Gian
Banned
I think it did happen. It's just that the main event hopped across the Channel to Britain.
A House Divided: A TL
- Thread starter Utgard96
- Start date
I think it did happen. It's just that the main event hopped across the Channel to Britain.
Maybe we'll see an opposite ending to the Franco-Prussian war. Where the French are defeated and overthrow their Orleans monarch. Then the Bonapartes try to make a comeback like the Orleans did IOTL.
Oh, the republicans are going to have a field day with that name. Perhaps not as much as a king John II in the UK but still. Not like he could have reigned under the name of Louis, or Charles, or Ferdinand, because the French and Spanish kings have quite thoroughly blotted the copy book, here.
Boo! Boo, I say! À la lanterne ! Down with the worm!
Really, he should have gone with Henri... except it was the restored Bourbons who made a lot of noise about good King Henri (IV) as they were desperately searching around for a model who was not as absolutist or dictatorial as some of the Louises, to the point their Roem clone, sorry, their legitimist heir was called Henri and only Henri.
I can guarantee you he won't come to power ITTL, but the details will have to wait for the "where are they now" chapter.
Yeah, there's not exactly a rich flora of names to choose from, is there?
The end of the Constitutional Convention and the resulting settlement will be covered in the next update.
You could, possibly, as a suggestion, read the preceding chapters. The #32 at the beginning of this one is a bit of a clue, I would have thought.
Just did a re-read for clarity (great decision) -- is this the Great War mentioned earlier in the TL? It'd definitely be interesting to have one last essentially pre-industrial war roil Europe, with all the ways that could go. I of course have revolutionary sensibilities and an aversion to kings -- although it definitely seems like the Austrians lose judging by contextual clues, what with an Italian federation of republics and maybe Prince Albert in a can plus a united Germany with regional sentiments and preserved monarchs (a la Malaysia?) That being said, it'd also be funny to turn France into the 19th century's Germany, losing two Great Wars at the behest of an animating national ideology and martial spirit within two generations, and to see how that'd turn out. I'm sure the Russians could be convinced to save reaction's ass once more...
Also hoping that Karadjordevic can return and avenge the Slavs, because no historical inversion could be funnier than the Yugoslavs being friends. And to see how the Mexican War is resolved -- will Cali be annexed? Will America into Pacific via Sonora?
Also hoping that Karadjordevic can return and avenge the Slavs, because no historical inversion could be funnier than the Yugoslavs being friends. And to see how the Mexican War is resolved -- will Cali be annexed? Will America into Pacific via Sonora?
Well for one, Ferdinand is alive and succeeds the throne. Unlike in OTL where he was dead at this point. So that's a difference.
As a hint: there are three updates left in this act.
This will be covered in two updates' time.
This will be covered in three updates' time.
#33: All Thine Shall Be the Subject Main
A House Divided #33: All Thine Shall Be the Subject Main
“I do not feel myself at liberty, holding the opinions that I do, now to resort to what may have been, at other seasons, the necessary and legitimate tactics of party. When I see the government indisposed to maintain the rights of property, the authority of the law, and, in a qualified sense, the established order of things against rash innovation, I shall deem it my duty to range myself against it. Believing it would be a public misfortune in the present crisis of the country that the hands of the established order should be weak, it is my determination to strengthen them as much as possible.”
