alternatehistory.com

I, IV: The Regent

As the bullet fired through William, only one thing was sure; Princess Victoria of Kent would assume the role of Regent of the Crown. It was assured, with some conditions, in the Regency Act of 1830, passed just 10 months before. Heir Presumptive Victoria, her daughter, had been prepared for royalty since she was born through the 'Kensington System', a complex set of rules devised to close her off from the rest of society. It withdrew the younger Victoria to the personal and public life unless guided by her mother, the Regent. This was the ultimate aim of the Kensington System, to control Queen Victoria in the event of her coming to the throne came early, i.e before her 18th birthday. The Regency Act even forbid her to marry without her express written consent from the Regent. Upon hearing the news of William's death, she was remarked to have said: "my time has come". She boarded a carriage to come to Bushy House, accompanied by her side, as always, by her Private Secretary and confidante, John Conroy. Conroy was a controversial figure in the Royal Court, with his links to the Regent questioned and his motives even more so. His influence on the new Regent was unparalleled and he seemed to be rising the ladder quickly. Regardless, as the Princess became Regent, Conroy became incredibly important to the United Kingdom.


With Grey having resigned his post, the Duke of Wellington assumed the role of First Lord of the Treasury and was keen, despite not holding the confidence of the House of Commons, to govern Britain back to health. This was further complicated with the automatic dissolution of Parliament due to the King's Death. A new election would have to be held, and the political stalemate over Reform would sludge and delay yet further. In the aftermath of the death of the King, Grey resigned himself and withdrew while Parliament was yet to recall. The debate over the Reform Act would cease for now in Parliament but would continue to rage in the streets of major cities. Directly responsible for quelling the violence in the hastily arranged Wellington Ministry was Earl Eldon Home Secretary, Lord Chancellor and an Ultra who detested the reform movement, and like Wellington, considered the Reform Acts unnecessary. Revolts were occurring on the streets of London, Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle, Leeds, Glasgow, Sherborne, Exeter, Southampton, and Eldon, while in his prime years, was the man to take on these unruly urban dwellers. He quipped at Thomas Hardy, member of the London Corresponding Society, that he was trying to install "representative government, the direct opposite of the government which is established here" - his reformist credentials were the antithesis of what the country needed. Working without having Parliament recalled, he drafted with a group of Ultras an act designed to restore discipline and control over the country and quash reform for good: the Protection of the Realm Act.

In the days after the assassination, the difference in mood was stark. In Cities and working-class towns in the North primarily, but also in the South Welsh Valleys and the Swing counties, there was a celebratory mood. Not for the death of the monarch, but in anticipation of the Regent. It was felt the new monarch would be more liberal and would welcome a new era of Young Monarchy with reform at the centre. In traditional, Tory Britain; in the military, in the estates and the Conservative elements of the Nobility, the death was a sign that it had arrived, the spectre of Revolution. All the fears of the Ultras, that Reform would unleash the masses onto governance, was correct. There would be no reform without disorder and ultimately, the completion of the growing cloud hanging over the men derided by the Reformists as 'Old Corruption'': seeing their power ebbing all around them with the big, Whig commercial barons holding the next baton of the establishment, leaving them in the dust. Their rural interests swatted aside by the cities' agenda of free trade (harming their wheat price), reform of the poor law and reduction of the national debt (which would inevitably see the return of the dreaded income tax) and larger suffrage (which would reduce their political leverage). All of Britain mourned, thousands from the cities and countryside alike, including most major radical leaders (Hunt, Attwood, O'Connell in particular) signed registers of condolence. There was anticipation that this was the apex of the violence. Most political marches were suspended for a few days, with public demonstrations cancelled. Rioters, after hearing the news, tended to wander home and disperse naturally.

But the truce only lasted so long. Political Unions began calling meetings together from the 12th October, while in reality, political agitating had moved indoors during the period of relative calm. The new monarch had ignited debate in the Political Unions, the only organised movement in favour of reform. They were disparate, unorganised and had no set agenda. The most advanced in terms of membership, scope and influence was Thomas Attwood's Birmingham Political Union, which despite espousing the natural unifying points of reformism at the time (more frequent parliaments, professional MPs, and equal constituencies based on population), had it's own bent, in its creator's image, on currency reform and abandoning of the gold standard. It was united by the heavily complex trade network of Birmingham, with artisans and merchants forming a more advanced middle-class, which share a uniting problem - lack of representation. Others often reflected the cities they were in; in Manchester, their local bent of Liberalism, centring on free-trade and representative government, saw a greater influx of working-class members into their Political Union. They wanted annual elections, universal suffrage and more power to the people - removing price ceilings and tariffs and opening up the country to the world with free trade. This tilt of the political unit was itself fused with more radical agendas, such as better, 'responsible' municipal governance and elections for magistrates and accountable courts, and codifying the common law of the country. Similarly, the London group, the Metropolitan Political Union, had a mix of workers and the middle-class in it's Union Council of 36 members.

