bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
The Fabric of Interest in the County: The Buckinghamshire Election of 1784
Authors: von den Steinen Karl 
Published: November 2007

A careful examination of the conduct of the Verney and Temple interests in the Buckinghamshire election of 1784 reveals that interest, not party, was the major determinant of political conduct in the eighteenth century English county constituency. The freeholder voted in deference to his head of interest, and he did so through an agent's performance of an unwritten but clearly understood code of electioneering conduct. By contrast, the more tangible relationship between tenant and landlord explains little about how individuals voted in the county.The importance of parliamentary politics in the 1784 election cannot be denied. The attempt of William Pitt the Younger to wrest the majority in the House of Commons from the Fox-North coalition occasioned this election three years earlier than a general election would normally have occurred. Yet to assume that party determined the course of the election far exceeds the evidence available at the level of the county constituency. The political awareness and rising interest in issues, described by J. H. Plumb and others, certainly existed in this election. But this tells us very little about the acquistion and exercise of political power, which Plumb rightly identifies as the essence of politics, though a great deal may thus be learned about literacy, public opinion, interests, tastes, and electoral tactics.Three aspects of the problem of party have dominated the studies of the period: the emergence of the modern political party in the sense of a group of electors consistently joined together because of a common devotion to a particular political philosophy; the emergence of the modern political party in the sense of a group of electors consistently joined together because of common attitudes toward government policies; and, the emergence of the modern political party in the sense of a group of electors consistently joined together in a structure suited to the winning of an opportunity to translate its desires and beliefs into government policies through success in elections. The 1784 Buckinghamshire election refutes the importance of party in any of these senses in the county constituency.
The Mid-Nineteenth Century Electoral Structure
Authors: Davis Richard W. 
Published: November 2007

It is far too early to talk with any real certainty about the mid-nineteenth century electoral structure. The very materials of which it was built are in dispute, let alone the shape of the edifice. A deference school of historians is challenging traditional notions of the growth of political individualism in the period, while so-called quantitative historians are beginning to question the assumptions and approach of both deference historians and traditionalists. Serious and detailed study of the questions involved has hardly begun. Still, some comment on the present state of the controversy may not be entirely out of place. An enduring interpretation can only be constructed of sound materials; and I am by no means certain of the soundness of some of those now being put forward for our use.W. O. Aydelotte, in a paper read a couple of years ago and soon to be published in a series of essays entitled The History of Parliamentary Behavior, notes the divergence of opinion among historians on the role of the electorate in shaping parliamentary opinion after 1832. As he rightly suggests, Norman Gash in his Politics in the Age of Peel appears to be of two minds on the subject, depending on whether one reads his introduction or his text. In the former Professor Gash stresses the increase of popular influence on Parliament, in the latter the continuance of traditional influences over the mass of the electorate. D. C. Moore comes down heavily on the side of the latter influences, contending that a relatively few leaders of what he has called “deference communities” represented effective electoral opinion, which was simply registered by the mass of the electorate.
A Matter of Policy: the Lessons of Recent British Race Relations Legislation
Authors: Carson John 
Published: November 2007

The sequence of events behind the drafting and implementation of British anti-discrimination legislation during the decade of the 1960s is illustrative of the dangers faced by a well-intentioned government seeking to protect minorities by statutory means. Longrange policy planning is difficult to achieve in most sectors of legislative activity, but the protection of basic liberties must be one sector where carefully considered legislation is both essential and attainable. The Labour Government of 1964 to 1970 was intent on protecting the rapidly growing immigrant communities from discrimination—a discrimination based on prejudice against the national and ethnic origins of the immigrants. The “wave” of immigrants of the nineteen fifties was singularly noticeable because of skin-colour: the places of origin of the immigrants being the islands of the West Indies, India, Pakistan, and, to a lesser extent, the former British colonies in West Africa.Prior to 1971, British immigration legislation was founded on the principles of nationality set forth in the British Nationality Act, 1948. This Act recognised British nationals and British “subjects” or “Commonwealth citizens.” Anyone not fitting into either category (i.e. national or subject) was an alien and the entry of aliens to Britain was controlled by quite separate legislation. British subjects enjoyed (until 1962) all the privileges of British nationality, and herein lay the cause of the “wave” of immigration from the comparatively economically depressed parts of the Commonwealth.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and W. T. Stead: The Novelist and the Journalist
Authors: Baylen Joseph O. 
Published: November 2007

