the following:

The Education (Provision of Meals) Act, 1906

This enabled Local Education Authorities (with a 50% grant from the Treasury) to provide school meals for destitute children by levying an additional halfpenny in the pound on the rates. Parents were to be charged if they could afford to pay.

The number of school meals rose from 3 million in 1906 to 14 million in 1914. By that time, a publicly-funded welfare service, administered by the Board of Education, had replaced a patchwork of local charitable efforts.

Comment

The Act was not made compulsory until 1914. It did not compel local authorities to provide school meals, nor did it insist that meals be provided free of charge. By 1912, over half the local authorities had not set up a school meals service.

The Education Act, 1907

Publicly funded Secondary Schools were to keep ¼ of all places free to needy children.

This increased educational opportunity for the poor in society.

The Education (Administrative Provisions) Act, 1907

This made medical inspections for children compulsory. The Board of Education was able to specify that at least three inspections must take place during a child’s school years.

The inspections revealed that children were not receiving necessary medical attention because parents could not afford treatment.

Comment

The Act did not in itself improve the health of children as it did not provide free medical treatment to those in need. Problems which were identified often went untreated because parents could not afford the cost of such treatment.

Only after 1912, did the Government introduce a system of grants to help schools establish clinics which could provide treatment for those in need. However, the level of provision was left at the discretion of the local authorities which led to variances around the country.

The Children’s Act, 1908

This Act made it a legal offence for parents to neglect their children, bringing together a number of measures designed to protect children and which reflected the view that the community as a whole was responsible for the welfare of children. It became known as the ‘Children’s Charter’.

Its main provisions were:

(a). The sale of alcohol to under 18s and tobacco to under 16s was forbidden. (b). Children were forbidden to beg. (c). Young offenders were to be separated from the prison system by being tried in juvenile courts, being kept in remand homes rather than prisons while awaiting trial and being sent to borstal rather than prison. (d). Stiff penalties were introduced for those who were convicted of ill treatment or neglect of children. (e). It was made illegal to insure a child’s life.

Comment

This was the first time any government had intervened so directly in the lives of ordinary families.

It provided help, not as a charity, but as right and as a service to all who were entitled to it.

These were measures designed to remove problem children from the malign influence of adults.

However, although these measures were well intentioned, they did little to solve the problem of poverty amongst the young in society.

The Old

The Old Age Pensions Act, 1908

This Act provided that single people over the age of 70 would receive a pension of 5 shillings per week and married couples, over the age of 70, would receive a pension of 7 shillings and 6 pence per week. No contributions were required.

The full pension was only available (via the Post Office) to those with an annual income of £21 or less. For annual incomes over £21, a sliding scale of descending payments would be made up to a ceiling of a £31 annual income.

The payment was seen to be a right. By 1914, there were almost a million claimants, costing the Exchequer £12 million per year. This was an indication of the level of poverty among the elderly.

Comment

Not everyone over 70 was entitled to a pension. Those who had claimed poor relief in the previous year, those who had failed to work regularly and those who had been in prison in the previous ten years had no entitlement.

The Labour Party wanted the age set at 65, arguing that many of the old would not live to see 70. Average life expectancy in 1908 was lower than 70 years of age.

The amount of money received was relatively small. 5 shillings was recognized to be 2 shillings short of that needed to keep above the poverty line.

The Government admitted that the payment was not enough in itself to lift people out of poverty but stated that it was a ‘life belt’ to be used in conjunction with savings.

The Sick

The National Insurance Act, 1911 (Part 1)

This Act entitled insured workers, earning less than £160 per year, to sickness benefit of 10s (shillings) per week for the first 13 weeks (then 5s per week for the next 13 weeks), free medical attention and medicines, and treatment at a TB sanatorium. A disablement pension of 5s per week could be claimed as well as a maternity benefit of 30s per child.

Male workers contributed 4d (old pence) per week, employers contributed 3d per week and the Government contributed 2d per week. Lloyd George sold the scheme as ‘ninepence for fourpence’ (covered 15 million people in all).

Comment

Benefits did not cover any illness befalling the worker’s wife or children.

Benefits did not cover general hospital treatment (only TB sanatorium).

Benefits did not cover those earning more than £160 per year.

The Unemployed

Labour Exchanges (1909)

Labour Exchanges (job centres) were set up as a response to rising unemployment. It was argued that it would be a more efficient method of providing employment opportunities than having men simply standing outside factory gates looking for work.

Employers would provide detailed information about job vacancies, whilst prospective employees would register by providing details of their skills, experience and requirements.

Comment

The first Labour Exchanges were set up in 1910, and by 1913 there were 430 of them throughout Britain. By 1914, 3,000 people per day were being fixed up with work.

However, as wages were generally quite low, many people saw Labour Exchanges as simply a source of cheap labour.

