Šta je dovelo do općih izbora u Ujedinjenom Kraljevstvu u 19. stoljeću?

Šta je dovelo do općih izbora u Ujedinjenom Kraljevstvu u 19. stoljeću?



We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Brzo skeniranje popisa britanskih vlada u 19. stoljeću brzo otkriva da, iako su mandati bili ograničeni na sedam godina, većina parlamenata nije trajala tako dugo. Umjesto toga, prorogacija (raspuštanje) parlamenta od strane monarha, djelujući po savjetu premijera, često je inicirala nove izbore.

Čitao sam o nekoliko primjera toga što se dogodilo, na primjer o zakonima o kukuruzu, ali još nisam naučio dovoljno da sa velike jasnoće napravim skok sa primjera na opće principe.

Pod kojim okolnostima su raspušteni parlamenti 19. stoljeća i šta je motiviralo glavne aktere? Između premijera, parlamenta, monarha, biračkog tijela itd., Tko je mogao izvršiti utjecaj da prisili promjenu?


Postojeći odgovori pružaju izvrsnu pozadinu političke situacije u devetnaestom stoljeću. Pokušat ću odgovoriti na konkretne tačke postavljene u pitanju.


Prije nego što počnem, želio bih razjasniti nekoliko stvari.

Prvo, sposobnost monarha da raspusti parlament potpada pod ono što je poznato kao Kraljevska prerogativa. Od "slavne revolucije", a posebno, Zakona o pravima iz 1689. godine koji je uslijedio, vršenje kraljevske prerogative bilo je ograničeno. Član 1. Bilješke o pravima kaže da:

"moć suspenzije zakona ili izvršenja zakona od strane kraljevske vlasti bez pristanka parlamenta je nezakonita."

Nadalje, Zakon o pravima potvrdio je da Parlament ima pravo ograničiti upotrebu preostalih ovlasti (što su i učinili u Trogodišnjem aktu iz 1694.).

U praksi je to značilo da monarh više nije mogao raspustiti parlament bez pristanka parlamenta. (Međutim, postojao je poseban izuzetak. Parlament je raspušten smrću monarha, što se dogodilo na primjer 1820. godine, iako je - da budemo pošteni - ovo krajnji slučaj!)

Druga važna stvar je da je u devetnaestom stoljeću monarh imenovao premijera i imao apsolutno pravo da imenuje koga god želi. Očigledno, ovo je moglo - i jeste - izazvati probleme. U stvari, to je bio uzrok onoga što je danas poznato kao "Desetljeće ministarske nestabilnosti" pod Georgeom II u prošlom stoljeću. HM Vlada na svojoj web stranici ima zanimljiv članak o razvoju institucije premijera.

Konačno, trebamo se sjetiti da su se političke stranke u Velikoj Britaniji tek počele spajati u stranke kakve bismo danas prepoznali krajem osamnaestog / početkom devetnaestog stoljeća, u razdoblju od oko 1760. do 1834. godine. Grupe "torijevaca" u parlamentu najbolje se razmišljaju o labavim koalicijama poslanika sa uglavnom sličnim stavovima i ciljevima. Međutim, nije bilo "stranačke linije" o pojedinim prijedlozima zakona koji su se našli pred Parlamentom. Do 1834. godine grupe su se već dovoljno uspostavile da je Robert Peel mogao izdati Tamworth manifest definirajući ciljeve "Konzervativne stranke".

Raskol je efektivno završen prelomnim izborima 1852. godine, gdje se pojavio dvopartijski sistem konzervativnih i liberalnih partija.


Dakle, da odgovorimo na vaša konkretna pitanja:

Pod kojim okolnostima su raspušteni parlamenti 19. stoljeća i šta je motiviralo glavne aktere?

Obično je premijer tražio od monarha raspuštanje parlamenta. To može biti zato što nisu mogli zadobiti povjerenje parlamenta ili formirati stabilnu vladu (npr. Na izborima 1807.).

Prije nastanka dvopartijskog sistema sredinom stoljeća, sporni zakoni o pitanjima poput katoličke emancipacije ili parlamentarne reforme jednostavno su uzrokovali promjenu i reformu različitih političkih koalicija. Premijer sa "pogrešne" strane takvog zakona mogao bi lako izgubiti povjerenje parlamenta (ili monarha koji ga je imenovao).

Sporno zakonodavstvo nakon što su se nove stranke počele pojavljivati ​​1830 -ih, poput onog za ukidanje zakona o kukuruzu, moglo bi podijeliti novonastale stranke i ojačati položaj premijera (kao što je bio slučaj s Robertom Peelom u izborima 1841.), ili ga fatalno potkopati (Robert Peel podnio je ostavku 1847., umjesto da traži raspuštanje parlamenta, strahujući da će predstojeći izbori postati glas povjerenja).

Premijeri bi također mogli zatražiti raspuštanje parlamenta jer su nastojali ostvariti političku prednost. To je bio slučaj na izborima 1806. Tada, kao i sada, takvi pokušaji sticanja političke prednosti na izborima nisu uvijek bili uspješni. Još jedan opći izbor uslijedio je 1807. godine!

Kao što je gore spomenuto, raspad bi bio izazvan smrću monarha (npr. Izbori 1820).

Osim toga, u osamnaestom i devetnaestom stoljeću bilo je normalno da su premijeri tražili raspuštanje parlamenta nakon zakona Parlamenta koji je rezultirao značajnim promjenama izbornog sistema. To se dogodilo, na primjer, na izborima 1832. godine nakon Reformskog zakona iz 1832. Međutim, kada je takav čin kasnio u životu Parlamenta, kao što je to bio slučaj sa Zakonom o predstavljanju naroda 1884., izbori bi mogli biti odgođeni, što se i dogodilo sa (izbori 1885).

Između premijera, parlamenta, monarha, biračkog tijela itd., Tko je mogao izvršiti utjecaj kako bi prisilio promjenu?

Premijer bi mogao zatražiti od monarha raspuštanje parlamenta. I tada, kao i sada, sastanci između monarha i njihovog premijera su privatni, pa ne znamo koliko je često, ako ikad, odbijan zahtjev premijera.

Parlament je uspio učiniti premijerov položaj neodrživim. U takvim slučajevima premijer je mogao podnijeti ostavku ili zatražiti od monarha da raspusti parlament i natjera izbore.

Do devetnaestog stoljeća, monarh više nije imao ovlaštenje raspustiti parlament, osim ako to od njega sam parlament ne zatraži, obično u ličnosti premijera.

Biračko tijelo nije imalo nikakvog glasa po tom pitanju.


Kliknite na vezu "izbori" na Wikipedijskoj listi britanskih parlamenata za više detalja o svakom izboru.


Ključna moć parlamenta tada (i sada) bila je da kontrolira ponudu - tj. Iznos novca prikupljenog od oporezivanja koji je otišao Kruni. Ako Kruna (tj. Vlada) nije mogla natjerati Parlament da odobri traženu opskrbu, tada, ekstremno, nije imala drugog izbora nego raspustiti Parlament i raspisati izbore.

Osim toga, Sedmogodišnji zakon iz 1715. zahtijevao je da kruna raspiše izbore najmanje svakih sedam godina (to je 1911. smanjeno na pet godina).

