Before Hansard
Robert Woodall describes the state of early parliamentary reporting, during a period when it was disapproved by Members .
'Every Englishman, from Johnny Grotes’s House to the Land’s End, is certain that he knows the worst - that nothing is concealed - that all the materials of judgment are before him - and that by reading and comparing the newspapers and journals he may be just as wise as if he lived within the sound of Bow Bells.’
So, on August 9th, 1814, wrote the Earl of Dudley to the Bishop of Llandaff, Dr Coplestone.
Lord Dudley was referring to the open reporting of Parliamentary debates which, although it was still forbidden by the standing orders of both Houses and continued to be opposed by a vociferous minority of members, had since 1771 been grudgingly permitted.
That until comparatively recent times Parliament should have insisted on conducting its affairs in an atmosphere of secrecy, and on punishing anyone rash enough to publicize even the purport of its deliberations, seems strange to us who live in an age when it is the commonly accepted view that we are entitled to know what our legislators are about.
To continue reading this article you will need to purchase access to the online archive.
Buy Online Access Buy Print & Archive Subscription
If you have already purchased access, or are a print & archive subscriber, please ensure you are logged in.
Please email digital@historytoday.com if you have any problems.
