Country Party Research Articles

King and People in Provincial Massachusetts

The American revolutionaries themselves believed the change from monarchy to republic was the essence of the Revolution. King and People in Provincial Massachusetts explores what monarchy meant to Massachusetts under its second charter and why the momentous change to republican government came about. Richard L. Bushman argues that monarchy entailed more than having a king as head of state: it was an elaborate political culture with implications for social organization as well. Massachusetts, moreover, was entirely loyal to the king and thoroughly imbued with that culture. Why then did the colonies become republican in 1776? The change cannot be attributed to a single thinker such as John Locke or to a strain of political thought such as English country party rhetoric. Instead, it was the result of tensions ingrained in the colonial political system that surfaced with the invasion of parliamentary power into colonial affairs after 1763. The underlying weakness of monarchical government in Massachusetts was the absence of monarchical society -- the intricate web of patronage and dependence that existed in England. But the conflict came from the colonists' conception of rulers as an alien class of exploiters whose was the plundering of the colonies. In large part, colonial politics was the effort to restrain official avarice. The author explicates the meaning of interest in political discourse to show how that conception was central in the thinking of both the popular party and the British ministry. Management of the of royal officials was a problem that continually bedeviled both the colonists and the crown. Conflict was perennial because the colonists and the ministry pursued diverging objectives in regulating colonial officialdom. Ultimately the colonists came to see that safety against exploitation by self-interested rulers would be assured only by republican government.

The ideology of Jacobitism on the eve of the rising of 1745—part I

The ideology of Jacobitism is difficult to articulate, since it was composed of many heterogeneous strands. The ideology of English Jacobites was a ‘partial’ view of the world. It embraced the pre-1688 Tory notions of hereditary and indefeasible right, passive obedience and non-resistance. It took in the ‘Country’ critique of corruption and its nostalgia for a lost ‘golden age’. The ideology of Scottish Jacobitism came nearer to being a ‘ Welta~sc~u~u~g’. Apart from its role as an ideolgy of nationalism, stressing the importance of a unique Scottish culture, it depended on a providential and mystical view of the world. Discussion of the part played by ideology in the Jacobite rising of 1745 necessarily includes, then, a motley array of issues, dynastic, religious, cultural, political and even philosophical. Basically, there were three types of ideological Jacobitism. The first type, whose major tenets had been exhaustively debated during the period 16881720, concerned the notions of divine, indefeasible right, passive obedience and non-resistance. This doctrine, particularly associated with pro-Stuart polemicists like Charles Leslie and Francis Atterbury, was still very much alive in Jacobite circles by 1745, though the debate between Whig and Tory on its implications had to some extent given way to the debate between exponents of the Court and Country positions. The second type was Jacobitism as an ideology of Scottish nationalism. This was particularly associated with the mystics of North-Eastern Scotland like Chevalier Ramsay, and was a powerful influence in the 1745 rebellion; one of its leading practitioners, Lord Pitsligo, was ‘out’ in the rising. The third type was Jacobitism as an offshoot of Country ideology. Perhaps the best representative of this species of Jacobitism was the great historian Thomas Carte. This is perhaps the most difficult type to pin down, since the Country party was in some ways diametrically opposed to the Jacobites. There is a further problem about Jacobite doctrine in that its ideological tenets were never collected together in one volume so as to rival John Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government which was a possible, if not actual Whig ‘bible’. A systematic and exhaustive survey of Jacobite ideology would have to be pieced together from a number of divers sources, including songs, pamphlets and manifestos, all of which tend to exemplify the tripartite heterogeneity mentioned above. Some of these tenets were, in any case, regarded as self-evident and in need of little refinement since their classical