***
From “Great Britain 1830-1930: A Century of Upheaval”
(c) 1982 by Sophie Mathews
Oxford University Press
The Constitutional Convention was opened on the 3rd of November, electing veteran reform campaigner Francis Place as their Chairman; besides having lobbied for myriad causes in his nearly eighty years of life and co-written the People’s Charter, Place was also known for his role in the Sellis controversy, where he pushed to investigate the guilt of the future King Augustus. [1] The election was a calculated slight against the old order, and judging from the deposed King’s reaction when word reached the Hague, it succeeded…
***
Declaration of Principles
Passed by the Constitutional Convention of Great Britain and Ireland
Mr. FRANCIS PLACE, Chairman
27th of September 1849
WHEREAS King Augustus the First has abandoned his solemn Coronation Vows to govern the People of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland according to their Laws and Customs and to cause Law and Justice to be executed in his Judgments;
WHEREAS the hitherto established Government of Great Britain and Ireland has failed to heed the will of the Majority of Electors of the Country;
WHEREAS the King abandoned the Country on the tenth day of June of this Year and dissolved his former Ministry without appointing another;
WHEREAS the duly-elected House of Commons of Great Britain and Ireland appointed this Convention to secure for the People of Great Britain a new Constitution enumerating their Rights and securing a new System of Government;
BE IT RESOLVED
1. That the Convention recognises the End of absolute Royal Prerogative over the Governance of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the Necessity of reforming said Governance on the Basis of constitutional Rights and Guarantees;
2. That all Persons born upon the Islands of Great Britain, Ireland or adjacent Islands under the Authority of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland shall be Citizens of the said United Kingdom;
3. That every Citizen enjoys inalienable Rights and Duties of Citizenship;
4. That these Rights include the Right to Free Speech and Freedom of the Press;
5. That these Rights include the Freedom to practice his chosen religious Confession, free from the Imposition of a State Church;
6. That these Rights include the Freedom to Assemble in any Number and for any peaceable Purpose;
7. That these Rights include the Right not to be deprived of Life, Liberty or Property except by due Process of Law, the Right to be secure against unreasonable Search and Seizure, the Right to a fair, speedy and public Trial by a Jury of his Peers, the Right not to be a Witness against Himself in a Criminal Case, the right not twice to be put in Jeopardy of Life or Limb, and the right to Habeas Corpus;
8. That the Enumeration of Rights in the previous Articles does not deny or disparage other ancient and traditional Rights retained by the People;
9. That the Governance of the United Kingdom must be based upon the Will of the People as expressed through free and fair Elections;
10. That the aforesaid Elections must be based on a general Franchise so construed as to include all Men with permanent common Interest with, and Attachment to, the Community;
11. That no Body not thus elected by the People of the United Kingdom may exercise Authority over the Composition of the Government or the Creation of Laws;
12. That Laws duly passed by a Parliament duly elected may not be suspended or abrogated by any Body of Government;
13. That any Part of the United Kingdom, coercively brought into it and showing sufficient Desire to separate therefrom, has the right to administrative Separation and the Resumption of native Government;
14. That the Convention may draft a Constitution encompassing these Principles and establishing a new Form of Government, which will enter into Force of Supreme Law immediately upon its Passage.
Enacted at Westminster, on the twenty-seventh Day of September, the Year of our Lord eighteen hundred and forty-nine.
***
From “Great Britain 1830-1930: A Century of Upheaval”
(c) 1982 by Sophie Mathews
Oxford University Press
The Fourteen Principles passed by the Convention represented the height of British radicalism at the time, and mark the end of the radical period in the Convention’s life. Whig interests, caught up in a general optimism until this point, began to push for compromise toward the end of the drafting process. The Radicals responded by inserting the fourteenth principle binding the Convention’s hands, and proposing the principles as a single resolution with a preamble declaring an official version of the course of events in June.
Francis Place, President of the Constitutional Convention
The resolution passed on the 27th of September, and the Whigs immediately switched tactics to working against the Radical interest and undermining the Fourteen Principles. Two principles in particular offended whiggish and rural sensibilities. [2]
Firstly, the fifth principle (freedom of religion) contained a reference to “the imposition of a State Church”. This was regarded as a disestablishmentarian clause by the pro-Church of England majority in the country at the time, and has commonly been represented as such in history books. However, the word “imposition” has a dual meaning here, and notes by Brougham and Bright [3] suggest that the intended meaning was to indicate that the Church must not act to impose upon the freedom of conscience, rather than the Church being an imposition upon the freedom of conscience in and of itself.
Secondly, the thirteenth principle was an affirmation of Ireland’s right to self-government, although Ireland was never specifically named in the wording of the resolution. The principle largely reflected the fact of massive Irish unrest and the Radical belief that repeal of the legal union was the only way to appease it. With the island divided between revolutionary groups in the countryside and the Dublin Castle-controlled yeomanry in the cities, it was clear that the principle was exactly that and no more for the time being. The de facto endorsement of the divisibility of the realm was nevertheless extremely offensive to Whigs and monarchists in the Convention, and for some, it was made worse by the fact that Ireland wasn’t specifically mentioned. If Scotland hypothetically showed “sufficient desire” to separate, the thirteenth principle implicitly recognised their right to do so. So too Wales, or Yorkshire, or Pimlico.
