Parliament and the army in England 1659: Constitutional thought and the struggle for control

Summary

Thomas Secker, archbishop of Canterbury from 1758 to 1768, was one of the most notable Anglican bishops of the eighteenth century. This article traces his involvement with Parliament throughout his career. The shorthand notes he made of speeches he had heard between 1735 and 1743, which he wrote up afterwards, were used by William Cobbett in assembling his Parliamentary History of England. Secker was an able speaker in the Lords and possessed a vein of independence, judging each bill on its merits, sometimes voting with and sometimes against the Court. This independence weakened his standing with the king and ministry and resulted in his being left in the see of Oxford from 1737 until 1758, when the king at last spoke to him again. Secker strongly opposed the Pretender's rebellion of 1745, but he was not always successful in other causes he espoused, notably his support for the Jew Bill of 1753. His years as archbishop were dogged by ill health, although he remained a person of weight in the Upper House. These were years when the Church of England was on the defensive, with Convocation prorogued, and Seeker found himself in a straitjacket. However, his devotion to the Hanoverian succession and the Church never wavered.     

Twentieth‐century rural England: A case for ‘peasant studies'?

Reed and others have argued for the continuing existence of a peasantry in nineteenth‐century England. The present article uses the instance of an upland Yorkshire area to suggest that a ‘peasantry’ continued there until the mid‐twentieth century sustained and to some extent re‐shaped by trends in the national agricultural economy. Family‐centred farming on small acreages, low rents and capital inputs, flexible attitudes to work and the dual economy proved efficient mechanisms for surmounting economic conditions which were often disadvantagous to larger farmers. Investigation of other areas of England for similar phenomena is invited.     

Is there a long‐run relationship between population growth and living standards? The case of India

This note examines the existence of a long‐run, cointegrating relationship between population and per capita GDP in India for 1950–93. Unit root tests show that per capita GDP is integrated of order one while population is integrated of order zero; further, estimation of the bi‐variate relationship using the cointegration procedure of Johansen shows that no long‐run relationship exists. Thus, population growth neither causes per capita income growth nor is caused by it. A corollary is that population growth neither stimulates per capita income growth nor detracts from it.