Time je povećana maksimalna dužina parlamenta (a time i maksimalni period između općih izbora) sa tri godine na sedam. Ovaj sedmogodišnji plafon ostao je na snazi ​​od 1716. do 1911. godine.

Zakon je poništio odredbe trogodišnjeg akta 1694, koji je "zahtijevao da se parlament sastaje godišnje i da se opći izbori održavaju jednom u tri godine".


DOGAĐAJI

Ključ unutrašnje zabrinutosti su bile:

  • Odlično Irska glad 1845. i 1852. godine, gotovo 800.000 je umrlo, što je rezultiralo značajnim Zemljišne reforme
  • Tone društvenih reformi do Parlament (pomislite na Dickensovu Bleak House)
  • Neki se fokusiraju na obrazovanje
  • Neki parlamentarne reforme za reprezentativniju vlast

Main spoljni zabrinutost je bila Krimski rat (1854) (njihova Velika igra) i kolonijalne Boer Wars.

Sve u svemu, 19. stoljeće je bilo razdoblje reformi koje su postupno povećavale političku demokraciju i poboljšavale ekonomske i socijalne uvjete za opću populaciju.

Ova poboljšanja se nije dogodilo slučajno.

POJEDINCI

Da bi se takve reforme ostvarile, Britanija je u 19. stoljeću imala osebujne pojedince voljni da se promene (politički) ili imali bolji način (o životu, obavljanju poslova, trgovini itd.).

Ključ političko lideri:

  • W. E. Gladstone - vođa liberala (vigova)
  • Benjamin Disraeli - vođa konzervativaca (torijevaca)
  • Lord Salisbury - konzervativac
  • Robert Peel - konzervativac

Pojedinci poznati po svom ideje / politički pritisak:

  • William Wilberforce - za ukidanje trgovine robljem
  • Richard Cobden - za Anti -Corn Law League
  • John Bright - za slobodnu trgovinu i, s Cobdenom, rad na kukuruznim zakonima
  • Karl Marx - koji je odraslo doba proveo u Londonu u Engleskoj razvijajući svoje remek -djelo, a čiji je utjecaj jasno izražen u britanskim društvenim reformama u 19. stoljeću.
  • Frederic William Maitland - nije popularan (na međunarodnoj razini), ali ga engleski pravnici, političari i znanstvenici vrlo poštuju zbog ove teze (s 25 godina), izrazito engleske percepcije slobode (tj. Utjecajne za parlamentarne reforme).

Britanski parlament mogao je trajati najviše sedam godina (do 1911. godine, kada je promijenjen u pet), a iz praktične je svrhe, izbori su često raspisivani u šestoj godini. Zato ću se fokusirati na izbore koji su ili raspisani mnogo prije šeste godine, ili su uključivali promjenu stranke. Evo liste britanskih općih izbora.

Ključno pitanje bile su ličnosti koje su oblikovale ove vanjske događaje.

Prvi izbori u 19. stoljeću, 1802., održani su "prema rasporedu", šest godina nakon 1796. No, na sljedećim izborima, 1806., torijevska vlada na vlasti pala je kada je umro njen veliki antinapoleonski vođa, William Pitt Mlađi . Njena smjena, vigova vlada, trajala je samo godinu dana, do 1807., a zamijenili su je torijevci.

Druge torijevske vlade pale su smrću kralja Georgea III 1820. i kralja Georgea IV 1830. godine. Dvije vlade vigova koje su uslijedile bile su kratkog vijeka.

Počevši od 1835, sljedećih nekoliko vlada okretalo se oko Sir Roberta Peela. Tehnički konzervativan, on je bio "fuzionista" koji je osvojio mandat 1835. godine kao konzervativni premijer koji je podržavao Whig. Podržavao je i vladu Whig -a koja je uslijedila 1837. i "prebjegla" nazad u torijevce 1841.

Izbori 1852. godine smatrani su izborima "prekretnice" utoliko što su odlučno podijeljeni konzervativci i liberali na stranke Tory i Whig. (Slično se dogodilo u SAD -u 1980. godine koji je većinu konzervativaca gurnuo u Republikansku stranku, a većinu liberala u Demokratsku stranku.) Tori su postali Konzervativna stranka, a Whigi Liberalna stranka.

Počevši od 1857. godine, izborima sredinom stoljeća dominirao je Lord Palmerston, koji je bio uspješan menadžer vanjske politike. Bilo je "slučajno" da je i on bio liberal, pa stoga i vig, ali izbor ovog čovjeka na temelju vanjskopolitičkih uspjeha omogućio je prolazak liberalnih društvenih reformi, posebno nakon Krimskog i Drugog opijumskog rata sredinom 1850 -ih.

U drugom dijelu 19. stoljeća, dva vodeća konzervativna i liberalna premijera, Disraeli i Gladstone, vršili su skoro jednaku anketu, ali nijedan nije imao većinu. Njihove vlade bacale su rascjepkane treće strane, posebno Irska nacionalna partija, koja je držala ravnotežu moći.


Britanija od 1754. do 1783. godine

Henry Pelham umro je 1754. godine, a na mjestu načelnika uprave zamijenio ga je njegov brat, vojvoda od Newcastlea. Newcastle je bio lukav, inteligentan i vrijedan i posjedovao je veliko političko iskustvo. No, nedostajalo mu je samopouzdanja i određene širine vida, a ometalo ga je to što je bio u Domu lordova. 1755. Henry Fox imenovan je za državnog sekretara i djelovao je kao portparol administracije u Commonsu. Foxova promocija otuđila je čovjeka koji je bio daleko zanimljiviji i izuzetniji od bilo kojeg od ovih ministara, Williama Pitta Starijeg. Pitt je ušao u parlament kao poslanik opozicije 1730 -ih. Godine 1746. imenovan je za generalnog upravnika, vrlo unosnu državnu službu. Ali Pitt, čija je ambicija bila više slava i priznanje nego novac, ostao je nezadovoljan. Kralj ga, međutim, nije volio i uspješno je opstruirao njegovu karijeru. Godine 1755. odbacio je Pitta, koji je počeo napadati Newcastle po pitanjima carske i vanjske politike.


Demontaža Rekonstrukcija

Rasizam je ostao sveprisutna sila na sjeveru i jugu, a do početka 1870 -ih mnogi su sjevernjaci počeli kriviti probleme rekonstrukcije za navodnu inferiornost crnaca.

U isto vrijeme, ključne odluke Vrhovnog suda SAD-a udarile su u zaštitu koju pružaju ustavni amandmani i zakoni iz doba rekonstrukcije. Odlukom Suda u predmetima "Klanica" (1873.) utvrđeno je da se 14. izmjena primjenjuje samo na bivše ropce i štiti samo prava koja mu daje federalna vlada, a ne države.

Tri godine kasnije, u Sjedinjenim Državama protiv Cruikshanka, Vrhovni sud je ukinuo presude trojici bijelaca osuđenih u vezi sa masakrom više od 100 crnaca u Colfaxu, Louisiana 1873., u sklopu političkog spora. Muškarci su osuđeni za kršenje Zakona o provođenju zakona iz 1870. godine, koji je zabranio zavjere radi uskraćivanja ustavnih prava građana, a namjera im je bila borba protiv nasilja od strane Ku Klux Klana nad crncima na jugu.