Arthur Conan Doyle was among the Late Victorian literary figures whose early work was recognized by the renowned sensational journalist, W. T. Stead. As editor of the influential Pall Mall Gazette (1883-1890), Stead appreciated Conan Doyle's literary merit and published his short novel, The Mystery of Cloomber, as a serial in the Gazette during September, 1888. They were in many ways quite similar; both were “impatient with … slow and seemingly unprogressive methods” and often appeared to act as if “Nothing short of a cataclysm” would satisfy them. Yet, Conan Doyle and Stead differed on many issues, especially on the Boer War and, during the decades 1890-1910, on spiritualism. Nevertheless their relationship, although never close, was marked by mutual respect for the courage and sincerity which distinguished their lives.In October, 1890, Conan Doyle, fatigued by the effort of completing and arranging for the publication of his novel, The White Company, became interested in Dr. Robert Koch's well publicized remedy for consumption and decided to journey to Berlin to study Koch's cure. On the way to Berlin, Conan Doyle visited Stead in London to obtain letters of introduction to the press. Stead, who had left the Pall Mall Gazette in January, 1890, to establish the highly successful Review of Reviews, not only complied with Conan Doyle's request, but asked the young physician to write an article on Koch and his research on tuberculosis for the Review of Reviews.
The Rising at Nottingham
Authors: Hosford David H. 
Published: November 2007

Despite the considerable amount of attention devoted to the Revolution of 1688 by serious scholar, constitutional panegyrist, and antiquary alike, no completely satisfactory account of the overthrow of James II has been put forward. Recent research has led to additional insights and a better understanding of the complexity of the event; it has also partially discredited the traditional Whig thesis. However, there is as yet no generally accepted new interpretation of the Revolution, and many questions remain concerning the causes, course, and consequences of this phenomenon. Analysis of the rising at Nottingham provides a valuable fresh perspective on the English contribution to what, a generation ago, was essentially regarded as England's Revolution. It also provides a useful opportunity for defining the crucial role played by the nobility, while at the same time demonstrating the importance of an event neglected by most historians.At the outset it should be recognized that the Revolution in the North, and more specifically the rising at Nottingham, were not by-products of special circumstances pertaining to the region. Careful investigation of the situation in the counties of Derby and Nottingham reveals little that is exceptional in terms of the patterns which existed in the country as a whole. It is true that the earl of Danby and others of the seven signatories of the invitation stressed the general disaffection in the North as a significant factor in favor of the prince's launching his invasion there, and certainly the rising at Nottingham and its counterpart at York would never have occurred had the environment been totally hostile to the Williamite cause. But while the impact of James II's policies varied somewhat according to local factors, county or regional boundaries were largely meaningless in this context.
Beaverbrook As Historian: “Politicians and the War, 1914-1916” Reconsidered
Authors: Stubbs John O. 
Published: November 2007

For students interested in the political history of Britain during the early years of the Great War, Lord Beaverbrook's Politicians and the War, 1914-1916 is now essential reading. This, however, has not always been the case. The historiographical fortunes of this important study, Beaverbrook's modus operandi, and his preoccupations as a historian are the main concerns of this paper. Examination of these issues, combined with a reassessment of of certain key themes and incidents in Politicians and the War allow for a reevaluation not only of the book as a major source for the period but also of that wonderful and partisan fusion of politics and history who was Max Aitken, the first and only Lord Beaverbrook.Beaverbrook, as A.J.P. Taylor's vast biography makes clear, was a man of many parts. Politics colored almost everything he did. His politics were those of the Unionist (later the Conservative) Party and, as a Canadian colonial who had come to Britain to augment further his considerable fortune, he identified strongly with the Tariff Reform wing of the party in the years before the First World War. He was Unionist MP for Ashton-under-Lyne from 1910 to 1916. Within the Unionist Party his closest friend was Andrew Bonar Law, another Canadian born politician, who in 1911 became Leader of the party and was thus a central figure in the tumultuous events examined in Politicians and the War. Aitken also had a wide circle of friends and acquaintances in the Liberal Party. They, too, provided him with another perspective on the politics of the wartime period; one of them, David Lloyd George, in one of his earliest acts as Prime Minister in December 1916, elevated Aitken to the House of Lords where he took the title of Lord Beaverbrook.
In Pursuit of Aristocratic Women: A Key to Success in Norman England
Authors: DeAragon RaGena C. 
Published: November 2007