THE INDUSTRIES ASSISTANCE COMMISSION AND THE MAKING OF PRIMARY INDUSTRY POLICY

Abstract: The Industries Assistance Commission has been a new ingredient to the policymaking process for Australian primary industry. The traditional process contained a number of features — close association with the Country Party, Federal/State bargaining, a powerful Department of Primary Industry and myriad non‐departmental authorities — which together led to policies which were ad hoc, complicated and often based on social rather than economic criteria. The Whitlam government, with the support of the Liberal Party, but against the opposition of the Country Party, included the examination of assistance to primary industry within the scope of the IAC. Advising on primary industry was a special challenge for the IAC. The Commission devoted considerable energies to expanding its own resources into this field and establishing working relations with other institutions working in this area. Since 1974 about a sixth of the IAC's resources have been devoted to inquiries into primary industries, though the workload has decreased in recent years. The consequence of the IAC's entry into the field has meant primarily that other actors in the process, such as State departments and industry organisations have had to supplement their own resources by the employment of professional agricultural economists to write their submissions. The style of debate has been indelibly altered. This, rather than the direct impact of the IAC's recommendations on assistance to primary industries, stands as the new institution's greatest achievement.

The Left-Wing Whigs: Whitbread, The Mountain and Reform, 1809–1815

In the decade after 1807, the Whig Opposition was divided between the conservatives and the progressives, the former consisting of the Grenvillites and most Foxite-Whigs, particularly their leaders, while many of the latter associated together in the Mountain. This was led by Samuel Whitbread until his death in 1815. It was distinguished from the rest of the Opposition primarily by its independent, aggressively activist support for economical and parliamentary reform and its willingness to associate on these issues with the followers of Sir Francis Burdett and the metropolitan radicals. The Opposition as a whole, and more recently the Grenvillites, have been carefully examined as part of the ongoing study of political groups in this era, but as yet there is no systematic analysis of the Mountain. This paper identifies twenty-one Mountaineers and marshalls the evidence for the nature of their activities together. It also analyzes the sources and nature of their reformist ideology, their independence, their tactics as a pressure group and their relationship to the Whigs and the radicals.ITwelve Mountaineers were by birth aristocrats and gentry. The Mountain's independent character was in part shaped by country gentlemen like Thomas William Coke and Charles Callis Western. Although committed to Whiggism and the Whig party, such men also inherited in some respects the eighteenth-century country party mentality which believed that the executive was corrupt and prided itself on acting independently as a check upon its excesses. Young Lord Folkestone, even more independent, was committed to Whiggism but not at all to the Whig party for he thought of himself as an independent, virtuous aristocrat guarding against and exposing government corruption.

Decline and division in the WA country party

IN AUGUST-October 1978 the Western Australian Country Party split in two, the National Country Party (NCP) retaining organisational continuity, coalition membership and party name while the new National Party (NP) created a parallel ruralbased political organisation with a substantial number of former NCP members. This event was a dramatic one, not least in its highlighting of two major themes in party history: the first the extent of diversity among State country parties and the second the divided nature of party response to political decline (and particularly to political decline within coalition). It is to these two themes that this article is in turn addressed. Dominant in Queensland, more-or-Iess secure in New South Wales and the Northern Territory, on the defensive in Victoria, virtually non-existent in South Australia and Tasmania, and divided in two in Western Australia: the regional differences are as evident as are the commonalities among the various State country parties and they present some difficulties for writers who seek to generalise across State boundaries. Nevertheless analysts have offered a number of general explanations for both party decline and party longevity. The question is how far the particularities of the Western Australian experience conform to the broad patterns discerned in these overviews. The Western Australian experience has been above all one of falling representation, a situation which has not everywhere been the case as is evident in Table 1. Whereas in the New South Wales and Queensland popular houses the party actually improved its position in the thirty years after 1947, in Western Australia representation was halved. Only in Victoria was there greater decline. Decreases in both parliamentary and coalition representation were evident in Western Australia through the whole of the post-war period but their impact was muted until the 1970s when the trend accelerated. Indeed in the thirtyto thirty-two-seat Legislative Council (increased to thirty-two in 1977) the party maintained its hold on either seven or eight seats throughout the post-war period until 1974 when the number fell to three. However as Year