Odluka Vrhovnog suda##2014 da je obećanje 14. amandmana o pravičnom postupku i jednakoj zaštiti pokrilo kršenja prava građana od strane država, ali ne i od pojedinaca, učinilo bi procesuiranje nasilja protiv crnaca sve težim, čak i s obzirom na to da je Klan i druge bijele nadmoćne grupe pomagale su obespravljivanju glasača crnaca i ponovnoj uspostavi bijele kontrole nad jugom.


Sadržaj

Akti Unije 1707 Uredi

Prvi korak ka političkom ujedinjenju učinjen je 1. maja 1707. godine, kada su to odobrili parlamenti Škotske i Engleske Akti Unije koji je kombinovao dva parlamenta i dva kraljevska naslova.

Možda najveća pojedinačna korist Škotske od Unije bila je ta što je Škotska mogla uživati ​​u slobodnoj trgovini s Engleskom i njenim kolonijama u inozemstvu. Što se tiče Engleske, neutraliziran je mogući saveznik evropskih država koje su bile neprijateljske prema Engleskoj.

Određeni aspekti nekadašnjih nezavisnih kraljevstava ostali su odvojeni. Primjeri škotskih i engleskih institucija koje nisu spojene u britanski sistem uključuju: škotsko i englesko pravo koje ostaje odvojeno, kao i škotski i engleski bankarski sistem, prezbiterijanska crkva Škotske i anglikanska crkva Engleske također su ostali odvojeni, kao i sistemi obrazovanje i visoko obrazovanje.

Kako su Škoti općenito bili dobro obrazovani, dali su nesrazmjeran doprinos i vladi Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva i administraciji Britanskog Carstva.

Irska se pridružuje Act of Union (1800) Edit

Druga faza u razvoju Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva stupila je na snagu 1. januara 1801. godine, kada se Velika Britanija spojila sa Irskom i formirala Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo Velike Britanije i Irske.

Zakonodavna unija Velike Britanije i Irske dovršena je prema Zakonu o uniji 1800. Ime zemlje je promijenjeno u "Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo Velike Britanije i Irske". Zakon je donesen u britanskom i stoga nereprezentativnom irskom parlamentu sa znatnom većinom koja je djelomično (prema savremenim dokumentima) postignuta podmićivanjem, naime dodjeljivanjem pohvale i počasti kritičarima da bi dobili njihov glas. [2] Odvojeni parlamenti Velike Britanije i Irske su ukinuti i zamijenjeni ujedinjenim Parlamentom Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva. Irska je tako postala dio proširenog Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva. Irska je poslala oko 100 poslanika u Donji dom u Westminsteru i 28 kolega u Dom lordova.

Napoleonovi ratovi Uredi

Neprijateljstva između Velike Britanije i Francuske počela su 18. maja 1803. Ratni ciljevi koalicije su se promijenili tokom sukoba: opća želja za obnovom francuske monarhije postala je blisko povezana s borbom za zaustavljanje Napoleona. Napoleonov sukob je došao do tačke u kojoj su kasniji historičari mogli govoriti o "svjetskom ratu". Samo je Sedmogodišnji rat ponudio presedan za rašireni sukob u takvim razmjerima.

Viktorijansko doba Edit

Viktorijansko doba obilježilo je vrhunac Britanske industrijske revolucije i vrhunac Britanskog carstva. Iako se obično koristi za označavanje razdoblja vladavine kraljice Viktorije između 1837. i 1901., znanstvenici raspravljaju o tome počinje li viktorijansko razdoblje - kako je definirano različitim osjećajima i političkim brigama koji su se počeli povezivati ​​s Viktorijancima - prolaskom Reformski akt 1832. Doba je prethodilo doba Regentstva, a naslijedilo ga Edvardijevo razdoblje. Posljednja polovica viktorijanske ere približno se poklapala s prvim dijelom ere Belle Époque kontinentalne Europe i drugih zemalja koje ne govore engleski.

Irska i prelazak na uređivanje kućnog pravila

Prvi svjetski rat Urediti

Podjela Irske Uredi

Empire to Commonwealth Edit

Britanska kontrola nad svojim carstvom je popustila tokom međuratnog perioda. Nacionalizam je postao jači u drugim dijelovima carstva, posebno u Indiji i u Egiptu.

Između 1867. i 1910. Velika Britanija je Australiji, Kanadi i Novom Zelandu dodijelila status "Dominiona" (gotovo potpuna autonomija unutar Carstva).

1945-1997 Urediti

Kraj Drugog svjetskog rata doživio je snažnu pobjedu na općim izborima za Clement Attlee i Laburističku stranku.

Kako je zemlja krenula u pedesete godine prošlog stoljeća, obnova se nastavila, a određeni broj imigranata iz preostalog Britanskog carstva pozvan je da pomogne u obnovi. Tokom 1950 -ih Velika Britanija je izgubila mjesto supersile i više nije mogla održavati svoje veliko carstvo. To je dovelo do dekolonizacije i povlačenja iz gotovo svih njenih kolonija do 1970.

Iako su 1970 -ih i 1980 -ih došlo do integracije Velike Britanije u Evropska ekonomska zajednica koja je 1992. postala Evropska unija i stroga modernizacija njene ekonomije.

Nakon teških 70 -ih i 80 -ih, devedesete su započele period kontinuiranog ekonomskog rasta koji je do danas trajao više od 15 godina. Sporazum o Velikom petku je vidio ono što mnogi vjeruju da je početak kraja sukoba u Sjevernoj Irskoj od ovog događaja, oružanog nasilja po tom pitanju je bilo vrlo malo.

Na Općim izborima 2001. Laburistička partija odnijela je drugu uzastopnu pobjedu.

Uprkos velikim antiratnim marševima koji su održani u Londonu i Glasgowu, Tony Blair je dao snažnu podršku invaziji Sjedinjenih Država na Irak 2003. godine. Četrdeset šest hiljada britanskih vojnika, jedna trećina ukupne snage britanske vojske (kopnene snage) , bili su aktivni kako bi pomogli u invaziji na Irak, a nakon toga su britanske oružane snage bile odgovorne za sigurnost na jugu Iraka u vrijeme prije iračkih izbora u januaru 2005.

2007. je zaključeno premijersko mjesto Tonyja Blaira, a zatim Gordona Browna. Sljedeći premijer David Cameron izabran je 2010. Tokom svog prvog mandata, Škotska nacionalna stranka (SNP) pobijedila je na izborima 2011. za škotski parlament. SNP je 18. septembra 2014. godine održao referendum na kojem je pitao građane Škotske da li žele biti nezavisni od Velike Britanije. 55% birača željelo je ostati u Velikoj Britaniji.

David Cameron reizabran je 2015. godine zbog obećanja da će održati referendum o tome treba li Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo napustiti Evropsku uniju. Održalo se 23. juna 2016. i pobijedilo je u kampanji "Ostavi" sa 52% glasova. Cameron bi tada dao ostavku, a zamijenila bi ih Theresa May kao premijerka koja će voditi zemlju u proces "Brexita".

