The public records: The historian, the national interest and official policy

Abstract

The passage of the Public Records Act in 1838 is regarded, and rightly regarded, as a landmark not only in historical studies in Britain but also in the evolution of a civilized informed democracy. The recognition by the state of its obligation to collect, preserve and make available the records of its own activities was a logical and necessary complement to its acceptance of the people's right to rule. It was by no accident that the French Revolution resulted in the opening of the French archives. It was by no accident that the Public Records Act was preceded, six years earlier, by the Great Reform Bill. The substitution of responsibility for neglect, of centralization for dispersion, of classification for chaos, of salaried experts for pensioners and perquisite-collectors, of free access for heavy fees this was all part of that urge for reform which justly entitles the 1830's and 1840's to be regarded as the harbingers of ordered democracy in Britain. And though much of this was not explicit in the 1838 Act, it was all latent in it and was by degrees achieved in consequence of it. Thus while, with some justification, emphasis fell on the custody and care of the records, the end of public service and public use was always present. As Lord Langdale, the Master of the Rolls, wrote to Lord John Russell in 1839, The Records have justly been called the Muniments of the Kingdom and the People's Evidence; and they ought to be kept and managed under such arrangements as may afford to the public the greatest facility of using them that is consistent with their safety.