Marriage has been a means of climbing the social ladder in most societies, and post-conquest England was no exception. The Conquest had provided a sweeping opportunity for men of all strata of the feudal hierarchy to gain lands and wealth in England, but high social status and prestige remained the prerogative of magnate families who had constituted the aristocracy of Normandy and northern France before 1066. Most of these families had themselves risen only recently to wealth and power through ducal patronage, but by 1066 they were firmly entrenched in their Norman estates and in the duke's inner circle of advisors. Many magnates possessed comital titles and ties of kinship with the Norman duke-kings, and all profited greatly from the Conqueror's victory at Hastings and his subsequent redistribution of English lands. Families such as the Beaumonts, Montgomerys, Clares, Mandevilles, and Warennes continued to enjoy the highest aristocratic honors in Anglo-Norman society.In the second generation after the Conquest, a number of men of lower social standing amassed land and political importance through service to William Rufus and Henry I, desiring to be accepted as peers by the great magnates. Their striving for social success is illustrated by William of Malmesbury in hisHistory of the Kings of England. In recounting the plan of William fitz Osbern to marry the widow of Count Baldwin of Flanders, the chronicler ascribed his motives to a desire “to increase his dignity.” Many men also wanted to impress the lower orders of society with their rank. Orderic Vitalis's contemptuous tale of one of Henry I's “new men,” Richard Basset, suggests that acquisition of social prestige was a possible motive for marriage. Having married a daughter of the earl of Chester, Basset returned to Normandy “and made a show of superiority to all his peers and fellow countrymen by the magnificence of his building in the little fief he had inherited from his parents.…”
Familial Clout and Financial Gain In Henry I's Later Reign
Authors: Mooers Stephanie L. 
Published: November 2007

To what extent were families important participants in the statecraft of Henry I? Their political influence, or clout, can best be measured by an examination of the rewards that the king bestowed upon their members for good service. Royal patronage could range from appointments to lucrative offices and marriages to heiresses to monetary gifts, pardoned debts, and exemptions from danegeld,auxilium burgi, and themurdumfine. Analysis of the Pipe Roll of 1130, the only surviving record of Henry's income and expenses, indicates that nearly seven hundred individuals received favors from the king in that account. The focus of this study shifts to royal patronage of the family groups to which these favored individuals belonged. Considered within the context of theirdomus, they form fifty-three fiscally-favored families and constitute the statistical sample upon which this analysis is based.This study fits into the prosopographical framework envisioned by Timothy Reuter for the Anglo-Norman aristocracy and described by George Beech. The Pipe Roll of 1130, a document of impressive detail and accuracy, illustrates which families were powerful and in the king's good graces and is a rich source of familial activity. It provides a glimpse not only of the financial and political activities of great magnates such as Ranulf earl of Chester and Waleran count of Meulan, but of the endeavors of families of modest origins and moderate status as well. Furthermore, the Pipe Roll suggests that political service and its consequent rewards were not confined to a “closed group,” but that the power structure could include families of varied means.
Charles I's Flight to the Scots
Authors: Kaplan Lawrence 
Published: November 2007

One of the most dramatic events of the entire Civil War occurred on May 5, 1646, when the English King unceremoniously appeared in the camp of the Covenanting army. Although not unexpected, despite Scottish protestations to the contrary, this bold move could conceivably have transformed the war's character. That it had so little impact on the final outcome resulted not from the high hopes of the participants, Scots, Royalists, and French, but from inadequate planning and the failure to realistically anticipate consequences. Before very long the recognition that Charles' flight to the Scots was a massive blunder for all those involved became embarrassingly evident. The King was to be held virtual prisoner by the Covenanters, yet the Scots would gain little from their prize possession. How it came about that these two parties participated in such an act of desperation is the subject of this essay.The Covenanters' willingness in 1646 to resort to extreme measures resulted from the recognition that their position in England had seriously deteriorated. They had originally intervened in the Civil War on the side of Parliament because they feared that a triumph for Royalism would provide the King with another chance to impose a settlement on Scotland. It was hoped in Edinburgh that the favorable resolution of the conflict, which their highly regarded army was sure to bring, would allow the Scots to shape the terms of the peace, and ultimately to play a permanent role in English affairs. Of great importance to the Kirk was the establishment in England of a Presbyterian church similar to their own model. Here too, Scottish ministers, with their greater experience, would exert an ongoing influence in England.
The Peace Ballot and the Public
Authors: Thompson J.A. 
Published: November 2007

In 1934-35 more than 11 ½ million adults in Great Britain completed the famous “Peace Ballot” (the official title was A National Declaration on the League of Nations and Armaments) designed to test, and indeed to demonstrate, popular support for the League and “the collective peace system.” The massive response exceeded all expectations and greatly impressed observers. It was, said the New Statesman, “the most remarkable popular referendum ever initiated and carried through by private enterprise.”But what did the Ballot demonstrate? Did it return a “plain and decisive” answer as Lord Cecil of Chelwood, President of the League of Nations Union and Chairman of the National Referendum Committee, claimed?Supporters of the Ballot had no doubt about the national verdict. Britons, said Cecil, had shown “overwhelming approval” of the collective system. They were, according to Winston Churchill, “willing, and indeed resolved, to go to war in a righteous cause,” provided that all action was taken under the auspices of the League. The British people were ready to fulfill their obligations under the Covenant, Philip Noel-Baker later wrote. The country was prepared to stop Mussolini by armed force if that should be required.
The Limitations of the New Liberalism: The Politics and Political Thought of John Clifford
Authors: Bernstein George L. 
Published: November 2007