It has been argued that the inclusion of these principles constituted a tactical error, and that the remaining twelve principles could’ve formed the framework of a constitution with genuine staying power. This line of thinking ignores the very real division of interest between Whigs and Radicals, over the specifics of the Convention’s task as well as general principles. A Convention dominated by the whiggish interest would most likely not have adopted a declaration of universal rights. A Convention dominated by Radicals, as the early phase of it was, would never have produced a declaration of rights acceptable to the Whigs. The Fourteen Principles also include an implicit denial of the Lords’ right to legislate and the King’s right to choose the Prime Minister. These would likely be opposed by Whigs in any situation where the more excitable issues of Ireland and the Church weren’t around to grapple at.
***
From "Peel”
(c) 1979 by Alan Sharpe
London: Crandall & Sons
By the end of October, the Convention had ceased to function in all but name. Debate remained lively, and the public gallery set up at the north end of Westminster Hall remained well-attended. But very little was actually done. The Convention was no nearer a draft constitution than it had been a month earlier, and with no effective majority for either Whigs or Radicals, any proposal made by one side was certain to be voted down by the other. Ultimately, the Radicals were responsible for far more proposals than the Whigs, but they also coordinated them poorly, with several contradictory franchise and representation proposals being introduced and then voted down over the month of October.
Peel had been in Drayton [4] since June, but as was his habit, he read every report from London and kept up correspondence with several leading Whigs in the Convention and in Parliament. In particular, the ageing Lord Anglesey proved a reliable ally in the capital, as the two men shared an outlook that began as concern, and then once the Convention turned out to be ineffective, turned to disgust. The old general became a key new ally of Peel’s, but his old friends stood him by as well.
Palmerston had stood and been elected to the Convention from Hertfordshire, believing that he could steer the body in the direction of moderate reform. It wasn’t long before he too was disillusioned; in a letter to Peel dated the 9th of October, Palmerston declared that “the Radical’s wildest dream is to see the Whiggish cause championed by such men as those I deign to call my allies”. By November, he wanted out, and so did a number of his fellows.
It would be Palmerston who launched the sequence of events that have gone down in history as “Auspicious November”, [5] when just after noon on the 22nd of that month, he tabled a motion to recognise the rights of the established church. The eyes of the Convention now on him, he proceeded to recount the history of organised Christendom from the Milvian Bridge until the present day. Francis Place tried to cut him off, but Palmerston had never been one for brevity, although this address might’ve seemed exceptional to his fellow delegates.
That was, of course, because he was stalling for time. Around 3pm, a company of Horse Guards with Anglesey at its head appeared at the door. As Palmerston spoke the word “homoousion”, the door opened to reveal the one-legged figure of Lord Anglesey, riding a horse for the very last time in his life. The delegates broke into a panic, fearing that they were going to be dispersed by force, and some even shouted “Cromwell! Cromwell!” to invoke the fate of the Rump Parliament. But Anglesey did not move into the Hall itself, nor did any of his men. They stood firm in New Palace Yard, neither advancing nor retreating but simply announcing their presence. And Palmerston continued his summary of the Council of Chalcedon as if nothing had happened.
At the same time, soldiers moved in on the Treasury Building, where the Provisional Authority were meeting, and St. James’s Palace, where a meeting of the Accession Council was quickly called. The Lord Mayor, three members of the Provisional Authority (Lansdowne, Brougham and Grey), around fifteen Privy Counsellors and twenty-five peers were in attendance, as was Prince George, [6] who had been in Bagshot during the Days of June and stayed there ever since. He was now formally acclaimed as King George V.
Palmerston withdrew his motion when news reached Westminster. In its place, Sir James Graham, arch-Whig delegate from Cumberland, submitted a motion to recognise the accession. He was substantially briefer than Palmerston, and the vote was called within a few minutes – 241 ayes to 227 nos. The King was back.
