![]() ![]() During this period he maybe viewed as the leader of the opposition, though the term isquestionable since the party system had not come to fullfruition. Clearly, it was the interaction ofthese two men and this company that precipitated much of theaction and rhetoric that resulted from the outbreak of theMutiny.ĭisraeli was a consummate factionalist in the House ofCommons and was notorious for seizing any opportunity to rousethe sentiments of special interest groups in his attempts toincrease the power of his own position. The newspapers that will beused for this investigation will be Punch, The Spectator, TheSaturday Review and to a lesser extent, The Times.īefore proceeding with an examination of the abovepublications, it is imperative that the positions of Disreali andPalmerston, the two key political players, be clearly stated.Moreover, it is important that the position of the East IndiaCompany also be understood. The concern of the present paper will be toexamine what was reported during the period of July 4th to August1st with regard to the Indian Mutiny, and how this reflected theactions and statements of the leading political figures and thesentiments of the public at large. As a result, whatwas published often had a very different tone than what waswritten in The Times. The Times maintained its supremacy and itsinfluence, but it now had competition and this competition wrotefor a different sector of the reading public. With the rescinding ofthe Stamp Tax there was an opening for these smaller papers tocompete with The Times by offering a product that cost less andwas designed to appeal to a "lower class", such as the tradesmen,than was The Times. this country is ruled by The Times."īy the middle of the century, weekly newspapers had enteredthis arena of political power brokering. ![]() So powerful was the pressthought to be in this era, that it was commonly believed that". It was in dealing withissues that affected Britain at home that the press gained itspower in influencing public opinion. Their concern was internal politics, not the "goingson" in some remote place like India. The press was in business to sell papers and Indiadid not interest the public enough to warrant even cursorycoverage. Therewas virtually no interest in the state of the people of India norany real inquiry into how the rule of the Company was affectingtheir lives. What few there were concentrated onthe East India Company and its allegedly corrupt practices. In the year prior to theoutbreak of the rebellion, very few stories ever appeared whichwere concerned with India. The popular press seemed toagree with this attitude of disinterest. The party system was still notfirmly established and with politicians busily followingindividuals perceived to be rising toward power, the events inIndia seemed of little importance. ![]() Factional manoeuvring and infighting were far moresuited to the tastes of the Parliamentarians, and India was notan issue that seemed likely to cause or contribute to the riseand fall of ministries in Britain. ![]() When the topic of Indiawas raised in the House of Commons, it was normal for the benchesto empty due to the disinterest in things Indian on the part ofthe members. TheSepoy were seen as obedient and docile. India had beenthought to be pacific a safe and secure part of the empire. In 1857, when the Indian Mutiny broke out, both thepress and the politicians were caught off guard. The mid Nineteenth Century was a period of change andadjustment for both the popular press and the political system inBritain. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |