WI: The Liberals manage to pass the 1867 Reform Bill

Thomas1195

Banned
IOTL, Lord John Russell failed to pass the 1867 Reform Bill due to opposition from both the Tories and the the "Adullamite" Whigs led by Robert Lowe, and then resigned. Disraeli then became PM and flanked the Liberals by introduced a more radical Bill of his own.

But, what if Russell was able to command his party better (like Gladstone was later IOTL) and managed to get his Bill passed?

What would be the political impact of Liberals passing 1867 Reform Bill?

One immediate consequence would be Russell continuing to be PM at least until the next election in 1871.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Act_1867#Reduced_representation
Liberal original bill: proposed to enfranchise "respectable" working men, excluding unskilled workers and what was known as the "residuum", those seen by MPs as the "feckless and criminal" poor. This was ensured by a £7 householder qualification, which had been calculated to require an income of 26 shillings a week. This entailed two "fancy franchises," emulating measures of 1854, a £10 lodger qualification for the boroughs, and a £50 savings qualification in the counties. Liberals claimed that 'the middle classes, strengthened by the best of the artisans, would still have the preponderance of power'. (No info about seat distribution under this proposal).

Under Disraeli: The bill enfranchised most men who lived in urban areas. The final proposals were as follows: a borough franchise for all who paid rates in person (that is, not compounders), and extra votes for graduates, professionals and those with over £50 savings. These last "fancy franchises" were seen by Conservatives as a weapon against a mass electorate. Overall, before the bill, only one million of the seven million adult males in England and Wales could vote, and the bill immediately doubled that number. Moreover, by the end of 1868 all male heads of household were enfranchised as a result of the end of compounding of rents.

Basically Disraeli accepted all amendments from Liberal opposition, making his bill more radical than Russell's original one.

Long-term impact: The redistribution of seats actually served to make the House of Commons increasingly dominated by the upper classes. Only they could afford to pay the huge campaigning costs and the abolition of certain rotten boroughs removed some of the middle-class international merchants who had been able to obtain seats. Personally, I believe that this kind of impact directly benefit the Tories.
 
IOTL, Lord John Russell failed to pass the 1867 Reform Bill due to opposition from both the Tories and the the "Adullamite" Whigs led by Robert Lowe, and then resigned. Disraeli then became PM and flanked the Liberals by introduced a more radical Bill of his own.

But, what if Russell was able to command his party better (like Gladstone was later IOTL) and managed to get his Bill passed?

What would be the political impact of Liberals passing 1867 Reform Bill?

One immediate consequence would be Russell continuing to be PM at least until the next election in 1871.
IOTL, Lord John Russell failed to pass the 1867 Reform Bill due to opposition from both the Tories and the the "Adullamite" Whigs led by Robert Lowe, and then resigned. Disraeli then became PM and flanked the Liberals by introduced a more radical Bill of his own.

But, what if Russell was able to command his party better (like Gladstone was later IOTL) and managed to get his Bill passed?

What would be the political impact of Liberals passing 1867 Reform Bill?

One immediate consequence would be Russell continuing to be PM at least until the next election in 1871.

In this ATL, Russell, not Dizzy getting the
Reform Bill through would greatly increase
the Liberals' popularity. I would thus see
Russell being re-elected in 1871 & the
Liberals staying in the saddle for @ least
another 5 years. The Tories would not in
the least like being stuck in the wilderness
for so long. In such situations, someone's
head's gotta roll, & in ITTL it would be Dis-
ralei's. His ouster as Conservative party
leader would mean the end of his career &
of course butterfly away his premiership.
 
Last edited:

Thomas1195

Banned
In this ATL, Russell, not Dizzy getting the
Reform Bill through would greatly increase
the Liberals' popularity. I would thus see
Russell being re-elected in 1871 & the
Liberals staying in the saddle for @ least
another 5 years. The Torres would not in
the least like being stuck in the wilderness
for so long. In such situations, someone's
head's gotta roll, & in ITTL it would be Dis-
rarli's. His ouster as Conservative party
leader would mean the end of his career &
of course butterfly away his premiership.
How would a Russell ministry ITTL potentialy differ from the OTL First Gladstone Ministry? Russell was also open to social reforms as well. Actually he was very reforming by Whig/Peelite standard.
 
How would a Russell ministry ITTL potentialy differ from the OTL First Gladstone Ministry? Russell was also open to social reforms as well. Actually he was very reforming by Whig/Peelite standard.


Good points Thomas1195. I was just thinking about what this would have done
to Disraeli's subsequent career, not what
policies would have been carried out ITTL.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
I was just thinking about what this would have done
to Disraeli's subsequent career, not what
policies would have been carried out ITTL.
If he vanished with obscurity, One-nation Tory could be butterflied away, and if so, the Tories is doomed.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Any other ideas? Could this Russell ministry achieve as much as the first Gladstone ministry in domestic reforms?

How would Russell react to Franco-Prussian War?
 
Any other ideas? Could this Russell ministry achieve as much as the first Gladstone ministry in domestic reforms?

How would Russell react to Franco-Prussian War?

My bet, re the Franco-Prussian War, is that Russell would have done the same ITTL as Britain did IOTL:
stay out of it as long as BOTH sides leave Belgium alone.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
My bet, re the Franco-Prussian War, is that Russell would have done the same ITTL as Britain did IOTL:
stay out of it as long as BOTH sides leave Belgium alone.
Agree. Also, would he successfully buy the Suez Canal like Disraeli did IOTL?

Good points Thomas1195. I was just thinking about what this would have done
to Disraeli's subsequent career, not what
policies would have been carried out ITTL.
Well, he could vanish and become a footnote in history. If so, the Tories is doomed.
 
Top