***
From “Great Britain 1830-1930: A Century of Upheaval”
(c) 1982 by Sophie Mathews
Oxford University Press
The new King cut a strange figure. At the age of nine, he’d been afflicted with an illness that left him blinded in one eye. As such he had no military experience whatsoever, deeply unusual for a man of his standing at the time, but his father had made sure that he was raised in the manner befitting a future monarch – and with the appropriate morals. Made Prince of Wales on his father’s accession in 1837, George was known to be conservative, but moderate next to the arch-reactionary King. This made him a popular figure, although he almost never spoke of politics in public, for or against his father…
…George V’s first act as King was to appoint a Prime Minister, and his choice surprised no one: Sir Robert Peel. Peel is universally acknowledged as one of the masterminds behind Black November, and in the immediate aftermath of the “Little Restoration” he would secure a position as the most prominent figure in British politics. It was he who wrote the Royal Charter issued by the King on New Year’s Eve, amidst the general election campaign, affirming some fundamental rights and providing small reforms to the government apparatus. It was he who ensured the survival of the new regime through his historic hustings speech in Tamworth, laying the foundation of the Moderate Party…
***
From "The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of British Politics"
(c) 1947 by Prof. Henry Goodwin (ed.)
Cambridge University Press
1850 GENERAL ELECTION: General election held in January 1850 as a result of the demise of the Crown caused by the Events of 1849. It was the last election held under the Canningite Reform Act franchise, and the first held under the new, post-1849 party system. Most notably, the formation of the Moderate Party by Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel (see Tamworth Declaration) would influence British politics for decades to come…
Moderate: 425 (+425)
Tory: 106 (-141)
Radical: 24 (+13)
Irish seats: 103 (not filled until November)
***
From "The Men of Downing Street: The Lives of Britain's Prime Ministers"
(c) 1967 by Adrian Menzies
London: Macmillan Publishing
26. Sir Robert Peel, 2nd Bt. (1849-)
***
[1] See #14. Basically, Joseph Sellis, the valet to the Duke of Cumberland (as he then was) was stabbed to death while the Duke was on the continent, and while the official version was that Sellis had tried to stab the Duke and then committed suicide, it was widely believed that the Duke had in fact killed Sellis. The less scrupulous anti-royalist papers alleged various love triangles involving the Duke, Sellis and either man’s wife, or even a homosexual relationship between the two men. Knowing a good wedge issue when he saw one, Place inveigled himself onto Sellis’ inquest jury and embarrassed the coroners through aggressive questioning, although the inquest ended up ruling that his death was indeed suicide.
[2] This chapter of Mathews’ book is regarded as one of the most polemical, in favour of the Radical interpretation of events. The course of King Augustus’s reign is a largely settled issue in British academia by TTL’s present; interpretations of the Days of June and the Constitutional Convention are anything but.
[3] Together, they Fight Crime.
[4] Drayton Manor, outside Tamworth in Staffordshire, was the Peel family’s country house. It was bought by Sir Robert Peel, 1st Baronet (the famous Peel’s dad) sometime around 1790, and his son had it rebuilt in the neo-Elizabethan style then en vogue. It fell into disuse and was demolished in 1929, and its site is currently occupied by the Drayton Manor theme park (one of several in the region).
[5] Known as “Glorious November” officially and “Black November” in Radical circles, until the compromise name was introduced into the school curriculum in 1943.
[6] George was (Ernest) Augustus’ eldest son, and did in fact become King George V IOTL – George V of Hannover. Britain, of course, would not get another George until 1910.
“I do not feel myself at liberty, holding the opinions that I do, now to resort to what may have been, at other seasons, the necessary and legitimate tactics of party. When I see the government indisposed to maintain the rights of property, the authority of the law, and, in a qualified sense, the established order of things against rash innovation, I shall deem it my duty to range myself against it. Believing it would be a public misfortune in the present crisis of the country that the hands of the established order should be weak, it is my determination to strengthen them as much as possible.”
