In the years between 1760 and 1770 the British nation and empire underwent a profound change in structure and function. Some of the change was made necessary by the survival of old institutions and of old forms of still vital institutions beyond the point of obsolescence, while some came as a result of contemporary disruption in the life of the nation. Obsolescence was particularily apparent in the administrative structure of the Empire, the so-called mercantilist system. The beliefs of mercantilism were largely inherited from the ecclesiastical society of the Middle Ages. Thus, while individualism and nationalism triumphed over Church in the sixteenth century, the idea of regulation, now adopted by the national state, continued to suppress economic individualism for two centuries longer. Imperial self-sufficiency was the ideal of the mercantilist theorists, and in an attempt to achieve this end, direct control by the mother country of the political and economic activities of all parts of the Empire was instituted. As the Empire expanded, however, it became increasingly more difficult to maintain this control. Special local complications, particularily in the cases of Ireland and India, aggravated the problem. Finally, the challenge of political and economic independence in America was successful in fringing to an end the old imperial system. In the mother country public life was dominated by the Revolution Settlement of 1688, and needed reforms were neglected. Parliament was unrepresentative of the majority of the nation and local government and local interests were far too powerful in relation to national government and national interests. In politics, party differences had been dissolved in 1688 as a result of the nation’s need for tranquility, political life became a struggle, not for principles, but for patronage and place, between factions of the now-predominant Whig Party. The corruption in politics at this juncture was without precedent in English history. In addition to these factors of obsolescence and decay, there were a number of disruptive influences which prevented the tranquil reform and change of institutions. A determined monarch was successful for a time in subverting the new institution of responsible government through cabinet. Out of the confusion thus caused, the political parties of the nineteenth century were simultaneously being developed. New classes were arising to seize political power, as a result of the economic revolution of the eighteenth century. In addition, the exhaustion of the nation, resulting from the Seven Years' War, aggravated the disruption. The economic organization of the nation was also in a state of dynamic change. In agriculture, the expansion of markets and the increase of population forced the adoption of new techniques and a new economic structure for farming on a large scale. This expansion, in turn, made necessary new marketing and price systems and an improved communication system. The chief economic phenomenon of the era, however, was the industrial revolution. The old domestic system of industry had been disintegrating since the beginning of the century, and, in any case, expanded markets demanded a larger scale of production than the old system could achieve. By 1770, the two principal phenomena of industrialism, capitalism and the factory system were widespread in the nation. Power machinery was applied to industry, and with this application the location of industry was shifted northwards. Moreover, a new individualist economic philosophy was developing, which rejected not only control by the state, but also the responsibility of the individual to the community as a whole. The new influence was reflected in such various aspects of the life of the times as taxation policy, parliamentary reform, the law, trade unionism, the factory system and the poor law. .Its most alarming result was the profound social schism created in the nation. In her empire, in her public life and in her economy, Britain was at a crossroads in the first decade of the reign of George III. If the transition was to be successful she needed peace, prosperity and order. The decade, however, was one of struggle, depression and disruption. The result was a retreat in British public life. / Arts, Faculty of / History, Department of / Graduate

This paper is an attempt to research a hypothesis concerning the policy formation processes of an open and of a closed political system. The paper opens with a discussion of the theoretical roots of the project. Particular attention has been paid to J.N. Rosenau's pre-theory of comparative foreign policy, and works by authors such as R.B. Farrell, Raymond Aron, and Alexis de Tocqueville on the differences between open and closed political systems. The hypothesis we tested was derived from the writings of R.B. Farrell. It reads: In a closed polity bureaucrats are less likely to provide information contradicting the leadership's known positions than in an open polity. In the second chapter the method of study, the case study, is introduced and discussed. Great Britain and Germany just prior to the First World War were chosen as examples of an open and a closed system. Their suitability as cases for this research project is critically analysed. Data on size, wealth, and political accountability are presented. In the third chapter four leaders are identified and their policy preferences outlined. The four are Edward Grey in Great Britain, Emperor William II, Chancellor von Bethmann- Hollweg, and Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs von Jagow in Germany. The fourth chapter discusses the kinds of messages which were being sent to these various leaders. We expected that in the case of Germany the content of these messages would be less contradictory of the positions of the above-mentioned German leaders than in the case of Britain and Sir Edward Grey. The conclusion of the study is that in the particular eases of pre-War Britain and Germany the hypothesis is not supported. In the final chapter explanations of why this might be so are suggested, two new hypotheses are formulated, and the findings are related briefly to the theory from which the paper originated. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