Industrial Relations Under a Conservative Government: The Coalition's Labour Law Programme 1975 to 1978

In just three years following the election of the Liberal-National Country Party Coalition Government, Australian industrial law underwent considerable transformation, including extensive amendments to the Conciliation and Arbi tration Act and further legislative changes introduced by commonwealth and state parliaments. These developments marked a shift towards the principle of industrial enforcement. In the 1960s and early 1970s a pattern of industrial relations developed which tended to play down the centralising role of the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission.1 Those developments have to some extent been legislatively repudiated, though how far this will effect the long term evolution of industrial relations remains to be seen. The purpose of this article is to provide an outline of recent changes in labour law and to make some comment on their likely impact upon industrial relations. The analysis concentrates on the amendments made to the Conciliation and Arbitration Act in the two key Bills of 1977.2 The central feature of the new legislation, the Industrial Relations Bureau (IRB) is taken as a starting point for an examination of the changes in four basic areas of industrial law: the enforcement of the legis lation and awards made thereunder; the protection of individual rights; control of internal trade union affairs; and the penal provisions against strikes. The con clusion is that the industrial legislation has served to bolster the Government's political campaign against the union movement and to direct public attention away from the real problem—the economic crisis.

DAYLIGHT SAVING IN NEW SOUTH WALES: A CASE OF EMOTIVE SYMBOLIC POLITICS?

Abstract: This is a case study of the campaign over daylight saving in New South Wales from the mid‐1960s. The period leading to the legislation making daylight saving a permanent feature in 1972 was marked by the involvement of various groups, media campaigns and inter‐governmental negotiations. After the legislation was passed, the character of the campaign changed. Conflict was confined mainly to the rural sector, where large‐scale citizen involvement occurred. Many anti‐daylight saving bodies were created and a petition of over 40,000 names protesting about daylight saving was presented to the Premier. The Country Party was pressured sufficiently to promise during 1973, 1974 and 1975 that a referendum would be held, and this was achieved in May 1976. The results of the poll showed majority approval lay with continuing daylight saving. Until 1972 the policy area appeared to correspond to Theodore Lowi's “regulative” category, but from 1972 the policy arena altered to one which may be viewed in terms of T. Alexander Smith's “emotive symbolic” policy. The article assesses the Smith concept and its usefulness in explaining the issue of daylight saving as an example of intense community debate.

The Social Origins of American Revolutionary Ideology

HE reigning ideas of American Revolution are now being characterized as premodern. This judgment comes at end of a decade of scholarly probing into ideological origins of colonial resistance movement. The origins that Neo-Whig historians Bernard Bailyn, Richard Buel, Jack Greene, and Gordon Wood have discovered are not simple and Lockean, as once believed, but complex and atavistic growing out of rich English intellectual traditions of Dissenters, radical Whigs, Classical Republicans, Commonwealthmen, Country party, or more simply, Opposition.1 Dramatically reorienting scholarship on Revolution, Bailyn has reconstructed interpretive scheme which dominated colonists' minds, triggered their emotions, and pushed them into resistance.2 The revolutionary force of this scheme lay, in Wood's words, with obsession with corruption and disorder, its hostile and conspiratorial outlook, and its millennial vision of a regenerated society.' These, of course, are qualities that have prompted J. G. A. Pocock to question whether American Revolution ought not to be considered as the last great act of Renaissance rather than 'the first political act of revolutionary enlightenment. '4 Originally undertaken as a corrective to shallow economic determinism of Progressive historiography, revisionary work of Neo-Whigs has ended up sapping foundation of their alma mater,

Party and the Augustan Constitution, 1694-1716: Politics and the Power of the Executive