Januara 2020. dogodio se Brexit.

Teroristički napadi Edit

Velika Britanija je također vidjela dva teroristička incidenta u Londonu u 21. stoljeću.

Dana 7. jula 2005. godine, tri bombe eksplodirale su u londonskom metrou u 8:50 sati tokom jutarnje špice, a četvrta je eksplodirala sat vremena kasnije u autobusu na trgu Tavistock. U napadu, koji su izvršili muslimanski ekstremisti, poginule su 52 osobe, a povrijeđeno preko 700 drugih.

Dana 22. marta 2017. godine, tačno godinu dana nakon bombardovanja u Briselu, pet ljudi je poginulo u napadu na Westminster 2017. godine u blizini domova parlamenta. Jedan od njih bio je napadač, Khalid Masood, koji je također ubo nožem policajca Metropolitanske policije, koji je kasnije preminuo od zadobijenih ozljeda.

Dana 22. maja 2017. godine u Manchester Areni dogodila su se "dva bombaška napada" sa 19 poginulih i 50 povrijeđenih. [3] Sumnja se na samoubilački bombaški napad. [4]

¹ Izraz "Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo" prvi put je korišten u Uniji sa Škotskim aktom 1706. Međutim, općenito se smatra opisnim izrazom, koji ukazuje na to da su se kraljevstva slobodno ujedinila, a ne osvajanjem. Ne smatra se stvarnim ime novog Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva, koje je (po članu jedan) bilo "Velika Britanija". Naziv "Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo" odnosi se na kraljevstvo koje je nastalo spajanjem Kraljevine Velike Britanije i Irske 1. januara 1801. godine.

² Ime "Velika Britanija" (tada napisano kao "Velika Britanija") prvi put je upotrijebio James VI/I u oktobru 1604., koji je naznačio da će se od sada na njega i njegove nasljednike gledati kao na kraljeve Velike Britanije, a ne na kraljeve Engleske i Škotske . Međutim, naziv nije primijenjen na država kao jedinica, Engleskom i Škotskom nastavile su se samostalno upravljati. Njegova valjanost kao imena Krune je također dovedena u pitanje, s obzirom na to da su monarsi nastavili koristiti posebne ordinale (npr. Jakov VI/I, Jakov VII/II) u Engleskoj i Škotskoj. Kako bi izbjegli zabunu, povjesničari općenito izbjegavaju koristiti izraz "kralj Velike Britanije" do 1707. godine, a umjesto toga da bi se podudarali s uobičajenom upotrebom nazivaju monarhe kraljevima ili kraljicama Engleske i Škotske. Odvojeni ordinali napušteni su kada su se dvije države spojile s Aktom Unije iz 1707., a kasniji monarsi su koristili ordinale koji su se očito temeljili na engleskoj, a ne na škotskoj historiji (moglo bi se reći da su monarhi jednostavno preuzeli viši redni red, koji je do sada uvijek bio engleski ). Jedan primjer je kraljica Elizabeta II od Ujedinjenog Kraljevstva, za koju se kaže da je "druga" iako nikada nije postojala Elizabeta I od Škotske ili Velike Britanije. Tako se izraz "Velika Britanija" općenito koristi od 1707. godine.

³ Broj se nekoliko puta mijenjao između 1801. i 1922. godine.

4 Anglo-irski ugovor ratifikovali su (i) britanski parlament (Commons, Lords & amp; Royal Assent), (ii) Dáil Éireann, i (iii) Donji dom Južne Irske, parlament formiran pod britanskom vlašću Akt Vlade Irske 1920 koji je u britanskim očima navodno bio važeći parlament Južne Irske i koji je imao gotovo identično članstvo u Dáilu, ali koji se ipak morao okupiti odvojeno prema odredbama Ugovora za odobrenje Ugovora, pa je Ugovor ratificiran prema britanskom i irskom ustavu teorija.


Whigs and Tories: 1688-1832

Od kasnog dijela 17. stoljeća do početka 19. u Velikoj Britaniji postojale su u suštini dvije velike političke stranke: vigovci i torijevci. Niti jedno i drugo ne može se opisati kao "moderno" u smislu organizovanih birača koji rade zajedno, kompromitujući svoje razlike radi zarade na biralištima. U 18. stoljeću jedini glasači bili su ljudi bogati: zemljoposjednička aristokracija i bogati trgovci. Oni su smatrali stranačku organizaciju nepoštenom i aktivnosti poput kampanja ispod njihovog statusa. Očekivalo se da će "quentgentleman" biti nezavisan, da misli svojom glavom i da štiti svoje interese. Mogao bi se udružiti s drugima po određenom pitanju, ali takvi su savezi bili privremeni i krhki. Prve političke stranke bile su labave grupe istomišljenika (zvane & quotfactions & quot) s malo discipline i manje lojalnosti.

Etikete stranaka "Quig" i "Quest" su počele kao podrugljivi izrazi kada su se prvi put pojavile tokom krize isključenja 1678. Širom zemlje ljudi se nisu slagali oko pitanja treba li Jamesu Stuartu, vojvodi od Yorka i prijestolonasljedniku dozvoliti da uspije. Kralj Charles II, njegov brat. Torijevci su vjerovali da bi James trebao uspjeti, a Whigi da ne bi trebao.

Poreklo ovog spora nalazi se u verskim i političkim kontroverzama u prethodnih sto pedeset godina. Uz mnogo krvoprolića i trauma, Tudorski monarsi u 16. stoljeću raskinuli su s Katoličkom crkvom, stvorili anglikansku crkvu i formirali protestantsku državu. Ova nova vjernost potvrđena je tokom građanskih ratova i međuvlašća 1649. - 1660. U isto vrijeme, Engleska je također počela prihvaćati neke moderne demokratske ideje koje su osnažile Parlament i ograničile Monarhiju. Kralj Charles II vjerovatno je potajno bio katolik, ali se barem javno držao anglikanske vjere. James je, međutim, bio otvoreno katolik i vrlo pobožan. Neki su njegov katolicizam vidjeli kao prijetnju svim vjerskim i političkim promjenama koje su se dogodile. Stoga su se Whigi, kako su postali poznati, protivili Jakovljevom nasljedstvu na prijestolju. Oni koji su podržavali Jamesovo nasledno pravo na krunu postali su poznati kao torijevci.

Izraz Whig vjerojatno je bio kratak za "Whiggamore", a odnosio se na kradljivca konja i na škotske prezbiterijance koji su bili povezani s republikanskim idejama, s neusklađenošću i s pobunom protiv legitimne vlasti. Nazivajući ih Vigovcima, torijevci su pokušali klevetati one koji su tvrdili da imaju pravo isključiti & quot; legitimnog & quot & quot; nasljednika iz nasljedstva. Kao odgovor, Whigi su pokušali oklevetati one koji su podržavali Jakovljeva nasljedna prava uprkos njegovoj vjeri nazivajući ih "quotTories". & QuotTory & quot vjerovatno je bila irska riječ koja znači "quotpapist odmetnik". & Quot od strane njihovih protivnika.