A number of books deal with the subject of the "Pall Mall Gazette", but none attempts to study in a scholarly way the journalistic, commercial and political evolution of this evening newspaper and review. Neither does the paper receive consideration In most of the official biographies and more common political works that deal with its age, even though the "P.M.G." often exerted an influence second only to that of "The Times". In addition, the "P.M.G." during its first twenty-four years provided a notable and continuous experiment in journalism. This study examines the "Pall Mall" through its first three editorships that extended from 1865 to 1889. Chapter I examines the journal under Frederick Greenwood, editor from the journal's founding until 1880. During this time the paper assumed a consciously impartial character which later gradually changed to a conservative coloration, though Greenwood never became a strict party man. Chapters II and III study the journal in the Radical garb it assumed during the editorship of John Morley, between 1880 and 1883. Chapters IV to VII are devoted to the Liberal-Radical "New Journalism" of William Thomas Stead, and Chapter VIII concludes. With the exception of Greenwood's editorship, for which material has been compiled from numerous memoirs and secondary works, the study draws its materials mainly from the daily record of the newspaper itself. Particular care has been taken to identify both permanent staff as well as contributors during the successive editorships and to relate them to the character of the paper. This activity has met with a good degree of success despite the fact that the paper's official files are lacking. The relation of the journal to other newspapers as well as to party thought are points that receive special attention, especially for the later editorships. The main emphasis remains on politics, but a general attempt is made in addition to relate the entire character of the journal to such a focus. Thus the ever-present literary ingredient is examined at some length. Finally, where monographic studies exist of given "crusades" undertaken during Stead's famous editorship, little attempt is made to retrace well-trodden ground. The present study makes a number of points about the various editorships of the paper. The pioneering work of Greenwood to establish the journalistic vehicle upon which Stead in turn built his "New Journalism," as well as the former's work to establish a strong tradition of independent journalism, are points that receive special emphasis. The study also stresses the "watershed" effect of Morley's short innings. His prestige and recruitment of staff aided the paper's recovery following its change of political banner, and girded it with inherent strengths upon which Stead both drew and built. Under Morley the "P.M.G." became recognized as the ablest supporter of Liberalism among the press. It also directly abetted the rise of the Radical leader, Joseph Chamberlain. The most impressive editorship remained that of Stead's, during which the paper succeeded in its efforts to revive the power of the press and attempted to establish its editor's aspiration of "Government by Journalism." In this way, the paper both preceded as well as guided investigation and legislation on many occasions to right outstanding social abuses. Concurrently, Stead's "Pall Mall" served as a means of educating the upper classes in many of the philosophies and movements that characterized the 'eighties, and that included Socialism in its various manifestations, the women's movement and the work of manifold secular arid religious organizations. The paper also attempted to exert a seminal influence upon Liberal thought, particularly in relation to imperialism and internationalism, and to a lesser extent, the question of Ireland. The "P.M.G." actively promoted programs in these fields in a number of instances. At all times the paper served as both bell-weather and friendly centre to the Liberal party. It was made all the more effective since it was the only newspaper of Liberal sentiment in the Metropolis that led active crusades. Its spirit directly reflected the moral ideals of its mentor, and was conspicuously broad, liberal and humanitarian. While Stead's "P.M.G." lasted, it was a remarkable example of much that was vital and admirable in late-Victorian Liberalism. Despite such a colorful and influential history, the "P.M.G." remained for the period of this study an uneconomic undertaking. This factor provided the motivation from which derived the paper's multitude of distinctive advances in journalistic technique. / Arts, Faculty of / History, Department of / Graduate

During the eighteenth century England underwent vast changes in her methods of production. As a consequence the factory posed a new experience for the workers. Although conditions and hours of work were better in textile factories than in most contemporary occupations, worker discontent was great because of the stricter regimen which the factory imposed. Conditions for children, generally the same as for the adults were no worse than they had always been. Although none of the early factory legislation was enforced, the Factory Act of 1833 and those that fol1owed are differentiated from previous efforts by their organized support, among which was that given by a group of Tory evangelicals. The evangelicals intended to limit hours to ten for all factory workers by restricting to that limit hours for persons up to eighteen years. The work of children and adults was so interrelated as to require them to work together. Legislation was introduced into commons in 1832 by Michael Sadler and in 1833 by Lord Ashley. Sadler's bill never got out of committee but the committee’s report served as a valuable source of propaganda. Ashley's bill was sent to a royal commission controlled by Benthamites who so altered the bill’s form as to cause Ashley to give it up. Acceptable to parliament in its new form, the bill clearly differentiated between child labor, which hours it limited to eight, and adult labor, which was left to protect itself. The Benthamite bill also required the manufacturers to provide education for their children; and inspectors were to attempt enforcement of regulations. Although parliamentary reform and an election had occurred in 1832, this revolution had no effect on the 1833 bill's passage. Factory legislation was the product of public demand and organized support rather than political upheaval. Furthermore, this was not a contest between Tories and Whigs, Establishment and evangelicals, or middle class and aristocracy. The simple motivation behind the bill was Christian humanitarianism. The debate arguments, themselves, fell into several categories and were repeated in volume and embellishment according to assumed value. The proponents of legislation emphasized the deleterious effect of the long hours; the inequities of the existing employment problem; and “the system” of competition and machinery which produced such conditions. The opponents threatened that family income would necessarily be reduced; that there would be massive unemployment due to collapse of the industry; and that such legislation would be contrary to natural laws of economics demanding free enterprise. Of course each side offered rebuttal to the other; conditions were really quite good; mortality rates were lower in the cities than elsewhere; the natural laws of economy would have to suffer rather than the children; there was no foreign competition, only British; and so forth. The Benthamite Factory Act was a disappointment to Ashley and his colleagues. They had failed in their effort to achieve a ten hour work-day. The effect was to spur them on to greater efforts. Ashley spent a successful lifetime in developing reform legislation. As with earlier legislation, this Act was poorly enforced: manufacturers and parents conspired to keep children at the mills; the education provisions were evaded or poorly employed. Of great value for the future, however, were the reports compiled by the parliamentary committee, the royal commission and the factory inspectors. These reports aided the reform effort later in the century.

By examining the attack waged against the royal prerogative during the Exclusion Crisis of 1678-1681, this thesis asserts that the crisis was primarily constitutional in nature, rather than religious. This Parliamentary attempt to remove the Catholic heir presumptive from the succession endangered the monarchy by creating a Parliamentary title to the throne. Insofar as the exclusionists challenged the king's right to retain ministers at will, to grant pardons, and to determine the calling and dissolution of Parliamentary sessions, the crisis also constituted a direct assault upon the prerogatives of the present king. The implementation of Parliament's proposal to guarantee a Protestant succession by arrogating to a Protestant Association many rights of the monarch would have tipped permanently the scales of power in favor of Parliament. The Exclusion Crisis can thus be viewed as an important, albeit abortive, attempt to better define the unresolved roles of the king and Parliament in the governing of England.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.