Between 1827 and 1830, Britain experienced political instability and social reforms that laid foundations for broader changes in the early 1830s.
The Governments of Canning, Goderich, and Wellington: Instability and Reform
George Canning’s Premiership (April–August 1827)
Canning’s tenure as Prime Minister was brief, lasting just four months before his death in August 1827.
He succeeded Lord Liverpool, who had resigned due to ill health.
Canning was seen as a moderate reformer, open to Catholic Emancipation, which alienated the more conservative Tories.
His cabinet was formed with a fragile coalition of Canningites, moderate Tories, and Whigs—many high-ranking Tories refused to serve under him.
Despite his short time in office, Canning symbolised a shift away from the rigid Tory orthodoxy of the early 1820s.
Viscount Goderich’s Ministry (August 1827–January 1828)
After Canning’s death, Frederick John Robinson, Viscount Goderich, took office.
Goderich lacked political authority and failed to manage competing interests within the coalition.
His ministry is widely regarded as ineffective, marked by internal divisions and an absence of legislative achievements.
He resigned after less than five months, largely due to his inability to reconcile Whigs and Tories.
The Duke of Wellington’s Government (January 1828–November 1830)
Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, took over in 1828, forming a purely Tory administration.
Wellington initially sought stability and opposed wide-ranging reform.
However, pressure from within Parliament and society forced his government to confront key issues, including religious toleration and law and order.
The period was marked by mounting social discontent, rising demands for reform, and economic challenges, all of which made governing increasingly difficult.
Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts (1828)
The Test and Corporation Acts, in place since the 17th century, required all holders of public office to be members of the Church of England.
They effectively excluded Dissenters (e.g. Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists) from political participation.
In 1828, under pressure from Whig reformers and public opinion, Wellington’s government allowed their repeal.
The repeal was introduced as a Whig private member’s bill by Lord John Russell and supported by many moderate Tories.
Although Anglican conformity was no longer legally required, officeholders still had to declare allegiance to the Church of England until 1866.
This change marked a significant step towards religious toleration, reflecting a growing emphasis on inclusion and liberal values.
The Creation of the Metropolitan Police (1829)
One of the most lasting reforms of this period was the establishment of the Metropolitan Police Force in 1829.
Introduced by Home Secretary Sir Robert Peel, the force aimed to address rising crime and disorder in London.
Prior to this, law enforcement relied on parish constables and watchmen, an outdated and ineffective system.
The new force:
Was organised, uniformed, and salaried.
Covered a radius of seven miles from Charing Cross, excluding the City of London.
Focused on preventative policing rather than reactionary enforcement.
Although initially unpopular and nicknamed “Bobbies” or “Peelers”, the Metropolitan Police set the model for modern British policing.
The creation of this force signalled a shift towards state intervention in social affairs and public order, laying the groundwork for future state involvement in welfare and policing.
Daniel O’Connell and Catholic Emancipation (1829)
Daniel O’Connell, an Irish barrister and political leader, emerged as the dominant force in the movement for Catholic Emancipation.
In 1823, he founded the Catholic Association, mobilising mass support for Catholic rights across Ireland.
In 1828, O’Connell stood in a by-election for County Clare and won—despite being ineligible to sit in Parliament as a Catholic.
This presented Wellington’s government with a constitutional crisis: refusing O’Connell his seat risked widespread unrest in Ireland.
Faced with this threat, the government passed the Roman Catholic Relief Act (1829), allowing Catholics to:
Sit in Parliament.
Hold most public offices.
However, it also raised the property qualification for voting in Ireland from 40 shillings to £10, disenfranchising many poorer Catholics.
While a landmark in terms of religious equality, the act was also a strategic compromise to prevent instability.
The episode highlighted the effectiveness of mass political mobilisation, particularly when led by a charismatic figure like O’Connell.
Industrial and Agricultural Change
Continuing Industrial Developments
The late 1820s saw the expansion of industrial infrastructure and production:
Steam power became increasingly dominant, enabling larger, more productive factories.
Textile industries, especially cotton, continued to thrive, particularly in the North of England.
Urbanisation accelerated as people moved from rural areas into cities to work in factories.
These changes contributed to a rising middle class and an increasingly vocal urban working class.
However, rapid industrialisation also meant:
Poor housing and sanitation.
Insecure employment.
Periodic downturns, leading to hardship and unrest.
Agricultural Developments
Despite the industrial focus, agriculture remained vital, employing more people than industry well into the 1830s.
There were:
Incremental increases in productivity due to enclosure and better farming techniques.
Fluctuating grain prices, causing distress among both producers and consumers.
The Corn Laws (still in effect) protected British landowners but made bread expensive, fuelling working-class resentment.
Rise of Early Free Trade Movements
The 1820s witnessed growing support for free trade, driven by industrialists who wanted cheaper raw materials and markets for goods.
Economists like David Ricardo and politicians like William Huskisson promoted lower tariffs and deregulated commerce.
Though Huskisson died in 1830 (famously becoming the first victim of a railway accident), his ideas outlived him.
Government measures reflected this shift:
Lower duties on many imports.
Relaxation of Navigation Acts to allow more foreign shipping.
These developments indicated a move away from mercantilist policies and toward laissez-faire economics, aligning with the interests of the rising industrial bourgeoisie.
Social Pressures and the Demand for Reform
Growing urban populations and discontent among working classes led to increasing pressure for parliamentary reform.
The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts and Catholic Emancipation, though significant, did not address electoral inequality.
Rotten boroughs, limited suffrage, and the lack of representation for industrial towns fuelled calls for change.
