Extra-parliamentary forces
The drive behind reforming legislation usually came from outside Parliament, as with the working-class Chartist movement intent on reform of the whole electoral process. It is essential, therefore, in the case of each projected 'reform bill' to assess the influence on it of extra-Parliamentary pressures, both of opinion and interests and, in the case of each successful 'reform bill', it is necessary to weigh the role of Parliament and the role of extra-Parliamentary forces in determining the outcome. Doing so has involved controversy between historians as it usually involved political controversy at the time. Moreover, since reformers outside Parliament were often dissatisfied with the extent of the reform, they returned sooner or later to what seemed to them a continuing struggle. Meanwhile, those public servants concerned with implementation often suggested further reforms in the light of experience. The stories of particular reforms, therefore, were usually serial stories.
Whether the comprehensive title the 'Age of Reform' should refer to the whole period in British history between 1837 and 1901 - a period of sharp contrasts in place and time - raises other basic questions, pivoting on the relationships between 'improvement', 'reform' and 'revolution'. As the fear of revolution in Britain receded after 1815, many 'reformers' claimed that only if particular reforms were carried in time could revolution be avoided. And almost all reformers agreed that 'revolution' was the best means of 'reform'. The opponents of the Great Reform Bill claimed that it was 'revolutionary', but within two years of its passing in 1832 most of them accepted it as a fait accompli and adjusted their politics accordingly. It proved to be the first of four successful 19th-century reform bills, the second in 1867, the third introducing the ballot in 1872 and the fourth in 1885. There was more popular agitation, driven by economic as well as by political discontent, in the years 1830-1832 and in the years 1866-1867 than there was in 1885, when the Reform Bill was introduced, as the 1867 had been, by a Conservative government. Yet the 1885 Act had long-term radical consequences - mainly, the political opening up villages through a rural electorate.
It is difficult in retrospect to tell the serial stories of particular reforms in terms of party manifestos, although politicians (and some historians) have been tempted to do so. Group politics are relevant in early and mid-Victorian Britain because members of the medical profession were in a position, as many clergymen were, to cross environmental and social divides and collect evidence, including statistical evidence, when they sought to identify 'problems' requiring action. It is individuals, however, who must usually be given the limelight. Coming from different social and political backgrounds, their personal commitment was crucial to the success of reform legislation.