The politics and finance of amelioration

British politicians of the third quarter of the nineteenth century, like their predecessors, did not enter upon social problems until they became serious, even critical. Most politicians were still part-time amateurs with an inclination toward a minimum of state action in the field of social welfare, as elsewhere. There was little belief in the idea that the state should or could solve the residual problems of society. Moreover, in order to operate an extended social policy, it was necessary to tax and regulate on an increasing scale; this met with powerful resistance. The process of social amelioration therefore continued to be one largely of patching-on. Each such action was promoted by those of the middle classes who were affronted by bad conditions of living and working, and who were now often in alliance with the growing strength of organised labour. Each was contested by those whose interests or opinions were threatened, using the weapons of attrition and minimalisation.

Other circumstances confirmed this situation. Though a good deal of the nepotism and corruption of earlier times disappeared as British politicians and civil servants moved toward the unprecedentedly high standards of honesty of later Victorian times, there was still enough patronage and corruption about to make those concerned with the standards of national life cautious about generating new ministries and new bureaucracies. Generalised distrust of the state was reinforced by the problem of the relationship between central and local governments.