Rezultat početne borbe između dviju "stranaka" tijekom krize sukcesije bio je taj što su Whigi izgubili, a James postao kralj kada je Charles II umro 1685. Međutim, tokom svoje kratke vladavine od samo tri godine, James II (1685 - 1688) je uspio uvrijediti ne samo Vige, već i mnoge Torije svojim radikalnim katolicizmom i tvrdnjama da vlada "božanskom desnicom", poput autokratskih katoličkih prinčeva u Evropi. Shodno tome, većina Vigovaca i mnogih torijevaca urotili su se kako bi svrgnuli Jakova tijekom slavne revolucije 1688. Nakon kraće borbe, James je sramotno napustio prijestolje i parlament je pozvao Williama Orangea i njegovu suprugu Mary Stuart, obojicu protestanata, da zajedno naslijede englesku krunu .

Iako je kriza sukcesije bila specifičan događaj koji je doveo do formiranja dvije velike stranke, razlike među njima bile su mnogo dublje. Općenito, oni koji su se identificirali kao Whigi bili su inspirirani vrijednostima liberalne demokracije koje je donijelo Prosvjetiteljstvo, a sastojali su se od plemićkih kuća, bogatih trgovaca i ne-Anglikanaca. Oni koji su se identificirali kao Tory sastojali su se od zemljoposjedničkog plemstva i engleske crkve i bili su protiv reformizma vigovaca, poput proširenja franšize i povećanja zastupljenosti parlamenta za niže klase.

Nakon 1688. većina je torijevaca prihvatila ograničenu verziju vigovske teorije ustavne monarhije. Međutim, bilo s pravom ili pogrešno, njihova lojalnost novom poretku bila je sumnjiva jer su uopće podržali Jakovljevo nasljedstvo. Ova sumnja je potvrđena 1714. godine kada su torijevski ministri pokojne kraljice Ane (1702-1714) osramoćeni zbog pregovora o povratku Jakova II u njenu smrt. Ovaj ustanak u korist Stuartove obnove (i još jedne 1745.) stigmatizirao je Torije kao pristalice apsolutne monarhije i kao protivnike protestantskog naslijeđa. Osim kratkog uspona od 1710. do 1714. godine, torijevci su bili u slabom političkom položaju skoro sto godina. Vigovi su postali toliko dominantni nakon prvog jakobitskog ustanka da se razdoblje od 1714. do 1784. često naziva "vigovskom nadmoćnošću." label.

Francuskom revolucijom 1789. godine i ratovima koji su uslijedili, Whigi su se podijelili, a mnogi su se svrstali u odnos s tadašnjim premijerom Williamom Pittom Mlađim protiv revolucije. Pitt i njegovi nasljednici postali su poznati kao torijevci, izvorno kao uvreda, ali su do vremena grofa od Liverpoola prihvatili taj izraz.

Konzervativno i liberalno: 1832-1922

Obje stranke Whig i Tory promijenile su se nakon donošenja Velikog reformskog zakona 1832. Dvije od tri velike moderne političke stranke, konzervativna i liberalna, izrasle su direktno iz ovih ranijih. Konzervativnu stranku osnovao je 1834. Sir Robert Peel kao rezultat svog Tamworth Manifesta, govora u kojem je izložio novu političku filozofiju. Stranka je dosljedno bila društveno konzervativna, ali je promijenila svoj stav o ekonomiji, u početku podržavajući slobodnu trgovinu pod Peelovim, zatim favorizirajući protekcionizam veći dio devetnaestog stoljeća, da bi postala stranka ekonomskog liberalizma i smanjila vlast nakon Drugog svjetskog rata.

Liberalna stranka nastala je nakon raspada stranke Whig uslijed prava glasa britanske srednje klase nakon Reformskog zakona 1832, i obično je bila reformska stranka. Od 1840 -ih do 1940 -ih bila je snažno definirana svojom podrškom slobodnoj trgovini i socijalnoj skrbi, za razliku od konzervativne sklonosti protekcionizmu i privatnom milosrđu. Liberali su bili poznati i po pragmatičnoj podršci državnoj intervenciji u ekonomiji gdje je to bilo potrebno, dok su se konzervativci protivili takvoj intervenciji na ideološkim osnovama. U svojoj posljednjoj vladi, od 1906-1922, uvela je niz društvenih reformi, uključujući socijalnu skrb, reguliranje radnog vremena i nacionalno osiguranje. Podjela Liberalne partije početkom 1920 -ih navela je mnoge prethodne pristalice da svoju vjernost pređu u Laburističku stranku. Liberalni demokrati, stranka nasljednica Liberalne partije, društveno su liberalni i obično podržavaju veće oporezivanje kako bi podržali socijalnu državu, ali imaju sve veći dio ekonomskih liberala.

Konzervativci i laburisti: 1922 do danas

Laburistička partija osnovana je 1900. godine kako bi zastupala stavove radničke klase i sindikalnog pokreta. Stranka je tradicionalno bila socijalistička ili socijaldemokratska u pogledu, što je dokazano uvođenjem socijalne države i centralnog planiranja u Ujedinjenom Kraljevstvu 1940 -ih. Nakon izbornog uspjeha tačerizma 1980-ih, katastrofalnog rezultata općih izbora 1983. godine za Laburističku stranku i izbornog uspjeha SDP-Liberalnog saveza, Laburistička stranka krenula je prema neoliberalnom stavu, kako je prikazano u Filozofija trećeg puta. Od ulaska u vladu 1997. godine, neki su tvrdili da su laburisti postajali sve desnije. Drugi su, međutim, ukazali na veliko povećanje socijalne potrošnje kao dokaz da stranka ostaje privržena socijaldemokratskim vrijednostima.


Politika 1870 -ih i 1880 -ih

Dva naizgled neskladna trenda obilježila su politički pejzaž posljednje četvrtine devetnaestog stoljeća. Ni u jednom drugom trenutku interes građana za izbore i politiku nije bio strasniji nego u ovom periodu. In fact, 80 to 90 percent of the eligible voters (white and black males in the North and white males the South) consistently voted in local and national elections. This amazing turnout occurred at a time when the major political parties differed little on the issues and when the platforms of the two main national political parties were almost indistinguishable. Consequently, throughout the era, voters gave few strict mandates to either parties or individuals and the outcomes of the presidential races were determined by a relatively small number of votes. Although Grover Cleveland, elected in 1884, was the first Democratic presidential candidate to win office since James Buchanan in 1856, no sitting President had a majority of his own party in both houses of Congress for his entire term.

Political activity in the Midwest was both highly partisan and rousingly participatory. Thousands turned out for political rallies and parades, sometimes clothed in cheap but colorful costumes provided by the parties and marching along with the bands and floats. Men and women sat for hours in the hot sun devouring details on the issues of the day, regardless of the fact that the parties differed little on these very issues. These rallies were as much social events as political gatherings.

The political debate was actively carried on in the press. Newspaper circulation far exceeded the number of voters in most counties, indicating that many families subscribed to more than one paper. In 1886, the Midwest published 340 dailies and 2900 weeklies, totals that were almost exactly the same as the number of television and radio stations in the nation in the mid-1950s. These papers flourished because they were semiofficial party organs, and provided a direct route from the party operatives to the rank and file. The news was almost as biased as the editorials.