While Wellington remained opposed to major reform, the events of 1827–1830 revealed a society in transition, increasingly at odds with the political status quo.
This period, though marked by political instability, saw key social and legislative shifts that highlighted both the pressure for reform and the limits of what the ruling elite were willing to concede. These pressures would culminate in the next phase: the campaign for the Great Reform Act.
FAQ
Although the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts in 1828 was a key moment in the journey towards religious toleration, it did not deliver full religious equality. The Acts had required public officials to be members of the Church of England, effectively excluding Dissenters—Protestants who did not conform to Anglican doctrine—from holding civic office. Repealing these Acts allowed Dissenters to legally hold office, but they were still required to make a declaration affirming their loyalty to the Church of England. This oath, though reworded, maintained a clear Anglican bias. Catholics remained fully excluded until the following year with the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829. Furthermore, Jews and non-Christians remained entirely outside the scope of reform until later in the 19th century. The 1828 repeal was therefore a partial victory—it eased restrictions on many Protestants but fell short of true religious pluralism. It reflected changing political priorities but also the enduring strength of Anglican dominance.
Public opinion and the expanding influence of the press were increasingly powerful forces in shaping reform during this period. The late 1820s saw a rapid rise in literacy rates among the urban middle and working classes, contributing to a greater consumption of political newspapers and pamphlets. Radical publications such as The Morning Chronicle and The Examiner challenged traditional conservative narratives and provided a platform for reformist voices. The Catholic Association, led by Daniel O’Connell, made effective use of pamphleteering and mass communication to rally support across Ireland. The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts and the passing of Catholic Emancipation were both influenced by a groundswell of public pressure reflected in petitions, local meetings, and media commentary. Additionally, growing urban populations meant that the voice of the industrial towns became harder to ignore. Though Parliament remained unrepresentative, MPs and ministers were increasingly aware of the need to respond to public sentiment to maintain stability and legitimacy.
Wellington began his premiership in 1828 as a firm opponent of major reform, believing the existing system of governance provided stability and continuity. He was particularly wary of expanding political participation and remained deeply sceptical of parliamentary reform. However, events quickly forced him to reconsider. The election of Daniel O’Connell in County Clare in 1828 presented a direct challenge to the system: denying him his seat risked civil unrest in Ireland. Wellington reluctantly agreed to Catholic Emancipation in 1829, arguing it was necessary to prevent widespread disorder. This decision alienated the ultra-Tory faction of his party and exposed deep divisions within the government. Despite this concession, Wellington remained firmly opposed to further reforms, particularly parliamentary reform. His infamous declaration in 1830 that the current system could not be improved hastened his downfall. His evolving stance was driven more by pragmatism than principle, as he sought to maintain order rather than champion progressive change.
The push towards free trade in the late 1820s was underpinned by both ideological and practical economic motivations. The industrial revolution had significantly expanded Britain’s manufacturing capacity, and many industrialists were now seeking cheaper raw materials and new markets for exports. Protectionist tariffs, while beneficial for some domestic producers, limited Britain’s ability to compete internationally. Politicians like William Huskisson championed free trade policies based on the principles of economic liberalism and comparative advantage, inspired by thinkers such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo. These ideas held that reducing trade barriers would increase efficiency and national wealth. The reduction of duties on imports, such as silk and wool, aimed to lower consumer prices, boost industrial output, and stimulate trade relations. Additionally, it helped weaken the monopolies held by elite landowners and merchants. Although limited in scope at this stage, these reforms marked the beginning of a long-term shift in British economic policy away from mercantilism towards laissez-faire capitalism.
Prior to 1829, policing in Britain was largely informal and decentralised. Local law enforcement was typically carried out by unpaid parish constables and part-time watchmen, who were often undertrained, underresourced, and lacked coordination. This system was ineffective in managing rising crime rates in rapidly growing urban centres like London. The establishment of the Metropolitan Police by Sir Robert Peel introduced a professional, salaried, and uniformed force tasked with preventing crime rather than merely responding to it. It was designed to operate under strict discipline and was accountable to the Home Office. Officers were required to follow a code of conduct and were identifiable by their blue uniforms, which helped distinguish them from the military. The new force also introduced centralised command structures and regular patrols, aimed at deterring crime through visible presence. The Metropolitan Police represented a significant departure from the ad hoc nature of earlier policing, laying the groundwork for modern law enforcement based on prevention, accountability, and public trust.
Practice Questions
‘The achievement of Catholic Emancipation in 1829 was the most significant reform of the years 1827–1830.’ Assess the validity of this view.
While Catholic Emancipation in 1829 was undoubtedly a major reform, driven by mass mobilisation and resulting in constitutional change, it must be balanced against other key developments. The repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts marked a significant move towards religious toleration, and the creation of the Metropolitan Police in 1829 demonstrated a shift towards social reform and modern state-building. Though Catholic Emancipation was the most politically dramatic, the period overall saw multiple reforms that reflected wider shifts in British society. Therefore, while significant, it was one of several crucial reforms, not necessarily the most impactful in isolation.
To what extent did political instability limit effective government between 1827 and 1830?
Political instability significantly hampered effective governance during 1827–1830. The rapid turnover of prime ministers—Canning, Goderich, and Wellington—reflected factionalism and lack of consensus on reform. Canning’s short-lived coalition collapsed under Tory resistance, and Goderich’s ministry achieved nothing of note. Although Wellington’s government passed major reforms, such as Catholic Emancipation and police reform, these were reactive responses to social pressure rather than proactive policymaking. The persistent instability hindered sustained legislative momentum and underlined the weakness of the ruling elite. Overall, while some reform occurred, political instability considerably limited consistent and confident government during this period.
