Short Essay on the Parliamentary Reforms in England

The history of the Parliament Reforms in England is quite long and it is an outcome of the incessant efforts and struggle of the people.

According to the glorious revolution of 1688 the principle of supremacy of Parliament was established and it was made clear that the sovereignty of the state should lie in the Parliament in place of the king.

But this revolution did not decide as to how the Parliament would execute its sovereignty. Owing to this uncertainty by 1815 the British Parliament, the Ministry and the prime minister failed to get recognition by law. Theoretically the role of the king was formal but practically he enjoyed great powers.

There were two houses in the Parliament the Upper House or House of Lords and the Lower House or the House of Commons.

The people of royal families sat in the upper house and the lower house was meant for the general public but on account of faulty representation and limited franchise the people belonging to the noble and high classes had full control over the lower house.

Thus as a result of Glorious Revolution no reform could be possible in the parliamentary system of England and the public had to struggle for it incessantly.

Before 1815 the structure of the British government was democratic but its soul was autocratic. This government was that of the rich and it took about a century to mould it on democratic lines.

Chief Defects of the Parliamentary System

The parliamentary system of England had two main defects:

(i) Defect pertaining to representation.

(ii) Defect pertaining to franchise.

Other Defects of the Parliamentary System

In Great Britain the system of representation in the Parliament had been continuing without change since the period of the Tudor kings. The following defects were in fact the causes of the Reform Movement in England:

1. The House of Commons was not a democratic body by 1832. The king and the landlords had sway over it.

It did not represent the people at all. Pitt the Younger remarked about it: “The House of Commons is not the true representative of the people of Great Britain; it is the representative of nominal Boroughs, of ruined and terminated towns, of noble families, of wealthy individuals and of foreign potentates.”

In the Black Book of 1821, there is reference to the House of Commons thus:

“The House of Commons is unconstitutional, glaringly absurd and ridiculous and is founded on no principle of population, intelligence or property.”

2. The principles on which the House of Commons was established were not clear.

3. Manchester and Birmingham, the two important towns, had no representation in the Parliament.

4. Representation system was not equal. Big towns were not permitted to send more representatives.

5. The representation from boroughs was higher than from counties. There were 658 members in the House of Commons, out of which 513 were the representatives of England and Wales, 100 from Ireland and 45 from Scotland. 319 members of boroughs had established their influence in the Parliament. They were divided into three categories: 1. Independent Borough, 2. Pocket Borough, 3. Rotten Borough.

6. Boroughs were regarded as the private property which could be sold or purchased.

7. The franchise system in England was very defective. Only wealthy people had the right to vote, so the number of the voters was very low in comparison to population in the boroughs.

8. The franchise was equal in the counties. Every freeholder in the county who paid 40 shillings as annual revenue had the right to vote.

9. The right of voting was reserved for the nobles only in Scotland and Ireland.

10. System of secret ballot was not in vogue. It troubled the people at the time of casting their vote.

11. The ordinary people did not like to contest the election as no salary was paid to the members of the Parliament.