***
From “Great Britain 1830-1930: A Century of Upheaval”
(c) 1982 by Sophie Mathews
Oxford University Press
The Constitutional Convention was opened on the 3rd of November, electing veteran reform campaigner Francis Place as their Chairman; besides having lobbied for myriad causes in his nearly eighty years of life and co-written the People’s Charter, Place was also known for his role in the Sellis controversy, where he pushed to investigate the guilt of the future King Augustus. [1] The election was a calculated slight against the old order, and judging from the deposed King’s reaction when word reached the Hague, it succeeded…
***
Declaration of Principles
Passed by the Constitutional Convention of Great Britain and Ireland
Mr. FRANCIS PLACE, Chairman
27th of September 1849
WHEREAS King Augustus the First has abandoned his solemn Coronation Vows to govern the People of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland according to their Laws and Customs and to cause Law and Justice to be executed in his Judgments;
WHEREAS the hitherto established Government of Great Britain and Ireland has failed to heed the will of the Majority of Electors of the Country;
WHEREAS the King abandoned the Country on the tenth day of June of this Year and dissolved his former Ministry without appointing another;
WHEREAS the duly-elected House of Commons of Great Britain and Ireland appointed this Convention to secure for the People of Great Britain a new Constitution enumerating their Rights and securing a new System of Government;
BE IT RESOLVED
1. That the Convention recognises the End of absolute Royal Prerogative over the Governance of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and the Necessity of reforming said Governance on the Basis of constitutional Rights and Guarantees;
2. That all Persons born upon the Islands of Great Britain, Ireland or adjacent Islands under the Authority of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland shall be Citizens of the said United Kingdom;
3. That every Citizen enjoys inalienable Rights and Duties of Citizenship;
4. That these Rights include the Right to Free Speech and Freedom of the Press;
5. That these Rights include the Freedom to practice his chosen religious Confession, free from the Imposition of a State Church;
6. That these Rights include the Freedom to Assemble in any Number and for any peaceable Purpose;
7. That these Rights include the Right not to be deprived of Life, Liberty or Property except by due Process of Law, the Right to be secure against unreasonable Search and Seizure, the Right to a fair, speedy and public Trial by a Jury of his Peers, the Right not to be a Witness against Himself in a Criminal Case, the right not twice to be put in Jeopardy of Life or Limb, and the right to Habeas Corpus;
8. That the Enumeration of Rights in the previous Articles does not deny or disparage other ancient and traditional Rights retained by the People;
9. That the Governance of the United Kingdom must be based upon the Will of the People as expressed through free and fair Elections;
10. That the aforesaid Elections must be based on a general Franchise so construed as to include all Men with permanent common Interest with, and Attachment to, the Community;
11. That no Body not thus elected by the People of the United Kingdom may exercise Authority over the Composition of the Government or the Creation of Laws;
12. That Laws duly passed by a Parliament duly elected may not be suspended or abrogated by any Body of Government;
13. That any Part of the United Kingdom, coercively brought into it and showing sufficient Desire to separate therefrom, has the right to administrative Separation and the Resumption of native Government;
14. That the Convention may draft a Constitution encompassing these Principles and establishing a new Form of Government, which will enter into Force of Supreme Law immediately upon its Passage.
Enacted at Westminster, on the twenty-seventh Day of September, the Year of our Lord eighteen hundred and forty-nine.
***
From “Great Britain 1830-1930: A Century of Upheaval”
(c) 1982 by Sophie Mathews
Oxford University Press
The Fourteen Principles passed by the Convention represented the height of British radicalism at the time, and mark the end of the radical period in the Convention’s life. Whig interests, caught up in a general optimism until this point, began to push for compromise toward the end of the drafting process. The Radicals responded by inserting the fourteenth principle binding the Convention’s hands, and proposing the principles as a single resolution with a preamble declaring an official version of the course of events in June.
Francis Place, President of the Constitutional Convention
The resolution passed on the 27th of September, and the Whigs immediately switched tactics to working against the Radical interest and undermining the Fourteen Principles. Two principles in particular offended whiggish and rural sensibilities. [2]
Firstly, the fifth principle (freedom of religion) contained a reference to “the imposition of a State Church”. This was regarded as a disestablishmentarian clause by the pro-Church of England majority in the country at the time, and has commonly been represented as such in history books. However, the word “imposition” has a dual meaning here, and notes by Brougham and Bright [3] suggest that the intended meaning was to indicate that the Church must not act to impose upon the freedom of conscience, rather than the Church being an imposition upon the freedom of conscience in and of itself.
