Protest, agitation and parliamentary reform in Britain, c1780–1928 - 2…

The idea

In c1780 the crown and aristocracy shaped politics through patronage: royal household posts, peerage creations, pocket and rotten boroughs, and landlords instructing tenants at the hustings. Assess the extent of that influence on elections and inside parliament, then explain its decline. ‘Economical reform’ in the 1780s (Burke’s reforms; the Civil List Act 1782) cut crown patronage and abolished many offices, weakening royal electoral weight. The 1832 Reform Act and later measures reduced aristocratic borough control. The Parliament Act 1911 removed the Lords’ veto over money bills and limited it elsewhere, so the Commons and elected parties dominated. Argue a line: influence was extensive in c1780 but declined unevenly, and by 1928 was much reduced though not extinct.

What earns the marks

• Explains the mechanisms of crown influence in c1780: patronage, pensions, places and the royal household, and how these could sway elections and votes in parliament.
• Explains aristocratic influence in c1780: pocket and rotten boroughs, landlord pressure on tenants, family electoral interests and control of seats in the Commons.
• Analyses ‘economical reform’ in the 1780s as a cause of declining crown influence, linking reduced patronage and office-holding to fewer levers over MPs and elections.
• Analyses the Parliament Act 1911 as a cause of declining aristocratic influence, explaining the removal of the Lords’ veto over money bills and the limitation of its delaying power.
• Judges the extent of change over c1780–1928, weighing continuity (residual landed and royal influence) against the structural decline of both crown and aristocratic power.
• Uses precise evidence and dates accurately, and sustains a clear argument about extent and reasons rather than listing reforms.

Common mistakes and how to put them right

• Treating ‘economical reform’ as a single event.

  Put it right by dating and naming specific measures, such as the Civil List Act 1782 and Burke’s reforms, and explaining their effect on patronage.

• Assuming the Parliament Act 1911 abolished the House of Lords.

  Put it right by explaining that it removed the veto over money bills and limited the Lords’ power to delay other bills, so the Lords survived with reduced influence.

• Confusing influence on elections with influence in parliament.

  Put it right by separating electoral mechanisms, such as borough control and bribery, from parliamentary mechanisms, such as patronage and management of MPs.

Exam tips

• Plan around the two halves of the question: extent of influence c1780, then reasons for decline, ensuring both elections and parliament are covered.
• Anchor each causal claim to a dated development, such as the Civil List Act 1782 or the Parliament Act 1911, and explain the mechanism of change.
• Reach a substantiated judgement on extent, using criteria such as control of seats, independence of MPs and the balance between the two Houses.