Was Fear Of 1815-1832 The Main Reason For Parliamentary Reform

Was fear of revolution 1815-1832 the main reason for parliamentary reform in 1832?

During the time frame of 1815-1832 there was a growing belief that some parliamentary reform was needed. The problems with the electoral system were overwhelming as the poor and women were still not able to vote and Britain was also dealing with an economic hardship. From this there is evidence to suggest that revolution was the main reason for parliamentary reform because change was long overdue and people thought that revolting was the only way that their voices would be heard and demands met. However, there is also evidence to suggest that revolution was not the main reason for parliamentary reform because there were no organised groups ready to plan and

Following the French Revolution, the Corn Laws were enforced between 1815 and 1846 to keep grain process high, in order to favour and protect the domestic producers. This caused further discontent within the people because the poor were made poorer, and the rich were made richer. The poor were still struggling to afford food and support their families while the landowners were benefitting from the increased prices of corn. Along with the price of food and living increasing, factory owners were trying to reduce wages which further encouraged and motivated those affected to take a stand. In 1819, what started out as a peaceful assembly with many dressed in their Sunday best and carrying themselves with dignity and discipline became the Peterloo Massacre. Fuelled by hunger and the fact that less than 2% had the vote, 18 people were killed and 700 were left seriously injured as a result of these peaceful pro-democracy and anti-poverty protesters. From the escalation of a peaceful assembly to a massacre, parliament again began to feel the pressure and so realised that reform was needed to prevent any further

As a result of the French Revolution many thought that it gave an example for the disgruntled people of Britain to follow as a way of having their demands met through riots. This is because it was successful for France and their monarchy was overthrown. However, the argument that I propose is that because some of the factors that started the French Revolution were not relative to the difficulties occurring in Britain there was no threat seen. France were dealing with an absolute monarchy whereas Britain did not have that problem. Because there was not a direct correlation and link between the problems in France and Britain, the possibility of another revolution was