William of Orange tried to be as absolute as possible. Inroads upon the power of the executive were fiercely resisted: indeed, William succeeded in keeping even the judiciary in a precarious state of independence. To maintain the prerogative and gain the needed supplies from parliament, he relied upon a mixed whig-tory ministry to direct court efforts. Following the Glorious Revolution, the whigs had divided into two principle groups. One faction led by Robert Harley and Paul Foley became the standard-bearers of the broadly based Country party, maintained the “old whig” traditions, did not seek office during William's reign, tried to hold the line on supply, and led the drive to limit the prerogative. The “junto,” “court,” or “new” whigs, on the other hand, were led by ministers who, while in opposition during the Exclusion crisis, held court office, aggressively sought greater offices, and wished to replace monarchy with oligarchy. They soon joined tory courtiers in opposing many of the Country party attempts to place additional restrictions upon the executive. To defend the prerogative and gain passage for bills of supply, William also developed techniques employed by Charles II. By expanding the concept and power of the Court party, he sought to bring together the executive and legislative branches of government through a large cadre of crown office-holders (placemen) who sat, voted, and directed the votes of others on behalf of the government when matters of importance arose in the Commons. So too, William claimed the right to dissolve parliament and call new elections not on a fixed date, as was to become the American practice, but at the time deemed most propitious over first a three-year and then (after 1716) a seven year period.

American-Australian Security Policies: The Current Phase

HE CARTER ADMINISTRATION has set out to review and, as I needed, recast American foreign and defense policies. It has tried to shift away from East-West to North-South concerns and from more strictly military to economic instruments, and to encourage international observance of human rights. In Asia, it has undertaken to avoid upsetting the power equilibrium and to honor essential treaty arrangements, but has eschewed an offshore security posture while stressing self-reliance by regional states. Transitions in American policy are of great interest to Australia which, in addition to its Asian-Pacific setting, is a nation with intimate links to the United States, as through the ANZUS treaty alliance, through the presence of sophisticated American defense facilities on Australian soil, and through trade and investment channels. American and Australian security interests in the area have continued to be broadly parallel. However, under the Liberal-National Country Party (L-NCP) Government led by Malcolm Fraser, Australia has been especially unnerved by changes in the power equation and by the generally unsettled atmosphere in its regional environment. It has reasoned that the heaviest burden of responsibility continues to fall on American leadership, will and preparedness. It understands the reduced American involvement in Asia but feels that this trend places a premium on the need for America not to lose interest, miscalculate the effects of its retraction, or otherwise forget the complex and interlocking stresses throughout the Indian-Pacific region. The Australian government has therefore sought clarifications and reformulations in American policy. This paper will highlight the interplay of U.S.-Australian policies, with special focus on subregional contexts, and will conclude by assessing some of the factors that characterize the alliance.

MINISTERIAL STAFF UNDER WHITLAM AND FRASER

Abstract: The ministerial staff of the present Liberal‐National Country Party government are compared with those of the Labor government between 1972 and 1975. The most striking contrasts between the two groups is that the Coalition staffers are fewer in number (with fewer “political” types) and less “visible” than their Labor counterparts. They also intrude less into the workings of departments and report better relationships with public servants. There is thus a weakening of the representative and party political elements in the Federal government which were built up under the Labor party, and an opening of the way for a possible reassertion of the bureaucratic element. Although Coalition staffers differ from Labor staffers in other respects (for instance more come from private industry and private practice, fewer from journalism), on a number of criteria they have much in common. They are mostly male, in their twenties or thirties, mostly graduates, disproportionately from non‐government schools, with about half from inside and half from outside the public service.