The scheme was only voluntary.

The National Insurance Act, 1911 (Part 2)

This Act entitled insured workers, who had been unemployed for a week, to unemployment benefit of 7s per week for a maximum of 15 weeks in any 12 month period.

Workers contributed 2½d per week, employers contributed 2½d per week and the Government contributed 2½d per week.

By 1914, 2.3 million workers were covered by the scheme, mainly in construction, shipbuilding and engineering – trades which were susceptible to fluctuating employment levels (cyclical/seasonal pattern of unemployment).

The insured worker had to register as unemployed at a Labour Exchange from where he would draw his pay.

Comment

The Act only covered 7 trades, which left many workers without any insurance against unemployment.

Unemployment benefit was only payable for 15 weeks per year.

For many workers, the contributory nature of the National Insurance schemes (sickness and unemployment) meant a cut in their wages, and therefore may have further encouraged poverty.

The Employed

The Liberal Government also passed a number of acts which sought to improve workers’ conditions:

Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1906 – this allowed compensation for injury to health caused by working conditions as well as accidents.

The Merchant Shipping Act, 1906 – this introduced stringent regulations on food and accommodation on British ships.

The Coal Mines Act, 1909 – this introduced the 8 hour day for miners.

The Trade Boards Act, 1909 – this set up boards to set minimum wages in 4 sweated trades. Almost 400,000 workers were covered by the scheme, mostly women.

The Shops Act, 1911 – this gave shop assistants a statutory ½ day off each week. However, it did not limit the hours of work, which led to shop assistants often being made to work later on other days to make up the time.

The Minimum Wages Act, 1912 – this set up local boards to set wages in each mining district.

All of these reforms are significant, especially to those most directly affected. However, they were reforms aimed to help specific groups of workers who had specific problems. They were not really measures that contributed to the setting up of a Welfare State.

Conclusion

The Liberal social welfare reforms of 1906-1914 were significant reforms. They had a very positive impact on the lives of many people and they undoubtedly eased hardship for many thousands of working people. These reforms attempted to tackle specific problems in society and tried to make life easier for many. They were a huge advance on what had happened in the 19th century and marked a clear move away from laissez-faire. However, in most areas, the reforms were inadequate and certainly did not represent the creation of a Welfare State. Important areas such as housing were neglected; there was no attempt to create anything approaching a National Health Service. Education was largely untouched. The Government made no effort to influence in any way employment and

unemployment. A degree of social security was introduced but it was very limited and patchy. Even the Liberals responsible for the reforms, such as Lloyd George and Churchill, recognised this but considered it the best they could do at that time. They also saw it as a first step on which later governments could build. It is this that is the real success of the Liberal reforms. They did not create a Welfare State to any extent but they did lay a very considerable foundation on which a Welfare State could be built.

How successfully did the Labour Government of 1945-51 deal with the

social problems identified in the Beveridge Report of 1942?

Success? Failure?

Or a bit of both…

WANT(poverty or need)

This could not be tackled in one easy step:

National Insurance Act (1946)This is a contributory system of insurance (i.e. you, your employer and the government contribute or ‘chip in’ towards it) to cover you against illness, unemployment, maternity leave, widow’s pension, retirement pension and a death grant to cover funeral costs. In other words, for all eventualities “from the cradle to the grave”. This is basically an expansion of the Liberals National Insurance Act of 1911.

Good points: Provided cover for those who needed it most.Weak points: People could only benefit from it after 156 contributions.

People were only covered from illness for a year and a half.It was very costly to run due to the large number of officials needed to operate it.Weekly contributions took up about 5% of average earnings! Would they have been better off keeping their money?People joining the insurance scheme for the first time were not entitled to full pension benefits for ten years.The level of payment did not rise with the cost of living so did not provide enough money for many. Even by “appointed day” on 5 July 1948 the levels set in 1946 were too low!

National Assistance Act (1948) Provided benefits for those not covered by the National Insurance Act. National Assistance Boards were set up to help citizens whose resources were insufficient to meet their needs.

Good points: A “safety net” for those who missed out on National Insurance cover because they were unemployed or hadn’t made enough contributions yet.One off payments could be given for essentials (bedding, clothing, etc) as well as weekly payments

Weak points: Benefit levels were set too low.Because people had to pay 156 contributions towards National Insurance before receiving it the National Assistance was over subscribed.It was “means tested” so unpopular especially with the old even though it was not as harsh a test as earlier means tests. This put some off applying.

Family Allowances Act (1945)

Although started by the wartime government, this was passed to attack household poverty to ensure wages could be spent on other areas while children were securely looked after. A small amount was paid to all mothers of two or more children.