Voters spoke of political loyalty in the same breath as religious affiliation. Most voted as their fathers had before them. A sample of thousands of interviews taken by directory makers in Illinois and Indiana in the mid-1870s showed that only 2 percent of men were without a party affiliation. Anyone uncomfortable with his party’s position would most likely not split his ticket and almost never switched parties. Instead, if he was really unhappy, he just stayed away from the polls on election day.

Given that the two parties were nearly evenly matched in the Midwest and the nation as a whole in the 1880s, turnout for elections was especially important. Nationally, less than two percentage points separated the total Democratic and Republican vote for congressmen in the elections of 1878, 1880, 1884, 1886 and 1888. On the presidential front, in 1880 Garfield was victorious over Hancock by only 7,000 votes. Cleveland, in 1884, edged out Blaine by only 70,000 votes out of 10 million cast. The Midwest was almost as close Blaine was only 90,000 votes ahead of Cleveland out of 3 million votes cast regionally. Indiana went to Cleveland, the only state in the Midwest to do so, possibly because his vice-presidential running mate was Indiana Senator Thomas A. Hendricks.

Clearly, a small shift in votes, a sharp drop in turnout or a bit of fraudulent manipulation of returns could decide the winners in local, state or even national races. Consequently, the parties aligned their strategy with the two main facts of political life, intense partisanship and very tight races. Indiana and New York were considered the ‘swing’ states, and much effort was expended by both parties on getting out the vote in these two states.

The Parties

THE REPUBLICANS
The Republican Party first appeared on the national ballot in 1856. Following the 1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act, the Whig party disintegrated, and meetings in the upper mid-western states led to the formation of this new party opposed to the spread of slavery into the western territories. The Republicans quickly became the dominant force in the North, and with the Confederate defeat, known as the party of the victors. The south became solidly Democratic, and would remain so for decades.

After the war, the Republicans continued the Whig tradition of promoting industrial development through high tariffs. The party promoted government activism, primarily to foster economic development. Freedmen and the white, Protestant population of the Northeast comprised their political base. It was during this post-war period that the party became known as the "Grand Old Party", or GOP.

The party advocated moralistic policies based on evangelical Protestant values. They generally supported restrictions on the sale and use of alcohol and limits on business openings on Sunday. Their support came from the Methodists and Baptists of the Northeast and Midwest and other evangelical sects.

The party was not without dissent. After the disgrace and scandal of Ulysses Grant’s administration, a group of Republican civil service reformers provoked a revolt in the 1872 election. This issue was kept alive by a group of New York Republicans, known as Mugwumps, who continued to advocate for reform of the civil service patronage system. Grant was not without his supporters, who were known as Stalwarts. A third group, the Half-Breeds, favored moderate reform and the continuation of high tariffs.

In truth, the parties differed only slightly on the issues in the years after the war. The Republican party, for the most part, favored industrialists, bankers and railroad interests. In fact, more than one scandal during the era arose from corrupt dealings between politicians and railroad barons. Republicans more strongly favored hard money policies and strict laissez-faire economic policies, until public pressure forced the issue of regulation, especially with regard to railroad rates.

THE DEMOCRATS
The modern form of the Democratic party began in the years after the War of 1812. Although the Democrats cannot be credited with starting conventions, platforms and highly institutionalized campaigning, they succeeded in bringing these features to new levels in the party system. From the mid-1830s to the Civil War, the Democrats were the nation’s majority party, controlling Congress, the presidency and many state offices. In general, the Democrats favored a confined and minimal federal government and states’ rights.

The party suffered its first major disruption in the mid-1850s. A large influx of Irish and German Catholic immigration precipitated a strong reaction among northern Democrats. Worries about the future of the "Protestant" nation led to the formation of the Know-Nothing party, which drew off many Democrats. Also, many Democratic leaders were reluctant to take a stand against slavery, and that was viewed as a pro-southern stand that permitted slaveholders to prevail in new territories and consequently to dominate in national politics. The new Republican party astutely played on the nativism and anti-southern sentiment, resulting in a new political alignment.

The Democrat’s second significant era lasted from the Civil War into the 1890s. Partisan loyalties planted early in the century and nurtured during the Civil War kept the party faithful loyal in election after election. Southern whites who had not been Democrats earlier flocked to the party in the aftermath of Reconstruction, making the Solid (Democratic) South a political reality.


Elections and Voting in the 19th Century

Today, the right to fair and free elections is almost taken for granted. However, many of the rights we have today as voters - including the right to a secret ballot and for elections to be duly supervised - were not commonplace until the late 19th century. Until this point, elections results were often open to corruption through practises including bribery and treating of electors, and intimidation and threatening of voters.

This section explores the way in which Parliament responded to calls for electoral reform in the 19th century.

What were voting conditions like in the 19th century? How did Parliament address corrupt practices in elections?

Parliamentary Archives and Norfolk Record Office worked with a local research group to explore elections in the 19th century


Leaving all to younger hands

The campaign to win passage of the 19th Amendment guaranteeing women the right to vote stands as one of the most significant and wide-ranging moments of political mobilization in all of American history. Among other outcomes, it produced the largest one-time increase in voters ever. As important as the goal of suffrage was, the struggle was always far broader than just the franchise, and it spoke to fundamental questions about women’s roles in politics and modern life: Who does the government permit to vote? What is the relationship between citizenship and suffrage? The suffragists challenged the political status quo at the time and in many ways can be thought of as the voting rights activists of their day. That observation is still true today as women approach their second century of full voting rights and leads us to explore why does the history of women’s suffrage matter?

The women’s suffrage movement always had a deep sense of its own history. In many ways, suffragists were our first women’s historians, none more so than Susan B. Anthony. When the fourth volume of the Istorija biračkog prava žena appeared in 1902, the 82-year-old Anthony looked back with pride at what the movement had accomplished, but she also looked forward to what still needed to be done, penning this inscription in her friend Caroline Healey Dall’s personal copy:

This closes the records of the 19th century of work done by and for women— what the 20th century will show—no one can foresee—but that it will be vastly more and better—we cannot fail to believe. But you & I have done the best we knew—and so must rest content—leaving all to younger hands. Your sincere friend and coworker, Susan B. Anthony. 1

When she wrote those words, Anthony had devoted more than 50 years to the women’s suffrage movement and victory was nowhere in sight. Yet she remained proud of what she and her co-workers had done for the cause, and confident that the future would bring even more progress. I suspect that the suffrage leaders who guided the movement to its successful conclusion on August 26, 1920, felt the same way.

Once the 19th Amendment passed, suffragists claimed a new moniker—that of women citizens.

“Shall Not Be Denied”

The 19th Amendment states that “the right of citizens to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.” The amendment was originally introduced in Congress in 1878 but it took until 1919 before it enjoyed sufficient bipartisan support to pass the House of Representatives and the Senate. Then it needed to be ratified by the legislatures in three-fourths of the states. By March 1920, 35 states had ratified the amendment, but that left suffragists one short. In August, Tennessee put the amendment over the top, paving the way for women to vote in the 1920 presidential election.

