Consequences
The reduction in the number of two-member constituencies ended cross-party co-operation. Prior to the Act, in many counties and boroughs the two main parties had agreed to nominate one candidate each, and no poll was held. After the Act was passed there were many more contested elections, and only 13 constituencies were uncontested at the 1885 general election. The division of former two-member constituencies had other important political consequences: it hastened the decline of the domination of parliament by the aristocracy and landed gentry, although the aristocracy continued to dominate the Cabinet and the landed classes dominated the Lords, which retained until 1911 the power to veto legislation. After 1885, for the first time, MPs connected to industry and commerce outnumbered those connected to the gentry.
There was a growing radicalisation of political parties, which also became more professionally organised. The expansion of the working class electorate meant that the number of 'Lib/Lab' MPs rose from 2 in 1874 to 13 in 1885.
There was also a Conservative resurgence, as they gained massively from the constitutional changes they had helped to engineer. The majority of the 132 seats taken from small boroughs to be redistributed had been Liberal and in many of the new single member constituencies, particularly the suburban ones, the Conservatives were triumphant – the electorate were discouraged by Chamberlain's radicalism and not appeased by Gladstone's Home Rule crusade. The Liberals won the 1885 General Election, but the Conservatives dominated the final years of the 19th century, following Liberal splits connected with Irish Home Rule.
Read more about this topic: Redistribution Of Seats Act 1885
Famous quotes containing the word consequences:
“[As teenager], the trauma of near-misses and almost- consequences usually brings us to our senses. We finally come down someplace between our parents’ safety advice, which underestimates our ability, and our own unreasonable disregard for safety, which is our childlike wish for invulnerability. Our definition of acceptable risk becomes a product of our own experience.”
—Roger Gould (20th century)
“Without being forgiven, released from the consequences of what we have done, our capacity to act would ... be confined to one single deed from which we could never recover; we would remain the victims of its consequences forever, not unlike the sorcerer’s apprentice who lacked the magic formula to break the spell.”
—Hannah Arendt (1906–1975)
“Results are what you expect, and consequences are what you get.”
—schoolgirl’s definition, quoted in Ladies’ Home Journal (New York, Jan. 1942)