Published in 1965: This book is about the Period in which the Whig Party was in power between 1807 - 1812. It talks about Economics, Parliamentary reforms and wars.
An historical analysis of the nature, growth and activity of organised political parties in England, from the Civil War to the general election of 1959.
The origins of the War of 1812 have long been a source of confusion for historians, owing to the lack of attention that has been paid to England's part in precipitating the conflict and to the overemphasis placed on "western expansionist" factors. This volume offers the first analysis of the causes of the war from both the British and American points of view, showing clearly that, contrary to the popular misconception, the war's basic causes are to. be found not in America but in Europe. For unless one accepts the view that America committed an act of pure aggression in 1812, one must turn to the motives underlying British policy to determine why America felt it had to fight. In the years immediately preceding the war (1803-1812), England was dominated by a faction that pledged itself not only to defeat Napoleon but also to maintain British commercial supremacy. The two main points of contention between England and America during this period—impressment and the restrictions imposed by the Orders in Council—were direct results of these commitments. America finally had no alternative but to oppose with force British maritime policy, which, although partly caused by jealousy of American commercial growth, stemmed in large measure from involvement in total war with France. In addition to tracing the gradual drift to war in America, Reginald Horsman shows that the Indian problem and American expansionist designs against Canada played small part in bringing about the struggle. He examines the efforts made by America to avoid conflict through means of economic coercion, efforts whose failure confronted the nation with two choices: war or submission to England. Since the latter alternative presented more terrors to the recent colonists, America went to war.
The Anglo-Irish Union of 1800 which established the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland made British ministers in London more directly responsible for Irish affairs than had previously been the case. The Act did not, however, provide for full integration, and left in existence a separate administration in Dublin under a Viceroy and a Chief Secretary. This created tensions that were never resolved. The relationship that ensued has generally been interpreted in terms of 'colonialism' or 'post-colonialism', concepts not without their problems in relation to a country so geographically close to Britain and, indeed, so closely connected constitutionally. Governing Hibernia seeks to examine the Union relationship from a new and different perspective. In particular it argues that London's policies towards Ireland in the period between the Union and the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921 oscillated sharply. At times, the policies were based on a view of an Ireland so distant, different, and violent that (regardless of promises made in 1800) its government demanded peculiarly Hibernian policies of a coercive kind (c. 1800-1830); at others, they were based on the premise that stability was best achieved by a broadly assimilationist approach — in effect attempting to make Ireland more like Britain (c. 1830-1868); and finally they made a return to policies of differentiation though in less coercive ways than had been the case in the decades immediately after the Union (c. 1868-1921). The outcome of this last policy of differentiation was a disposition, ultimately common to both of the main British political parties, to grant greater measures of devolution and ultimately independence, a development finally rendered viable by the implementation of Irish partition in 1921/2.
In a period scarred by apprehensions of revolution, war, invasion, poverty and disease, elite members of society lived in fear of revolt. Boyd Hilton examines the changes in society between 1783-1846 and the transformations from raffish and rakish behaviour to the new norms of Victorian respectability.
John Stevenson has revised and expanded his standard but long-unobtainable work on Popular Protest and Public Order 1700-1870 in two self-sufficient volumes. The first (1700-1832) appeared in 1992; this is its keenly-awaited sequel. The greater part of it is entirely new, and brings the analysis of popular disturbance -- and its political and economic roots -- through to modern times. Tracing the theme through from the Chartists of the late 1830s to the British Union of Fascists in the late 1930s, it highlights both the changing agendas and the unchanging tensions that underlie social disorder.
Disenfranchising Democracy examines the exclusions that accompany democratization and provides a theory of the expansion and restriction of voting rights.
In 1811 England was on the brink of economic collapse and revolution. The veteran poet and campaigner Anna Letitia Barbauld published a prophecy of the British nation reduced to ruins by its refusal to end the interminable war with France, titled Eighteen Hundred and Eleven. Combining ground-breaking historical research with incisive textual analysis, this new study dispels the myth surrounding the hostile reception of the poem and takes a striking episode in Romantic-era culture as the basis for exploring poetry as a medium of political protest. Clery examines the issues at stake, from the nature of patriotism to the threat to public credit, and throws new light on the views and activities of a wide range of writers, including radical, loyalist and dissenting journalists, Coleridge, Wordsworth, Southey, and Barbauld herself. Putting a woman writer at the centre of the enquiry opens up a revised perspective on the politics of Romanticism.
The Rise and Fall of Radical Westminster, 1780-1890 explores a critical chapter in the story of Britain's transition to democracy. Utilising the remarkably rich documentation generated by Westminster elections, Baer reveals how the most radical political space in the age of oligarchy became the most conservative and tranquil in an age of democracy.