Good points: Wasn’t means tested.The money was not paid to the fathers but to the mothers, who it was felt were more likely to spend the money on what the children and household needed

Industrial Injuries Act (1946)This was a big improvement on previous legislation, under which it had been difficult and expensive for a workman to prove that an injury or disability had been caused by his job.

Good points: The act made insurance against industrial injury compulsory for all employees.Under the terms of the act, industrial injury benefits were to be paid at a higher rate than for ordinary sickness.Compensation was paid by the government, not individual employers, and all workers were covered.

DISEASE(lack of health care)

National Health Service Act 1946 For the first time every British citizen could receive free medical assistance.

Good points: medical, dental and optical services free of charge. Treatment by GPs and in hospitals was free also. These benefits were free at point of use, no patient being asked to pay for any treatment.

Weak points: Many of the hospitals were old and out of date.National Insurance only covered 9% of the running costs so it had to be paid for through general taxation – the public are never happy at tax increases.By 1950 the idea of free treatment for all was undermined when charges were introduced for spectacles and dental treatment.Doctors could still run private surgeries. Money could still buy better health which went against the ethos of the NHS.

SQUALOR(poor housing)

Most of Britain still had slum areas and overcrowding was a serious problem made worse by bomb damage during the war. To deal with the problem of squalor the government concentrated on the building of homes for the working class after the war. The government aimed at building 200,000 houses a year and many of these were prefabricated houses which were assembled quickly onsite.

Housing Acts 1946/1949Good points: Local authorities given financial assistance and access to building

materials (which were in low supply at the end of the War) to build 1.25 million new permanent homes

Weak points: No where near enough new homes were built and many people remained in “prefab” homes, army barracks and even train carriages by the end of 1951. Although Labour’s building programme compares poorly to previous governments, people are not too critical of them over this considering the level of house destruction during the War along with the lack of building materials, increase in marriage and “baby boom” after the War.

New Towns Act (1946)Good points: 14 new towns were built across Britain, including Glenrothes and

East Kilbride in Scotland providing clean safe homes away from the old overcrowded and war damaged cities.

Weak points: The towns were soulless and often left working class families cut off from their previous areas due to a lack of transport.

Access to the countryside Act (1949)Opened up public footpaths in rural areas.

Good point: Got city people into the fresh air away from their disease ridden city slums.

IGNORANCE(lack of education)

Education Act (Butler Act, 1944)This was actually passed by the 1944 war time Coalition government and was proposed by the Conservatives. But it was the Labour government that implemented its measures.

Good points: Secondary education became compulsory until the age of 15.Provided meals, milk and medical services at every school.

Weak points: The building of new schools concentrated on the primary sector to cope with the baby boom; the secondary sector was largely neglected.An examination at age 11 years (called the '11+') placed children in certain types of school, according to their ability. Those who passed this exam went to senior secondary schools and were expected to 'stay on' after 15 years and possibly go to university and get jobs in management. Children who failed the exam were not expected to stay at school after 15 years and they were expected to get the unskilled types of employment. This did nothing to create more equal opportunities for working class children.

Employment and Training Act (1948)Linked closely to Idleness.

Good points: To create a skilled work forceFunding for school leavers to train for a new skilled job

IDLENESS(being unemployed)

After the war, there seemed to be work for everyone as Britain rebuilt itself. The Labour Government succeeded in its commitment to maintain high levels of employment after the war. By 1946, unemployment was reduced to 2.5 % (even Beveridge had not though it possible to get it below 3%) and this was in spite of huge post-war problems such as shortages of raw materials and massive war debts.

Employment and Training Act (1948)Linked closely to Idleness.

Good points: To create a skilled work forceFunding for the unemployed and “demobbed” soldiers to train for a new skilled job.

One way in which the government kept almost full employment was through “nationalisation” - this means that the government took control of certain industries such as iron, coal and steel manufacture. Careful with this one though! Nationalisation can be done for many reasons at different times so is not technically part of a normal Welfare State so you need to make it relevant. Emphasise that the Labour government Nationalised on purpose to help create employment at this time.

NationalisationGood points:The government could use tax money to keep a “nationalised”

business going even if it was a failure so that they could keep people employed and paying their tax and National Insurance contribution.

Weak points: Much of this success was built on the Marshall Plan. A giant loan of £1263 million given by the Americans to stop Communism spreading into Britain.Nationalisation on this scale was very costly especially as many were poorly operated. However, the economic arguments about Nationalisation are not so important here. The key point is that it made jobs when needed.

This is a good link to the BBC. It looks at who is responsible for the Welfare State and how successful it was:http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/learning/bitesize/higher/history/labour/five_rev_print.shtml

Check out this guy as a good revision tool. But be careful… He does a great job describing what Labour did but isn’t very critical in analysing the success or not of their action. There is a good link to the Liberal reforms and other relevant parts of our course as well:http://www.youtube.com/user/HistoryHelper