We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Though Mr Gladstone was speaking of the opposition to home rule in the country, rather than in the parliamentary Liberal party alone in the statement quoted above, this has become the rather standard interpretation of the great separation in the Liberal party in 1886. As one modern historian of the Liberal disruption puts it, ‘a striking characteristic of modern British history has been the class alignment of political parties… The Liberal Unionist party (those who seceded on the home rule question) was a half-way house, which entertained for a time much of the wealth and territorial influence which had been Liberal and was to be Conservative.’ One of the most influential historians of late-nineteenth-century Britain puts the issue in broader terms. The origins of Conservative dominance as well as the leakage of the landed and business classes to the Conservative party, Sir Robert Ensor argues, are to be found in the undermining of English and Irish agriculture by the invasion of North American wheat. This produced, in turn, agrarian revolution in Ireland, the rise of violent nationalism in Ireland, the growth of social and political conflict, and, ultimately, the rejection of Irish political demands by the English. Yet another attributes the fall of Gladstone's third ministry to a general revolt against the Liberal party by railway directors and other businessmen who had been alerted to the dangers to property which the government's railway policies implied. This theme has been taken up and many have come to argue that class voting emerged in 1886 when the upper – and middle-class Liberals, taking home rule as an excuse, departed to the Conservatives in a reaction against growing social radicalism.
1 Gladtone, W. E., Speeches on the Irish question in 1886 (Edinburgh, 1886), p. 176Google Scholar.
2 Goodman, Gordon L., ‘Liberal Unionism: the revolt of the Whigs’, Victorian Studies, II, 2 (1959), 173, 190Google Scholar.
3 Ensor, R. C. K., ‘Some political and economic interactions in late Victorian England’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 4th series, XXXI (1949), 17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
4 Armytage, W. H. G., ‘The railway rates question and the fall of the third Gladstone ministry’, English Historical Review, LXI (01 1950), 18–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
5 Blewett, Neal, The peers, the parties, and the people: the general elections of 1910 (London, 1972), pp. 4, 10, 75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Christie, O. F., The transition to democracy, 1867–1914 (London, 1934), p. 198Google Scholar; Jennings, Ivor, Party politics (London, 1961), II, 184Google Scholar; Koss, Stephen, Sir John Brunner, radical plutocrat (Cambridge, 1970)Google Scholar, passim. For discussion of class analysis as it relates to electoral behavior see Cornford, James, ‘The transformation of Conservatism in the late nineteenth century’, Victoriaz Studies, VII (09 1963), 35–66Google Scholar; Clarke, P. F., ‘Electoral sociology of modern Britain’, History, LVII (1972), 31–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wald, Kenneth D., Crosses on the ballot: patterns of British voter alignment since 1885 (Princeton, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
6 Lipset, Seymour Martin, Political man (New York, 1963), p. 230Google Scholar, and Revolution and counter-revolution: change and persistence in social structures, revised and updated edition (Garden City, New York, 1974)Google Scholar, chapter 5.
7 MacIver, Robert M., The web of government, rev. edn (New York, 1974), p. 162Google Scholar.
8 Key, V. O., Politics, parties, and pressure groups, 5th edn (New York, 1964), p. 167Google Scholar.
9 Pulzer, P. G. J., Political representation and elections: parties and voting in Great Britain (New York, 1967), p. 102Google Scholar.
10 The marquess of Salisbury to Lord Randolph Churchill, 4 Jan. 1886, Churchill College, Cambridge, Lord Randolph Churchill letters, 1/12/1241 b.
11 Salisbury to Churchill, 9 Nov. 1886, Lord Randolph Churchill letters, 1/14/1991.
18 Quoted in Koss, Sir John Brumur, p. 80.
13 Acland to Gladstone, 15 July 1886, quoted in Memoirs and letters of the Right Honourable Sir Thomas Dyke Acland, Bart., ed. Acland, Arthur H. D. (printed for private circulation, London, 1902), p. 360Google Scholar.
14 The Times, 7 June 1886.
15 Atherley-Jones, L. A., Looking back, reminiscences of a political career (London, 1925), p. 33Google Scholar.
16 Higonnet, Patrick L.-R. and Higonnet, Trevor B., ‘Class, corruption, and politics in the French Chamber of Deputies, 1846–1848’, French Historical Studies, v, 2 (1967), 212 ffGoogle Scholar.; Aydelotte, W. O., ‘The country gentlemen and the repeal of the Corn Laws’, English Historical Review, LXXXII, 82 (01 1967), 47–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Heyck, T. W., The dimensions of British Radicalism: the case of Ireland, 1874–95 (Urbana, Chicago, and London, 1974)Google Scholar; Cornford, J. P., ‘The parliamentary foundations of the Hotel Cecil’, Ideas and institutions of Victorian Britain, ed. Robson, Robert (London, 1967), pp. 268–311Google Scholar.
17 Cannadine, David, ‘The theory and practice of the English leisure classes’, Historical Journal, XXI, 2 (1978)Google Scholar, passim.
