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:
“The middle years are ones in which children increasingly face conflicts on their own,... One of the truths to be faced by parents during this period is that they cannot do the work of living and relating for their children. They can be sounding boards and they can probe with the children the consequences of alternative actions.”
—Dorothy H. Cohen (20th century)
“We are still barely conscious of how harmful it is to treat children in a degrading manner. Treating them with respect and recognizing the consequences of their being humiliated are by no means intellectual matters; otherwise, their importance would long since have been generally recognized.”
—Alice Miller (20th century)
“[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)