Voice of the People or Raving of the Rabble? Petitions and Disputes on Political Representation in Britain, 1721–1776

Abstract

Representation has, in one form or another, been one of the cornerstones of organised societies throughout their history. It is also an extensively studied topic in the fields of political history, political science, and philosophy. Most studies have, however, approached the subject by focusing on intellectuals and philosophers, often emphasising sudden ruptures and paradigmatic changes. In order to understand representation from a pragmatic and less paradigmatic perspective, this thesis examines parliamentary representation in eighteenth-century Britain through petitions. It is based on 464 petitions submitted to parliament, members of parliament, and the Throne in 1721–1776; located and gathered through digital methods. It also scrutinises debates on petitions and petitioning in parliament and the press. The studied petitions demonstrate that rather than being defined by a clear-cut dichotomy between the free mandate and the imperative mandate of representation, the process of defining representation in Britain contained far more nuance. The thesis argues that most petitioners used implicit means to influence the petitioned, from representative claims to ideals and counter-ideals. Such means provided petitioners more leeway than the explicit forms of persuasion, enabling them to suggest that the petitioned ought to act as requested without explicitly demanding so. By focusing on the practical aspects of representation, the thesis argues that rather than being a fact, or something primarily defined through high-minded theories, representation was a constant process of negotiation between the representatives and those they represented.