Secondly, the thirteenth principle was an affirmation of Ireland’s right to self-government, although Ireland was never specifically named in the wording of the resolution. The principle largely reflected the fact of massive Irish unrest and the Radical belief that repeal of the legal union was the only way to appease it. With the island divided between revolutionary groups in the countryside and the Dublin Castle-controlled yeomanry in the cities, it was clear that the principle was exactly that and no more for the time being. The de facto endorsement of the divisibility of the realm was nevertheless extremely offensive to Whigs and monarchists in the Convention, and for some, it was made worse by the fact that Ireland wasn’t specifically mentioned. If Scotland hypothetically showed “sufficient desire” to separate, the thirteenth principle implicitly recognised their right to do so. So too Wales, or Yorkshire, or Pimlico.
It has been argued that the inclusion of these principles constituted a tactical error, and that the remaining twelve principles could’ve formed the framework of a constitution with genuine staying power. This line of thinking ignores the very real division of interest between Whigs and Radicals, over the specifics of the Convention’s task as well as general principles. A Convention dominated by the whiggish interest would most likely not have adopted a declaration of universal rights. A Convention dominated by Radicals, as the early phase of it was, would never have produced a declaration of rights acceptable to the Whigs. The Fourteen Principles also include an implicit denial of the Lords’ right to legislate and the King’s right to choose the Prime Minister. These would likely be opposed by Whigs in any situation where the more excitable issues of Ireland and the Church weren’t around to grapple at.
***
From "Peel”
(c) 1979 by Alan Sharpe
London: Crandall & Sons
By the end of October, the Convention had ceased to function in all but name. Debate remained lively, and the public gallery set up at the north end of Westminster Hall remained well-attended. But very little was actually done. The Convention was no nearer a draft constitution than it had been a month earlier, and with no effective majority for either Whigs or Radicals, any proposal made by one side was certain to be voted down by the other. Ultimately, the Radicals were responsible for far more proposals than the Whigs, but they also coordinated them poorly, with several contradictory franchise and representation proposals being introduced and then voted down over the month of October.
Peel had been in Drayton [4] since June, but as was his habit, he read every report from London and kept up correspondence with several leading Whigs in the Convention and in Parliament. In particular, the ageing Lord Anglesey proved a reliable ally in the capital, as the two men shared an outlook that began as concern, and then once the Convention turned out to be ineffective, turned to disgust. The old general became a key new ally of Peel’s, but his old friends stood him by as well.
Palmerston had stood and been elected to the Convention from Hertfordshire, believing that he could steer the body in the direction of moderate reform. It wasn’t long before he too was disillusioned; in a letter to Peel dated the 9th of October, Palmerston declared that “the Radical’s wildest dream is to see the Whiggish cause championed by such men as those I deign to call my allies”. By November, he wanted out, and so did a number of his fellows.
It would be Palmerston who launched the sequence of events that have gone down in history as “Auspicious November”, [5] when just after noon on the 22nd of that month, he tabled a motion to recognise the rights of the established church. The eyes of the Convention now on him, he proceeded to recount the history of organised Christendom from the Milvian Bridge until the present day. Francis Place tried to cut him off, but Palmerston had never been one for brevity, although this address might’ve seemed exceptional to his fellow delegates.
That was, of course, because he was stalling for time. Around 3pm, a company of Horse Guards with Anglesey at its head appeared at the door. As Palmerston spoke the word “homoousion”, the door opened to reveal the one-legged figure of Lord Anglesey, riding a horse for the very last time in his life. The delegates broke into a panic, fearing that they were going to be dispersed by force, and some even shouted “Cromwell! Cromwell!” to invoke the fate of the Rump Parliament. But Anglesey did not move into the Hall itself, nor did any of his men. They stood firm in New Palace Yard, neither advancing nor retreating but simply announcing their presence. And Palmerston continued his summary of the Council of Chalcedon as if nothing had happened.
At the same time, soldiers moved in on the Treasury Building, where the Provisional Authority were meeting, and St. James’s Palace, where a meeting of the Accession Council was quickly called. The Lord Mayor, three members of the Provisional Authority (Lansdowne, Brougham and Grey), around fifteen Privy Counsellors and twenty-five peers were in attendance, as was Prince George, [6] who had been in Bagshot during the Days of June and stayed there ever since. He was now formally acclaimed as King George V.
Palmerston withdrew his motion when news reached Westminster. In its place, Sir James Graham, arch-Whig delegate from Cumberland, submitted a motion to recognise the accession. He was substantially briefer than Palmerston, and the vote was called within a few minutes – 241 ayes to 227 nos. The King was back.