18 Elliot, A. R. D., Life of Lord Goschen (London, New York, Bombay, Calcutta, 1911), 11, 280–2Google Scholar.
19 Folkestone News, 31 Oct. 1885, quoted in Rodden, Brian William, ‘Anatomy of the 1886 schism in the British Liberal Party’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Rutgers University, 1967), p. 674Google Scholar.
20 Grosvenor to Gladstone, 7 and 9 Dec. 1885, British Library, Gladstone papers, Add. MSS 44316, fos. 143, 139v, 140. Fitzwilliam's brother, W. C. Wentworth Fitzwilliam, stood for, but lost, the Hallamshire division of the West Riding of Yorkshire as a Conservative in the general election of 1885. He was the first member of this old Whig family so to stand. The Times, 3 Dec. 1885, 9.
21 Pease, Sir Alfred, Elections and recollections (London, 1932), p. 100Google Scholar.
22 The body of literature on scaling research is extensive and includes: MacRae, Duncan Jr, Issues and parties in legislative voting (New York, Evanston, London, 1970)Google Scholar; Anderson, Lee F., Meredith, Watts Jr, and Wilcox, Allen R., Legislative roll-call analysis (Evanston, 1966)Google Scholar; Aydelotte, W. O., ‘Voting patterns in the British house of commons in the 1840s’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, v, 2 (01 1964), 134–63Google Scholar; Bylsma, John R., ‘Party structure in the 1852–1857 house of commons: a scalogram analysis’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, VII, 4 (1977), 617–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lubenow, W. C., ‘Ireland, the Great Depression, and the railway rates: political issues and backbench opinion in the house of commons of 1886’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, CXXII, 4 (1978), 204–13Google Scholar; Mattheisen, Donald J., ‘Liberal constitutionalism in the Frankfurt parliament of 1848: an inquiry based on roll-call analysis’, Central European History, XII, 2 (1979), 124–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Another quantitative approach to the study of the late Victorian Liberal party, discriminant analysis, has been used by Professor T. W. Heyck. See Heyck, T. W. and Klecka, William, ‘British Radical MPs, 1874–95: new evidence from discriminant analysis’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, IV (1973), 161–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also, Heyck, The dimensions of British Radicalism. (For the procedure used in the present study see the appendix to this article.)
23 Namier, Lewis, England in the age of the American Revolution (London, 1930), pp. 220–1Google Scholar.
24 Lubenow, W. C., ‘Irish Home Rule and the Great Separation in the Liberal Party in 1886: the dimensions of parliamentary Liberalism’, Victorian Studies, XXVI (winter 1983), pp. 169–71Google Scholar.
25 W. C. Lubenow, ‘Radicalism in the house of commons of 1886’ (forthcoming).
26 Pease, Elections and recollections, p. 108.
27 Goodman, ‘Liberal Unionism’, passim; Southgate, Donald, The passing of the Whigs (London, 1962), p.382Google Scholar; Stansky, Peter, ‘Review of Michael Barker's; Gladstone and Radicalism’, Victorian Studies, XIX, 2 (12 1975), 267Google Scholar.
28 The Duke of Argyll to Gladstone, 2 Oct. 1885, B.L., Gladstone papers, Add. MSS 44106, ff. 11–12.
29 Wilson, Trevor, The downfall of the Liberal Party, 1914–1935 (London, 1968), p. 16Google Scholar.
30 Broderick, G. C., ‘Liberals and Whigs’, Fortnightly Review, XXIX (05 1879), 738Google Scholar.
31 Cooke, A. B. and Vincent, John, The governing passion: cabinet government and party politics in Britain, 1885–1886 (Hassocks, 1974), p. 100 nGoogle Scholar.
32 Milner to Goschen, 21 Aug. 1884, Viscount Milner papers, Bodleian Library, box 182, quoted in Cooke, and Vincent, , The governing passion, p. 100 nGoogle Scholar; Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, Blunt diary, 30 Dec. 1885, Blunt MSS 333–1975, fo. 228.
33 Mattheisen, Donald J., ‘German parliamentarism in 1848: roll-call voting in the Frankfurt assembly’, Social Science History, V, 4 (1981), 476–8Google Scholar. Professor Mattheisen finds a rough correlation between occupation and scale position in both the Frankfurt parliament and the Prussian assembly.
34 Heyck, The dimensions of British Radicalism, passim.
35 Pease, Elections and recollections, p. 41.
36 Edward Hamilton diary, 14 Apr. 1886, B.L., Sir Edward Hamilton papers, Add. MSS 48643, fo. 86.
37 Pease, Elections and recollections, p. 137.
38 Briggs, Asa, ‘Middle class consciousness in English politics, 1780–1846’, Past and Present, 04 1956, pp. 67–8Google Scholar.
39 Sartori, Giovanni, ‘From the sociology of politics to political sociology’, Politics and the Social Sciences, ed. Lipset, Seymour Martin (New York and Oxford, 1969), pp. 83–5Google Scholar.
40 Thorold, A., The life of Henry Labouchere (London, 1913), pp. 289–90Google Scholar.
41 Edward Hamilton diary, 6 May 1886 and 29 June 1886, B.L., Sir Edward Hamilton papers, Add. MSS 48643, fo. 110, and 48644, fo. 49.
