For fifty years after the coming in of the Georges the country had been ruled by a powerful Whig (SS479, 548) monopoly.  Under George III that monopoly was broken (S548), and the Tories (S479) got possession of the government.  But whichever party ruled, Parliament, owing to the “rotten-borough” system, no longer represented the nation, but simply stood for the will of certain wealthy landholders and town corporations.  A loud and determined demand was now made for reform.  In this movement no one was more active or influential among the common people than William Cobbett.  He was a vigorous and fearless writer, who for years published a small newspaper called the Political Register, which was especially devoted to securing a just and uniform system of representation.

On the accession of William IV the pressure for reform became so great that Parliament was forced to act.  Lord John Russell brought in a bill (1831) providing for the abolition of the “rotten boroughs” and for a fair system of elections.  But those who owned or controlled those boroughs had no intention of giving them up.  Their opponents, however, were equally determined, and they knew that they had the support of the nation.

In a speech which the Reverend Sydney Smith made at Taunton, he compared the futile resistance of the House of Lords to the proposed reform, to Mrs. Partington’s attempt to drive back the rising tide of the Atlantic with her mop.  The ocean rose, and Mrs. Partington, seizing her mop, rose against it; yet, notwithstanding the good lady’s efforts, the Atlantic got the best of it; so the speaker prophesied that in this case the people, like the Atlantic, would in the end carry the day.[1]

[1] Sydney Smith’s “Essays and Speeches.”

When the bill came up, the greater part of the Lords and the bishops, who, so far as they were concerned personally, had all the rights and privileges they wanted, opposed it; so too did the Tories (S479), in the House of Commons.  They thought that the proposed law threatened the stability of the government.  The Duke of Wellington (S573) was particularly hostile to it, and wrote, “I don’t generally take a gloomy view of things, but I confess that, knowing all that I do, I cannot see what is to save the Church, or property, or colonies, or union with Ireland, or, eventually, monarchy, if the Reform Bill passes."[2]

[2] Wellington’s “Dispatches and Letters,” II, 451.

581.  The Lords reject the Bill; Serious Riots (1831).

The King dissolved Parliament (S534, note 2); a new one was elected, and the Reform Bill was passed by the House of Commons; but the upper House rejected it.  Then a period of wild excitement ensued.  The people in many of the towns collected in the public squares, tolled the church bells, built bonfires in which they burned the bishops in effigy, with other leading opponents of the bill, and cried out for the abolition of the House of Lords.