Suffragists-turned-women-citizens

Once the 19th Amendment passed, suffragists claimed a new moniker—that of women citizens. In many ways the suffrage movement was an anomaly, the rare time when a broad coalition of women came together under one banner. In the post-suffrage era, politically engaged women embraced a wide variety of causes rather than remaining united around a single goal. Their political ideologies ran the gamut from progressive to moderate to conservative, but when it came to politics and public life, their message was clear: “We have come to stay.”

In this enlarged perspective, the suffrage victory is not a hard stop but part of a continuum of women’s political mobilization stretching not just between the iconic Seneca Falls Convention of 1848 and the passage of the 19th Amendment in 1920 but across all of American history. It is still appropriate, indeed welcome, to commemorate the centennial of the 19th Amendment as an important marker in American women’s history. But, rather than positioning 1920 as the end of the story, it is far more fruitful to see it as initiating the next stage in the history of women’s political activism—a story that is still unfolding.

Throughout American history, women have been dedicated political actors even without the vote. Women’s political history is far broader than the ratification of a single constitutional amendment.

Passage of the 19th Amendment: An incomplete victory

When thinking about the larger implications of the suffrage victory, we also need to remember that many women, especially those in Western states, were already voting in the years before the passage of the 19th Amendment. In addition, many women across the country enjoyed the right to vote on the local level in municipal elections and for school committees. Focusing too much on the 1920 milestone downplays the political clout that enfranchised women already exercised, as well as tends to overshadow women’s earlier roles as community builders, organization founders, and influence wielders. Throughout American history, women have been dedicated political actors even without the vote. Women’s political history is far broader than the ratification of a single constitutional amendment.

Celebrating the passage of the 19th Amendment also slights the plight of African American voters, for whom the 19th Amendment was at most a hollow victory. In 1920, the vast majority of African Americans still lived in the South, where their voting rights were effectively eliminated by devices such as whites-only primaries, poll taxes, and literacy tests. For Black Americans, it was the Voting Rights Act of 1965, not the 14th, 15th, or 19th Amendments, that finally removed the structural barriers to voting.

In a parallel disfranchisement, few Native American women gained the vote through the 19th Amendment. Not until 1924 did Congress pass legislation declaring that all Native Americans born in the United States were citizens, which cleared the way for tribal women to vote. But Native American women still faced ongoing barriers to voting on the state and local levels, especially in the West, as did Mexican Americans. Puerto Rican women did not gain the vote until 1935 and Chinese American women not until 1943. When assessing who can exercise the right to vote, it is always essential to ask who cannot.

Women suffragists cover a billboard to advertise their Washington, D.C. parade. Nation-wide demonstrations were held in May 1914 to support the Federal Amendment enfranchising women (Shutterstock)
Suffrage and feminism

Women’s demand for fair and equitable treatment in the political realm emerges as an integral part of the history of feminism. To protest women’s exclusion from voting demanded an assault on attitudes and ideologies that treated women as second-class citizens to formulate that challenge involved conceptualizing women as a group whose collective situation needed to be addressed. Unfortunately, white suffragists often failed to realize they were speaking primarily from their own privileged class and race positions. The fact that certain groups of women, especially women of color, were often excluded from this supposedly universal vision demonstrates how racism intersected with feminism throughout the suffrage movement and its aftermath. Contemporary feminists have significantly broadened their commitment to recognizing the diversity of women’s experiences and worked hard to include multiple perspectives within the broader feminist framework, but it is still a struggle. The suffrage movement is part of that story, warts and all.

A global struggle

The history of women’s suffrage also reminds us that the struggle for the vote was a global phenomenon. Starting in the 1830s and 1840s, American and British abolitionists forged connections that influenced the early history of the suffrage movement. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott first met at an antislavery conference in London in 1840. Women’s international networks were especially vibrant in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In 1888, the International Council of Women was founded to bring together existing women’s groups, primarily from North America and western Europe, with Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony as its prime instigators. Its offshoot, the International Woman Suffrage Alliance, founded in Berlin in 1904 “to secure the enfranchisement of the women of all nations,” fed the growth of the women’s suffrage movement worldwide. Women today enjoy nearly universal access to the franchise, but it is a misnomer to say that women were “given” the vote. Just as in the United States, women around the globe had to fight for that right.

Empowered through solidarity

Participating in the suffrage campaign provided women with the kind of exhilaration and camaraderie often described by men in periods of war or political upheaval. Women were proud to be part of this great crusade, and they cherished the solidarity it engendered for the rest of their lives. Frances Perkins, a veteran of the New York suffrage campaign and the first woman to serve in the cabinet as Franklin D. Roosevelt’s secretary of labor, remembered it this way: “The friendships that were formed among women who were in the suffrage movement have been the most lasting and enduring friendships—solid, substantial, loyal—that I have ever seen anywhere. The women learned to like each other in that suffrage movement.” 2

National Woman’s Party activists watch Alice Paul sew a star onto the NWP Ratification Flag, representing another state’s ratification of the 19th Amendment (Library of Congress)
Factions within the movement

The history of women’s suffrage also confirms the difficulty of maintaining unity in social movements. Women’s rights and abolition were closely allied before the Civil War, but that old coalition linking race and gender split irrevocably in the 1860s. The dispute was about who had priority: newly freed African American men or white women, who also wanted to be included in the post-Civil War expansion of political liberties represented by the 14th and 15th Amendments. Suffragists such as Lucy Stone, Henry Blackwell, and Julia Ward Howe had hoped for universal suffrage, but once the amendments were drafted, they supported ratification despite the exclusion of women. Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton adamantly refused to support the amendments, often employing racist language to imply that white women were just as deserving of the vote as African American men, if not more so. By 1869 the suffrage movement had split in two over this question, not to reunite until 1890.

That split was both strategic and philosophical, as was the one in the 1910s between Carrie Chapman Catt’s mainstream National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) and Alice Paul’s upstart National Woman’s Party (NWP). Catt’s much larger group tended to favor a state-by-state approach, while Paul and her supporters focused on winning a federal amendment. In addition, NAWSA was committed to working within the system while the NWP took to the streets, silently picketing the White House to express their outrage at women’s voteless status. In the end both sides were necessary to win ratification, just as the 19th century split had allowed competing personalities with different approaches to advance the movement in their own ways.

It is a misnomer to say that women were “given” the vote. Just as in the United States, women around the globe had to fight for that right.

Toward the future of equality in practice as well as in law

By the early 20th century, women had already moved far beyond the domestic sphere and boldly entered public life, yet a fundamental responsibility and privilege of citizenship—the right to vote—was arbitrarily denied to half the population. The 19th Amendment changed that increasingly untenable situation, representing a breakthrough for American women as well as a major step forward for American democracy. The wave of female candidates in the 2018 midterm elections and the unprecedented number of women who ran for president in 2020 built directly on the demands for fair and equitable access to the political realm articulated by the women’s suffrage movement.

Historian Anne Firor Scott provides an especially evocative image of how winning the vote was part of larger changes in women’s lives and in American society more broadly: “Suffrage was a tributary flowing into the rich and turbulent river of American social development. That river is enriched by the waters of each tributary, but with the passage of time it becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish the special contributions of any one of the tributaries.” 3 Think of the contributions of the hundreds of thousands of rank-and-file women who participated in the fight to win the vote as the tributaries that make up suffrage history. And then think of suffrage history as a powerful strand in the larger stream of American history, which is richer and stronger because it heeded Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s prescient statement at Seneca Falls that all men and women are created equal. While the United States still lacks truly universal suffrage and gender equity remains a widely debated issue, the 19th Amendment represented a giant step toward both goals and left a firm constitutional foundation for future progress. When Susan B. Anthony talked about “leaving all to younger hands,” I like to think this is what she had in mind.


