Wednesday 24 December 2014

Pocket Boroughs and Rotten Boroughs

In the years and centuries that followed the Norman conquest of 1066, various monarchs were forced to give concessions to the people to ensure that they stayed on the throne. One such concession was the establishment of parliament, a place where representatives of the people could make their voices heard.

Settlements were given the right to send two representatives, Members of Parliament, by Royal Charter, which made the settlement a borough. These charters were given to the major settlements of the medieval period, thriving market towns and the like. Changing demographics and settlement locations though were not taking into account, and by the start of the nineteenth century England had many rotten and pocket boroughs.

The Russel Purge - CJG 1831 - PD-art-70
The terms rotten borough and pocket borough are often interchangeable, but they do have fairly specific meanings, and whilst a rotten borough would probably be a pocket borough, a pocket borough didn’t necessarily have to be a rotten one.

A rotten borough was a place which sent two MPs yet had a tiny electorate. The most famous example, and the most extreme example of a rotten borough, was that of Old Sarum in Wiltshire. When the borough had been created Old Sarum had been a thriving town established around the old cathedral. Subsequently, though a new Cathedral had been built at Salisbury and a whole new settlement was established. All that remained at Old Sarum was three houses, comprising seven eligible voters, who returned two MPs. At the same time, the new industrial cities of Birmingham, Leeds and Manchester were unrepresented.

A pocket borough differed slightly, in so much that this type of borough was “in the pocket” of an individual or family, meaning that they could guarantee the two members who would be elected. This was done by controlling the majority of the electorate. Of course, if the pocket borough was also a rotten borough, it made easier to control.

Both types of borough tended to be in the hands of large landowners, the likes of the Dukes of Devonshire and Lord William Fitzwilliam. These landowners, who might well own several pocket boroughs, could nominate friends and family to office, and once elected the MPs would ensure that their patron’s interests were looked after.

The wealth of the landowners was normally used to control the electorate. In many boroughs the voters were tenants of the landowners, and if they did not vote as their landlord wanted could find themselves evicted. It was a time where votes were done by a show of hands rather than in a secret vote format. Some landlords would bribe voters with money or promises of jobs, or others might be forced to vote one way, otherwise their businesses might be boycotted.

To a large degree, British politics before 1832 was based on a principle of not what you knew, but who you knew. Regardless though, some pocket and rotten boroughs did produce some of England’s great statesmen. Indeed William Pitt the Elder was first made a member of parliament in 1735 when he took up a seat at Old Sarum, Pitt’s brother having been successfully elected at both Okehampton and Old Sarum.

Rotten boroughs were particularly associated with the Tories, but pocket boroughs were in the hands of both Tory and Whig landowners, and so there was little political will to make changes to a system which benefited them. At the start of the nineteenth century though, the Charterist movement started to make itself heard, with demands for political reform, and it had enough popular support to make parliament’s position uncomfortable.

Earl Grey - After Thomas Lawrence (1769–1830) - PD-art-70
As a result in 1832, Earl Grey managed to push through the 1832 Reform Act, which effectively removed the right of almost sixty rotten boroughs to elect MPs. This though did little to get rid of the larger pocket boroughs, and even the Reform Act of 1867, which increased the number of males eligible to vote, did not completely eliminate them. Eventually, the 1872 Secret Ballot Act ensured that landowners could no longer see which way the voters voted, effectively meaning that pocket boroughs no longer existed. Even today though there are safe seats, ones where it is virtually certain that a party will be returned to parliament because it traditionally always has.

A quirk of English politics, pocket boroughs were a feature of the Westminster Parliament for many years, and with a relatively small electorate and no secret ballots, it was something that was just allowed to happen as it always had. Their demise came about as more people were entitled to vote, and pocket boroughs simply passed into the history books.

Copyright - First Published 7th June 2011

No comments:

Post a Comment