The Whig Prince: Prince Rupert and the Court vs. Country Factions During the Reign of Charles II

Considerable scholarly attention has been paid to the origins of political parties in England during the reign of King Charles II. Yet the fact that a prominent courtier and member of the king's own family, Prince Rupert, was also a leader of the opposition or “country” party has frequently been overlooked by historians. J. R. Jones, for example, in The First Whigs, fails to mention the prince, and even Rupert's biographer, Eliot Warburton, has dismissed the last decade in his subject's life by saying that, after 1673, the ailing prince was too ill to play a role in English government.But Prince Rupert was, in fact, very active politically in the two decades following the Restoration. He sat in the House of Lords as duke of Cumberland and served on parliamentary committees. He had a seat on the Privy Council and was a member of all four of its standing committees. Rupert was often selected to serve the crown: as special emissary to his friend, Emperor Leopold I, in 1661 with the task of preventing an Anglo-imperial rupture over the marriage of King Charles to a Portuguese princess; as England's representative in negotiations with Denmark in 1669 and Brandenburg in 1670; as joint admiral of the fleet during the second Anglo-Dutch War, and de facto commander of the fleet during the third conflict with the United Provinces. Although the prince became openly critical of the royal government as early as 1667 and, by 1673, had allied with Anthony Ashley Cooper, first earl of Shaftesbury, to form an opposition group, the future country or Whig party, he also retained many ties with the court.

The Commission of Public Accounts and the formation of the Country Party

The Commission of Public Accounts and the formation of the Country Party

Tri‐partism in Australia: The role of the Australian country party

(1975). Tri‐partism in Australia: The role of the Australian country party. Politics: Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 1-14.

The Country Party in New South Wales: A Study of Organisation and Survival. By Don Aitkin. (Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1972. Pp. xiv, 343. $11.70.)

The Country Party in New South Wales: A Study of Organisation and Survival. By Don Aitkin. (Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1972. Pp. xiv, 343. $11.70.)

Book Reviews

Book reviewed in this article:POLITICS, LANGUAGE and TIME: Essays on Political Thought and History. By J. G. A. Pocock.INDIRECT RULE AND THE SEARCH FOR JUSTICE: Essays in East African Legal History. By H. F. Morris and James S. Read.HISTORY OF MODERN EUROPE.THE HISTORY OF MODERN EUROPE, 1460–1559. By Eugene F. Rice jr.THE AGE OF RELIGIOUS WARS, 1559–1689. By Richard S. Dunn.KINGS AND PHILOSOPHERS, 1689–1789. By L. Krieger.THE AGE OF REVOLUTION AND REACTION, 1789–1850. By C. Breunig.THE AGE OF NATIONALISM AND REFORM, 1850–1890. By N. Rich.THE END OF THE EUROPEAN ERA, 1890 to the present. By F. Gilbert.THE COUNTER‐REVOLUTION: Doctrine and action, 1789–1804. By J. Godechot, translated by S. Attanasio.HITLER? HORTHY? AND HUNGARY: Germ; in‐Hungarian Relations, 1941–1944. By Mario D. Fenyo.THE REVOLUTION OF 1688 IN ENGLAND. By J. R. Jones.THE BRITISH EMPIRE‐COMMONWEALTH, 1897–1931. By John Kendle.THE DURHAM REPORT AND BRITISH POLICY: A Critical Essay. By Ged Martin.INTERNATIONAL LAW AND CONTEMPORARY COMMONWEALTH ISSUES. By Robert R. Wilson.THE EMERGENCE OF THE INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS. By S. R. Mehrotra.INDIA'S DEMOCRACY. By A. H. Hanson and Janet Douglas.THE DYNAMICS OF INDIAN POLITICAL FACTIONS: A Study of District Councils in the State of Maharashtra. By M. C. Carras.THE WAGES OF WAR 1816–1965: A Statistical Handbook. By J. David Singer and Melvin Small.ECONOMIC GROWTH IN HISTORY: Survey and Analysis. By J. D. Gould.EMILE DURKHEIM: Selected Writings. Edited and translated by A. Giddens.HISTORISM: The Rise of a new Historical Outlook. By F. Meinecke; translated by J. E. Anderson.TOWARDS THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF HISTORY: Selected Essays. By Lee Benson.POLITICS AND SOCIAL INSIGHT. By Francis G. Castles.CAPITALISM AND MODERN SOCIAL THEORY: An analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. By A. Giddens.LEGAL CONTROL OF GOVERNMENT: Administrative Law in Britain and the United States. By Bernard Schwartz and H. W. R. Wade.THE COUNTRY PARTY IN NEW SOUTH WALES: A Study of Organisation and Survival. By D. Aitkin.A FINE COUNTRY TO STARVE IN. By G. C. Bolton.ADELAIDE AND THE COUNTRY 1870–1917: Their Social and Political Relationship. By J. B. Hirst. THE MAKING OF AN AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER. By Laurie Oakes and David Solomon.PROTESTANTISM AND SOCIAL REFORM IN NEW SOUTH WALES, 1890–1910. By J. D. Bollen.CONSCRIPTION: Necessity and Justice: the Case for an All Volunteer Army. By Glenn Withers.EDWARD GIBBON WAKEFIELD IN NEW ZEALAND: His Political Career, 18534. By Peter Stuart.SILENT POLITICS: Polls and the Awareness of Public Opinion. By Leo Bogart.THE POLITICS OF UNREASON: Right‐Wing Extremism in America 1790–1970. By S. M. Lipset and E. Raab.RADICALS OR CONSERVATIVES? The Contemporary American Right. By J. McEvoy III.THE BROKEN REBEL: A Study in Culture, Politics and the Authoritarian Character. By Rupert Wilkinson.PARTICIPATION IN POLITICS. Edited by G. Parry.CONTEMPORARY COMMUNITY: Sociological Illusion or Reality? By J. Scherer.COMMUNITY POWER STRUCTURE: Propositional Inventory, Tests and Theory. By C. W. Gilbert.GOVERNING WITHOUT CONSENSUS: An Irish Perspective. By Richard Rose.ULSTER: A Case Study in Conflict Theory. By R. S. P. Elliot and John Hickie.IRELAND'S ENGLISH QUESTION: Anglo‐Irish Relations 1534–1970. By Patrick O'Farrell.