***
From “Great Britain 1830-1930: A Century of Upheaval”
(c) 1982 by Sophie Mathews
Oxford University Press
The new King cut a strange figure. At the age of nine, he’d been afflicted with an illness that left him blinded in one eye. As such he had no military experience whatsoever, deeply unusual for a man of his standing at the time, but his father had made sure that he was raised in the manner befitting a future monarch – and with the appropriate morals. Made Prince of Wales on his father’s accession in 1837, George was known to be conservative, but moderate next to the arch-reactionary King. This made him a popular figure, although he almost never spoke of politics in public, for or against his father…
…George V’s first act as King was to appoint a Prime Minister, and his choice surprised no one: Sir Robert Peel. Peel is universally acknowledged as one of the masterminds behind Black November, and in the immediate aftermath of the “Little Restoration” he would secure a position as the most prominent figure in British politics. It was he who wrote the Royal Charter issued by the King on New Year’s Eve, amidst the general election campaign, affirming some fundamental rights and providing small reforms to the government apparatus. It was he who ensured the survival of the new regime through his historic hustings speech in Tamworth, laying the foundation of the Moderate Party…
***
From "The Cambridge Encyclopaedia of British Politics"
(c) 1947 by Prof. Henry Goodwin (ed.)
Cambridge University Press
1850 GENERAL ELECTION: General election held in January 1850 as a result of the demise of the Crown caused by the Events of 1849. It was the last election held under the Canningite Reform Act franchise, and the first held under the new, post-1849 party system. Most notably, the formation of the Moderate Party by Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel (see Tamworth Declaration) would influence British politics for decades to come…
Moderate: 425 (+425)
Tory: 106 (-141)
Radical: 24 (+13)
Irish seats: 103 (not filled until November)
***
From "The Men of Downing Street: The Lives of Britain's Prime Ministers"
(c) 1967 by Adrian Menzies
London: Macmillan Publishing
26. Sir Robert Peel, 2nd Bt. (1849-)
***
[1] See #14. Basically, Joseph Sellis, the valet to the Duke of Cumberland (as he then was) was stabbed to death while the Duke was on the continent, and while the official version was that Sellis had tried to stab the Duke and then committed suicide, it was widely believed that the Duke had in fact killed Sellis. The less scrupulous anti-royalist papers alleged various love triangles involving the Duke, Sellis and either man’s wife, or even a homosexual relationship between the two men. Knowing a good wedge issue when he saw one, Place inveigled himself onto Sellis’ inquest jury and embarrassed the coroners through aggressive questioning, although the inquest ended up ruling that his death was indeed suicide.
[2] This chapter of Mathews’ book is regarded as one of the most polemical, in favour of the Radical interpretation of events. The course of King Augustus’s reign is a largely settled issue in British academia by TTL’s present; interpretations of the Days of June and the Constitutional Convention are anything but.
[3] Together, they Fight Crime.
[4] Drayton Manor, outside Tamworth in Staffordshire, was the Peel family’s country house. It was bought by Sir Robert Peel, 1st Baronet (the famous Peel’s dad) sometime around 1790, and his son had it rebuilt in the neo-Elizabethan style then en vogue. It fell into disuse and was demolished in 1929, and its site is currently occupied by the Drayton Manor theme park (one of several in the region).
[5] Known as “Glorious November” officially and “Black November” in Radical circles, until the compromise name was introduced into the school curriculum in 1943.
[6] George was (Ernest) Augustus’ eldest son, and did in fact become King George V IOTL – George V of Hannover. Britain, of course, would not get another George until 1910.
Last edited:
He can't go into the chamber, because Charles I arresting five members and Cromwell's repeated dissolutions established the precedent that The Monarch Or The Military Do Not Enter The House Without Permission, as seen at the start of the Queen's Speech ritual where the Black Rod gets the door slammed in his face and has to knock three times before being allowed to enter. And the Convention meets at Westminster Hall, whose front door is also the front door of Westminster Palace as a whole, so he can't enter the Palace by any other route. So what does he do? He stands in front of the door looking in menacingly until the Convention dissolves itself of its own free will.
Deleted member 109224
Is there an update coming soon?
I'd love to see a map of the US, Mexico, and California.
I'd love to see a map of the US, Mexico, and California.