More Radical elements of the Reform movement were concentrated in Glasgow within working-districts, Nottingham, Newcastle, Oldham, Huddersfield, Leeds, Wakefield, Liverpool Derby and Bristol - cities with high numbers of artisans and lower-paid workers alike, alongside middle-class merchants who were Whig and Reformist leaning. In the South of Wales, especially, the agenda was radical and addressed many political ills. They meshed the Political ends with Social demands, adopting both platforms that strengthened workers rights, such as abandoning the Combination Acts, but also advocating widespread democracy and power to ordinary people, redistribution of land amongst unemployed peasants. They crossed most with the followers of Captain Swing and had an agrarian tinge to their radicalism. The Unions divided, roughly, into the spectrum by city, Birmingham on the moderate end, South Welsh on the radical end, and Manchester sitting roughly in the centre. This hampered attempts at creating a cross-city coalition, as the Birmingham camp did want to include too much radicalism on their platform, risking retribution. In late October, Francis Place attempted to centralise efforts from London, but with local interests not keen to wield power to London, internal divisions of their platform doomed them from the start. In the month of October, they divided on the scope of suffrage to support, whether to pursue reform or simply support the restoration of the Whig Ministry by the Regent and negotiating a more balanced reform, like the reform plan which retained potwolloper boroughs, but eliminated certain rotten boroughs and assigning their seats to Counties with large populations to address the imbalance.

While these debates were had, protests continued, marches and meetings continued and people sensed the inertia of the regime stifling reform, like reforms to the Corn Laws and Poor Laws and every advancement achieved since the end of the Napoleonic Wars. Amongst leadership, moderation was the key, but amongst the membership, radical sentiment grew. Politically, the moderation of the Political Unions would grow unhelpful, as the actions of the Regent would grow increasingly erratic. In the end, the Political Unions had to act to control and direct the protests for reform, which had reached a nasty conclusion. Rioters in Bristol took control of the city from the 29-31st October, when an anti-reform judge, Charles Wetherell entered the city. The working-classes revolted, which was only brought under control when a posse comitatus was formed between conservative middle-classes and members of the military in the city. The crisis brought municipal reform to the forefront of conversation amongst radicals, as the Corporation was caught brutally under-prepared and unaware of the situation. Even more condemning for the Reformist movement in the city, the Mayor, Charles Pinney, was a supporter of the Reform Act but was undermined critically by a mainly corrupt, Tory administration. These failures of government brought the need for root and branch reform to the forefront of the conversation. Members of the Bristol Political Union, including it's President, William Herapath assured the cities magistrates that order could be maintained by their neutrality in the riots, providing troops were not used. Despite this, this truce was called off on the 25th October, two days before the serious rioting began, as the Corporations reactionary elements called troops in anyway.


When the cities corporation asked the Government to provide troops, they were happy to do so, sending in 500 men from the 14th Light Dragoons and the 3rd Dragoon Guards. Earl Eldon personally saw that the 14th were used, as they were unpopular in the city due to their role in the suppression of the Swing revolts. Despite this, their commander, Thomas Brereton, had reformists sympathies. As Wetherall entered the city gates, the cities working-class were waiting and stoned him and Pinney from their horses. Middle-class merchants and professionals cheered them on from their windows. Soon they burned corporation buildings shouting "Oh, its only Corporation property", and "Tear down the churches and mend the roads with them". The burning of major public houses and churches made quite the impression on the cities middle-classes and turned their fear into action. Three thousand men volunteered to take hold of the city, which they managed with ease, even beating the arrival of a shipment of 500 more troops from London. These troops took direct control of the city and a state of insurrection was declared. Eldon tried several of the cities magistrates, and the cities Mayor, but Pinney was acquitted in a controversial public trial. While the Reformist movement claimed the rioting was the result of youths in the city, the composition was said to be male, and from workers in the city. Estimates of the death toll range from 100-250, £300,000 of damage occurred to the city and the city was divided more than ever. This fragility of the coalition between the working and middle classes was exposed, even at this early stage.

The incident brought home the ineffectiveness of municipal government, with their slow response and corrupt administration widely panned. Pinney, as the leader, unfairly took on a lot of the criticism, and Brereton was painted by Conservative pamphlets as not only incompetent but also arguably mutinous. What was noticeable about the criticism of Brereton was it was not shared by his soldier corps and his military record within the companies themselves was not tarnished by the incident. While general support was with the restoration of law and order, except in working-class districts where sympathy lay with the 200 workers who were killed in the riots, however in London, this overstated the importance, as to most in Parliamentary circles it was a mere Provincial matter. This may explain the decision to keep the troops in Bristol for four months. A simple matter to a simple problem. Agitation in Westminster centred around its recall date, with the Commons keen to reassemble to debate Reform. The Regent, however, insisted that she would issue writs for a new election once the violence had ceased, claiming an election would excite the population.

"An election of the Commons in this climate would excite the populous already whipped up in fear of Reforms and revolts. The House of God burning, the way of life perfected in this land disturbed." - Princess of Kent, 1st November 1831.

This model of politics, suspending it until after a political riot is completed and order is restored, is patchy at best. The Regent misread the mood of the public, but she was not alone in this; the Prince Regent in 1819 misjudged the mood at Peterloo & William misjudged it when he dismissed Grey. A Grey Ministry would have at least pacified the Whig members of the house and allowed for Government work to continue on a fresh Reform proposal. The Regent did not trust Grey and wanted a calm, stable military man to calm the mood of the country, hence appointing Wellington without the support of a Tory Parliament. She believed in Monarchy in the traditional sense, of one guiding vision for the Kingdom through the Regent - a dangerous dogma in reform-minded populous. It was in this naive, misunderstanding mind that she issued the writs for election on 4th November but elected to wait on the advice of John Conroy, to call the election for 14th June, leaving the country without a Parliament for eight months. In that time, the Privy Council, to be convened in December, would rule the country directly. When the news of this emerged, the mood amongst middle classes and working classes alike were aligned again. What was most important to both was a strong and functioning representative Parliament. This was taxation without representation.