Late 19th Century

In the second half of the 19th Century, printing technology in the United States was advancing to meet the needs of a population expanding from coast to coast. Faster printing presses and the construction and connection of the railroad system and postal service made the manufacture and distribution of books, magazines, and newspapers more efficient, and the nation was able to read about and respond to current events more quickly than ever before. Illustration was important to publications like Frank Leslie&rsquos Illustrated Newspaper i Harper&rsquos Weekly. Artists, salaried as on-site reporters, sketched events as they were taking place, while freelancers were paid to do political cartoons, allegorical pictures, and story illustrations. In order for the artwork to be printed, the original artwork&mdashgenerally done in pen and ink&mdash had to be interpreted by wood engravers who created the printing blocks that would go on the presses.

Winslow Homer, engraving made from reportage drawing, "Surgeons at the Rear," 1862

Harper and Brothers publishers, already successful with its books and illustrated weekly newspaper, created a monthly magazine and formed a staff of in-house artists to make pen drawings on a wide range of subjects and narrative fiction. These illustrators of the 1870s and 1880s were among the finest in the world, each with his own specialty: Thomas Nast for political cartoons, Thur de Thulstrup for history and horses, Howard Pyle for Americana, Edwin Austin Abbey for all things costumed or English, William A. Rogers for urban scenes, A. B. Frost for rural subjects and humor, and Frederic Remington for the western frontier. This great collection of talent led American publishing to finally rival the quality of European illustrated journals.

In the words of his biographer, &ldquoIf Thomas Nast was merely a cartoonist, then Abraham Lincoln was merely a politician.&rdquo Followers of Nast&rsquos political cartoons tripled the circulation of Harper&rsquos Weekly. Political personalities that he satirized were weakened and usually dethroned, and every presidential candidate that he supported was elected. He expressed his opinion on every important social and political issue of his time, created the elephant and donkey symbols for the Republican and Democratic parties and gave America its now familiar portrayals of Uncle Sam and Santa Claus.

Thomas Nast, cover illustration, Harper's Weekly, 1874

English artist/illustrators associated with the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood&mdashDante Gabriel Rosetti, Edward Burne-Jones, Frederick Sandys, A.B. Houghton, and others&mdashcreated drawings for books and literary journals. Typically, these would be translated by wood engravers or wood block cutters. The Dalziel Brothers were the finest engraving craftsmen of their time and their interpretations of artists' pen work was said to actually improve the picture's quality. The English were the first to adapt Japanese colored wood block printing techniques to book production. Edmund Evans, a former engraver, designed a method of printing illustrations in six colors and employed the talents of Walter Crane, Randolph Caldecott, and Kate Greenaway. Near the end of the century, the English illustrator Aubrey Beardsley was creating elegant and decadent work which was also, in part, influenced by Japanese graphic art. In France, the commercial posters of Czech artist Alphonse Mucha were the epitome of Art Nouveau illustration style. Art was drawn onto multiple stone lithographic plates representing particular colors, and resulted in a full-color effect. Color lithography, also called "chromolithography," was being used to produce advertising posters, business cards, and greeting cards and also for magazine covers and center pages (Joseph Keppler). Towards the end of the century, photoengraving allowed artists' original line art to be exactly reproduced without having to be interpreted through hand engraving. The halftone screening process was used to reproduce tonal paintings and photographs.

Arthur Boyd Houghton, book illustration (engraved by the Dalziel Bros.), 1868

Kate Greenaway, watercolor illustration, 1879

Aubrey Beardsley, book illustration in woodcut, from Salomé, a play by Oscar Wilde, 1894

Alphonse Mucha, lithographic print, "The Arts: Poetry," 1898

Joseph Keppler, colored lithograph, "Nevermore" (President William Henry Harrison), Puck magazine, 1890

Howard Pyle became well-known for his illustrations in Harper&rsquos Monthly Magazine and his illustrated children&rsquos books. He told the story of the legendary Robin Hood in an illustrated novel and revealed the world of pirate lore to readers of his illustrated short stories. In the 1890s he decided that he wanted to teach what he had learned through experience. At the time there were no courses in any schools or colleges for studying illustration, so he offered his services to the Drexel Institute in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and in 1896 began teaching there. In that first year he had five students of extraordinary talent&mdashthree women and two men: Violet Oakley, Elizabeth Shippen Green, Jessie Wilcox Smith, Maxfield Parrish, and Frank Schoonover. Pyle&rsquos classes grew from year to year as his reputation as a teacher spread. He created a special summer course for his most promising students that was held in an old mill along the Brandywine River in the village of Chadd&rsquos Ford, Pennsylvania, and in 1900 he opened his own, tuition-free school in Wilmington, Delaware. The training he provided produced a crop of confident and supremely skilled young artists whom Pyle personally shepherded into their first professional work. The narrative realism that Pyle and they practiced became the primary approach to illustration of the early 20th Century and would come to be called the &ldquoBrandywine Tradition.&rdquo

Howard Pyle, oil painting, "Walking the Plank," later engraved for Harper's Monthly Magazine, 1887

Howard Pyle, oil painting, Leteći Holanđanin, 1900


What voting rights issues remain today?

While voting rights in America have come a long way toward ensuring equal ballot access for all, many scholars and activists argue that the overtly racist Jim Crow laws of the past have given way to discriminatory policies, like voter ID laws, cuts to early voting, polling place closures, and limits to pre-registration.

Strict voter ID laws and other restrictions enacted by Texas and North Carolina in the wake of the Shelby County v. Holder were struck down in federal court, with one federal appeals court finding that North Carolina's law targeted "African Americans with almost surgical precision."

Among voting issues and controversies in recent years, in 2018, former Georgia Secretary of State and current Governor Brian Kemp was accused of putting 53,000 voter registration applications "on hold" for mismatched names, and incorrectly purging 340,000 voters from the rolls.

In North Dakota, where most Native Americans who reside on reservations only have a PO box, the US Supreme Court upheld a state law requiring voters to bring an ID to the polls with a residential address. The ruling left Native communities scrambling to obtain proper IDs just weeks before the election.

Along with the predominately non-white citizens of American territories like Guam and American Samoa, almost 6 million taxpaying Americans with felony convictions were barred from voting in the 2018 midterms due to state-level felon disenfranchisement laws.

In November 2018, voters in Florida approved a constitutional amendment overturning the state's disenfranchisement law for good, allowing around 1 million formerly disenfranchised residents to vote. The following year, the Florida Legislature passed a law that requires people with felony convictions to pay off any court fines and fees before they can register to vote, which critics say discriminates against poorer residents who cannot afford to do so. In July 2020, the Supreme Court allowed Florida to keep this law in place — it continues to be appealed.


Pogledajte video: Identities of mutually intelligible languages: Croatian, Serbian, Bosnian and Montenegrin 092021