Why Did the Chartist Movement Fail - Essay Example

Name Task Tutor Date Why did the chartist movement fail? Introduction Chartism movement was a political and social reform movement in UK that took place between 1838 and 1850. Its name came from the people’s charter of 1838, The charter stipulates six main aims of the movement as a vote for every citizen of over 21 years of age with sound mind without undergoing anything like a punishment for crime; a demand for secret balloting for voting because it will protect the electorate in exercise of his vote; there should be no properties consideration for the Members of the Parliament, for this will make easier for the electorate to re-elect a contestant of their choice whether he is rich or poor; salaries to be paid to the members of parliament for this will enable a working man, a business person, or any other man to serve the people well when one is elected and taken away from his business to serve the interest of the country; equal representation by having the same number of representation for equal number of electors instead of having some small constituencies that will swamp the votes of large constituencies; and annual parliaments for it to present the most effective check of intimidation and bribery. This movement was committed to making the lives of those working become better and achieve political reforms1. It was a very influential and powerful reaction to the development of the entrepreneurial mid class and industrial revolution in England. Since the 6 points of the charter was dealing specifically on the voting and electoral reforms, Chartism movement encompasses broadly on social, cultural, and political goals. The main reasons that lead to the charisma failure include fundamental lack of focus. This movement was supported by a wide range of personalities that had a wide range of motives, fears, and hopes. For them to have had a common focus, it was supposed that all the members had the same issues and all of them should have held equal support for all the six main points of the people’s charter. But this was not the case with the charters, in many cases the members would support something only if they suite them, like a fork and a knife issue and this was one cause of the collapse in the Chartism movement. The members had different interest, some didn’t want stump duty; the anti Corn Law league needed the Corn Law to be repeal; ten hours work lobby group wanted the factory hours to be reduced; and free trade lobby group wanted the currency to be reformed. This lack of focus was the key to their failure since they never raise any support at any time hence the government didn’t have any concern because small groups uprising was easy to be dealt with. At some point the government realizes that the chartist movement was whimsical in support for the charter. So the government introduced the new poor law which was very oppressing and the government never told them about the law, this law served the rate payers and not the paupers and they refer poverty as a mistake of the poor. The government was capable of bringing in the new poor law quietly unnoticed by the people as they played up to the charter because the charter attracted the people’s attention and as a result of chartist fashion there was an abrupt increase in support of the charter2. These shows how unfocused the Chartism was and few people were solidly supporting the Chartism constantly and regarding this there was no way the lobby group could have an impact. The Chartism was a massively fragmented movement without any organization. The people wanted it for divergent reasons. Some wanted it for long term benefits for the future of their children while others wanted rapid change for those who were looking for immediate glory. A certain section of them supported it on the basis of political rights, this is a group that posed the greatest danger to the government for they were conversant with the possibilities of the movement and the opposite, and these are the members that saw the charter as a way in which politics can be dictated. The people used Chartism for their self interest and their own issues hence lack of focus prevail. Within the faction, they never had 100 percent cohesion, people in Manchester, Birmingham, and in general the northern cities were frequently concerned with the economic issues that affect their lives3. In London, people didn’t share this views strongly likewise in the northern part, there was a strong division concerning Chartism and its aims. The government of England handled the Chartism movement firmly and calmly by deciding to ban the planned procession with the petition to be taken to the House of Commons. The chartist leader at that time O’Connor accepted the ban. This became contrary because many of those who was against him was keen to watch after the demonstration what will happen since he was a frightened blusterer and because he was aware that confrontation with the soldiers might lead to the killing or wounding of the people. Successfully the petition was conveyed from the kennington common into the House of Commons by the 3 cabs with the chartist leaders walking alongside. No part of the petition survived even though a section of the earlier petitions survived. Two days after the presentation of the petition, O’Connor was given the information that the right number of the genuine signatures they presented was much less than the 6 million the chartist claimed. Within seventeen hours, thirteen clerks that was assigned to count the signatures was found to have counted 1.9 million signatures and this made O’Connor to express skepticism that such a work could not be completed within such a short time by a small number of clerks. The mass imprisonment of the members by the government, transportation, and victorious confrontation with the demonstrators during the 3 phases of the movement contributed extensively to the destruction of the Chartism4. These aggressions by the government lead to the failure of Chartism. At some point the chartist was split into two groups’ one group advocating for the violence in order to achieve their goals while the other group advocate for peaceful methods. As a result of these disagreement between the moral force and the physical force groups disadvantaged the Chartism movement from the start. The physical force pleads to the workers from the north where there was anger as a result of poor working conditions and broad social oppression was so high. This situation was enflamed by O’Connor fiery speeches and encourages the people to take act directly against those oppressing them. When the women join Chartism it makes it look ridiculous. The women start running several chartist associations. Other associations admitted men and women to work for them. They also attended mass meetings and during the rallies they were allowed to march in the streets; others was trained to become female chartist lecturers. They also play a crucial role in economy boycotts of businesses whose owners were against Chartism and in educating and socializing children on the Chartism principles. Chartism also fails as a result of the land plan. In 1845 O’Conner starts getting an interest in the issue of land and he launched a Chartism land plan. His idea was that the government can support the citizens to move away from their factory towns to go and start their independent live at a cottage with an allotment. This idea got a huge appeal and in 1848 around six hundred branches of the land company were started5. Company’s members were supposed to pay a small subscription fee weekly and in return they drew a lot of cottages. When £100,000 was collected, more than five estates were bought. The first estate to be bought was Herons gate at Watford. This land scheme touch peoples deep feelings about the land attachment and significantly bolstered the movement although only two hundred and fifty workers were settled for three years in the estate before the company collapsed. Many workers believe that having bought the shares they have bought the land and later on the company found it very difficult to get the rents from them to pay off the mortgages. Shortly, the project ran into legal problems because O’Connor was rushed through the project in the House of Commons and he later decided to save the company by paying over £3,000 of his money to it6. And it later emerged that many of the workers could not cope up with the situation and they decided to move back into the town while others were moved to the workhouse and in the late 1851, it was dissolved. The plan also failed because of O’Connor erratic behavior, a lot of enthusiasm then followed by prolonged periods of inactivity. O’Connor was also not attentive in detail because he was a lawyer. He was unstable and very emotional and later he started developing a persecution complex. At that crucial time, he started suffering from general paralysis of insane since he was in the last stages of syphilis that he was suffering from. O’Connor instability started being noticed when he was the Member of Parliament for Nottingham, during the debate about the charter in 1849 his behavior was odd. He was more marked after the movement failed in 1849 and finally he was committed to Dr Tuke lunatic asylum in 18537. The economy and social status of the country also contributed in the Chartism failure. The economy condition of England in 1838 played a role in giving rise to the movement. Then England economic rise from 1840 made it hard for the Chartism movement to sustain a popular campaign like before. This economic rise from 1840 to 1848 created employment and improves workers working conditions and peoples moral helps England enjoy economic prosperity thus the Chartism movement could not sustain it. Also the development of railway improves the economy hence hitting the chartist. The development of railways helps in stimulating the growth of industries like the core, iron, and steel8. These new emerging industries support wider economic growth more than the old traditional industries like textile industries. As the workers migrate into the new industrial age, they move to new societies that could keep their interest and new working class organizations promoted self respect and individual interest. The government of Victoria England saw Chartism as a treat to its stability. The government perceived Chartism as a potential for upheaval and toppling of social institutions in the country. The violent havoc of the French revolution was still fresh in the minds of many people in the government9. Apart from the government being swayed by the sensibilities of the movement burden, the authorities reacted violently in fear of the possibility of violent overthrow of the society and their positions. This made Chartism failed to gather the support in parliament because of that considered treat to those in the authority, hence the government became hard towards them. The Chartism demands was too radical for many workers who were comfortable with the status quo being maintained. Even though the movement failed to achieve its goals, a point was made that Chartism itself was not a failure, but it was a powerful force that resulted in the increase of awareness of social issues and formed a frame work for future workers organizations. References. Adams, W,E, Memoirs of a Social Atom (new York: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers, 1968). Wood, Anthony, Nineteenth century Britain, 1815-1914 (New Delhi: Longman, 1982). Ashton, Rosemary, Little Germany: Exile and Asylum in Victorian England (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986). Black, Frank Gees & Black, Renee Metivier eds, The Harney Papers (Assen, Van Gorcum, 1969). Burdett, John, ed., Annals of Labour: Autobiographies of British Working-Class People 1820-1920 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1974). Boston, Ray, British Chartists in America (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1971). Briggs, Asa, ed., Chartist Studies (London: Macmillan, 1967). Frederick C Mather, Chartism, (California: Historical Association, 1972).  Carlyle, Thomas, Past and Present (New York: New York University Press, 1977). Engels, Frederick, the Condition of the Working Class in England, (London: Grafton Books, 1969). Federation of Australian University Staff Associations, Vestes, Volume 12, (California: Federation of Australian University Staff Associations, 1969). Frederick, Mather, Chartism, (California: Historical Association, 1972). Gillespie, Frances Elma, Labor and Politics in England 1850-1867, (New York: Octagon Books, 1996). Gammage, R, G, History of the Chartist Movement 1837- 1854, (New York: Augustus M. Kelley, Publishers, 1969).  Harney, Julian, the Red Republican and the Friend of the People, June 1850-July 1851, (New York: Barnes and Noble Inc., 1966). Hadfield, & Alice Mary, the Chartist Land Company (Devon: David and Charles, 1970). Margaret, Hambrick, a Chartist's Library (London: Mansell Publishing Ltd., 1986). Jupp, James, The Australian people: an encyclopedia of the nation, its people and their origins (London: Cambridge University Press, 2001). Lowe, Norman, mastering modern British history (London: Macmillan, 19960). Weisser, Henry, April 10, Challenge and Response in England in 1848 (Lanham, Md: University Press of America, 1983). Webb, R.K, the British Working Class Reader 1790- 1848 (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1955). Read More