The Road to Reform: Britain’s Electoral Landscape Before 1867

The mid-19th century found Britain at a crossroads between aristocratic tradition and industrial modernity. The 1832 Reform Act – known as the First Reform Act – had begun the process of electoral modernization by eliminating some of the most egregious abuses in the system. While this increased the electorate from about 500,000 to over 800,000, significant restrictions remained. Voting rights were still tied to property qualifications, favoring wealthier males, while rural areas and small towns maintained disproportionate representation compared to growing industrial cities.

By the 1850s, pressure for further reform grew from both Liberal and Conservative camps, though their proposals remained cautious. The political landscape shifted dramatically in 1864-65 with the formation of two influential organizations: the moderate National Reform Union (successor to the Anti-Corn Law League) and the more radical Reform League, which included trade union participation. Intellectuals like John Stuart Mill, supported by Florence Nightingale, began advocating for women’s suffrage as well.

The Political Battlefield: Palmerston’s Legacy and Gladstone’s Rise

The decade from 1855-1865 was dominated by Lord Palmerston’s Liberal government, which historian Wolfgang J. Mommsen described as “the last Indian summer of aristocratic rule.” Palmerston’s final years saw foreign policy failures during the American Civil War and the Schleswig-Holstein crisis, while domestic politics increasingly centered on William Gladstone. The former Tory turned Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer represented a new political force – middle-class professionalism rather than aristocratic privilege.

Palmerston’s death in October 1865 opened the door for reform. Lord Russell became Prime Minister with Gladstone as both Chancellor and Leader of the House of Commons. In March 1866, Gladstone introduced a reform bill lowering the borough franchise from £10 to £7 and the county franchise from £50 to £14. This would have enfranchised one in four adult males compared to the existing one in five.

The Adullamites and Parliamentary Defeat

The reform proposal faced fierce opposition not just from Conservatives but from Liberal “Adullamites” – rebels led by Robert Lowe and Lord Elcho who feared losing their seats. John Bright famously compared these dissenters to the biblical outcasts in the Cave of Adullam. On June 18, 1866, the government suffered a devastating defeat when Parliament approved a Conservative amendment maintaining higher property qualifications. The Russell government resigned on June 26.

Disraeli’s Conservative Gamble

Contrary to expectations, the new government under Lord Derby was purely Conservative, with Benjamin Disraeli as Chancellor. Initially opposed to reform, Disraeli recognized the growing pressure after mass protests erupted in Hyde Park during July 1866. However, his motives were strategic rather than ideological – aiming to protect rural Conservative interests while appearing to embrace democratic change.

The Reform League’s continued demonstrations forced Disraeli’s hand. By February 1867, he proposed enfranchising male householders who paid poor rates directly, excluding those whose landlords paid for them (“compounding”). After another massive Hyde Park demonstration in May, Disraeli accepted an amendment removing this restriction, significantly expanding the franchise.

The 1867 Reform Act: Provisions and Limitations

The Representation of the People Act 1867, passed on August 15, marked a watershed:
– England and Wales’s electorate grew from 1.36 million to 2.48 million (82.5% increase)
– Many urban workers gained voting rights, though agricultural laborers remained excluded
– The Redistribution Act reduced small boroughs’ representation while increasing seats for larger cities
– Proposals for women’s suffrage (by John Stuart Mill) and plural voting were rejected

While revolutionary for its time, the Act still excluded the poorest urban dwellers and maintained rural biases. Britain had taken a major step toward democracy, but universal suffrage remained decades away.

Intellectual Debates: Bagehot vs. Mill on Democracy

The reform sparked intense debate among Britain’s intellectuals. Walter Bagehot’s 1867 “The English Constitution” argued Britain functioned as a “deferential society” where the uneducated masses wisely deferred to their betters. He warned democracy could destroy this delicate balance.

John Stuart Mill, in his 1861 “Considerations on Representative Government,” acknowledged democracy’s inevitable advance but advocated safeguards against “collective mediocrity,” including weighted votes for the educated. Both thinkers grappled with how to reconcile majority rule with minority rights – a tension that continues to shape democratic theory.

The Political Aftermath: Gladstone’s First Ministry

The 1868 election, the first under the new system, produced a Liberal landslide with over 100-seat majority. Gladstone’s first premiership (1868-74) implemented sweeping reforms:
– Disestablishment of the Irish Church (1869)
– Irish Land Act (1870) protecting tenant rights
– Education Act (1870) introducing compulsory schooling
– Secret ballot (1872) ending voter intimidation
– Judicial reforms creating a Supreme Court (1873)

Legacy of the 1867 Reform

The 1867 Reform Act fundamentally altered British politics:
1. It began the process of mass political participation, though full universal suffrage took until 1928
2. The Conservative Party under Disraeli learned to adapt to democratic politics
3. It established the principle that parliamentary representation must evolve with social change
4. The debates it sparked about democracy’s limits remain relevant today

While imperfect, the 1867 Reform marked Britain’s decisive turn toward becoming a modern democratic state, proving that even conservative forces could channel rather than resist the democratic tide. Its legacy reminds us that political systems must continually adapt to remain legitimate in changing societies.