Between the 1880s and 1914, British liberalism underwent a significant transformation. During this period, liberalism was redefined by liberal intellectuals so as to be more explicitly an ideology of social reform. At the same time, from 1906-1914 Liberal governments enacted a radically new social welfare policy. Both of these phenomena were the product of a growing awareness on the part of most Liberals that their party was critically dependent upon the votes of working men for electoral success. Following the formation of the Labour Representation Committee in 1900 and the launching of Joseph Chamberlain's tariff reform campaign in 1903, the Liberals were faced with an overt challenge from both the left and the right to their claim to be the party of the working man. The articulation of a new liberalism—both as ideology and as policy—was central to the Liberal response to this challenge.If, however, the Liberal party were to persuade working-class voters that it remained the best political instrument for defending their interests and promoting their needs, the evidence of a transformed liberalism could not be limited to the ideology of intellectuals and the policy of the parliamentary party. The language and behavior of the party activists in the constituencies had to reflect a similar transformation. These were the men who represented liberalism to the local voter. At the same time, these were the men upon whom the national party depended for the unstinting work that was crucial to electoral success. This Liberal rank-and-file was dominated by middle-class Nonconformists. They shared with Liberals a belief in individual liberty and an abhorrence of privilege. Their political agenda—disestablishment of the Anglican church and an end to its privileged position in the education system, temperance reform, the application of Christian principles to foreign policy—reflected these concerns, and after 1886 it increasingly was identified with the policy of the Liberal party. To what degree, then, did the new liberalism affect them?
The Baronetcy of the Skellingthorpe Vavasor
Authors: Cutler Kenneth E. 
Published: November 2007

On 22 June 1631 the government of Charles I issued Letters Patent proclaiming Captain Sir Charles Vavasor of Skellingthorpe, Lines., a baronet. The grant of honors to Sir Charles Vavasor was among the most distinctive made in England during the seventeenth century. By its special terms, Sir Charles became the first baronet (of approximately 285) to receive rights of precedence—in spite of parliamentary statutes opposing such rights. A clause of precedency declared the title retroactive to 29 June 1611, and that, in turn, made Sir Charles's father, Sir Thomas Vavasor, who had died in 1620, a baronet post mortem. The baronetcy of Sir Charles Vavasor is also unusual as one of the few which did not depend upon the patronage of the Duke of Buckingham, as the only one created during the whole of 1631, and as the last one created before the eve of Civil War.The competition for honors among the gentry is an important element in the social history of early seventeenth century England, and a factor in the complex origins of the Civil War. The full dimensions of that competition can be illuminated by studying the motives of individual families, and the processes by which they achieved their titles. The Skellingthorpe Vavasor make an especially interesting study because of the unusual distinctions which attend their title.Heretofore, however, paucity of evidence made it nearly impossible to reconstruct the quest for honors of the Skellingthorpe Vavasor. The evidence did show that before he died in 1620, Sir Thomas Vavasor sought the title of baronet without success, and that eleven years later, Sir Thomas's son, Charles, finally received a baronetcy with precedency. The intervening years, 1620-1631, had to be filled with conjectures about Charles Vavasor's motives, timing, and patronage, and also with some conjectures about why the government granted him honors of dubious legality.
Technical Education and Economic Performance: Britain, 1850–1914
Authors: Floud Roderick 
Published: November 2007

Since the time of the British “Great Depression,” and with increasing urgency as the relative decline of the British economy has gathered pace in the twentieth century, economists and economic historians have sought to explain both depression and decline and to suggest remedies. Until recently, it has been fashionable to ascribe the decline to the failings of British management, often working in conjunction with workers and trade unions, and to focus attention particularly on the failure to innovate, to adopt inventions which would have significantly lowered British production costs and improved international competitiveness in the manufacturing industries which were the basis of British prosperity. In the last fifteen years, however, studies of specific industries and investment decisions have made this global explanation for British decline less attractive, so much so that a recent summary of these studies can conclude that:
While some examples of “technological backwardness” and other types of failure have been found, and more undoubtedly remain to be found, it is not established that the failure rate was any higher than in other countries, including the United States and Germany, during the same period or than in Britain during earlier periods. Much less has it been shown that the British “entrepreneurial failures” in this period exceeded those in Germany and America by so much that they can materially have contributed to Britain's relative economic decline.