Reviews: The Morality of Politics, Humanism and Ideology, Wittgenstein and Justice, beyond the State: The Future Polity in Classical and Soviet Marxism, John Locke, Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin in Munich. Münchner Studien Zur Politik Bd. 18, Jean Bodin and the Rise of Absolutist Theory, Staff Relations in the Civil Service, Whitehall and the Colonial Service: An Administrative

Reviews: The Morality of Politics, Humanism and Ideology, Wittgenstein and Justice, beyond the State: The Future Polity in Classical and Soviet Marxism, John Locke, Proceedings of the International Conference on Bodin in Munich. Münchner Studien Zur Politik Bd. 18, Jean Bodin and the Rise of Absolutist Theory, Staff Relations in the Civil Service, Whitehall and the Colonial Service: An Administrative

Editorial: Medicine and politics in Australia.

Abroad1 October 1973Medicine and Politics in AustraliaDEREK MEYERS, M.D., F.R.A.C.P.DEREK MEYERS, M.D., F.R.A.C.P.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-79-4-602 SectionsAboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ExcerptMedicine, said the late Aneurin Bevan, architect of the British National Health Service, is at the heart of politics—a statement just as true for Australia.There are two major political forces in Australia—Labor and non-Labor—the latter has used various names over the years but at present is constituted in the federal sphere by the Liberal and Country parties. Since the first federal parliament was elected in 1901, there have been fewer Labor than Liberal—Country party governments. In the last 30 years Labor held office from 1941 to 1949, the Liberal—Country Coalition from 1949 to 1972, and now Labor is back... This content is PDF only. To continue reading please click on the PDF icon. Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Brisbane, Australia PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics 1 October 1973Volume 79, Issue 4Page: 602-603 ePublished: 13 March 2020 Issue Published: 1 October 1973 PDF downloadLoading ...

Sly racism in Queensland Senator Neville Bonner and the Country Party

(1973). Sly racism in Queensland Senator Neville Bonner and the Country Party. Politics: Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 155-157.

The Country Party's performance

The Country Party's performance