Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:35:30.507Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review Article: the British House of Commons as a Focus for Political Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2009

Samuel C. Patterson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , July 1973 , pp. 363 - 381
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 In the order in which they are discussed, these books are as follows: Bradshaw, Kenneth and Pring, David, Parliament and Congress (London: Constable, 1972)Google Scholar; Crick, Bernard, The Reform of Parliament (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1968)Google Scholar; Hanson, A. H. and Crick, Bernard, eds., The Commons in Transition (London: Fontana, 1970)Google Scholar; Butt, Ronald, The Power of Parliament (London: Constable, 1967)Google Scholar; Walkland, S. A., The Legislative Process in Great Britain (London: Allen and Unwin, 1968)Google Scholar; Ranney, Austin, Pathways to Parliament (London: Macmillan, 1965)Google Scholar; Rush, Michael, The Selection of Parliamentary Candidates (London: Nelson, 1969)Google Scholar; Richards, Peter G., The Backbenchers (London: Faber, 1972)Google Scholar; Leonard, Dick and Herman, Valentine, eds., The Backbencher and Parliament (London: Macmillan, 1972)Google Scholar; Barker, Anthony and Rush, Michael, The Member of Parliament and his Information (London: Allen and Unwin, 1970)Google Scholar; Reid, Gordon, The Politics of Financial Control (London: Hutchinson University Library, 1966)Google Scholar; Johnson, Nevil, Parliament and Administration (London: Allen and Unwin, 1966)Google Scholar; Coombes, David, The Member of Parliament and the Administration (London: Allen and Unwin, 1966)Google Scholar; Richards, Peter G., Parliament and Foreign Affairs (London: Allen and Unwin, 1967)Google Scholar; Richards, Peter G., Parliament and Conscience (London: Allen and Unwin, 1970)Google Scholar;Finer, S. E., Berrington, H. B., and Bartholomew, D. J., Backbench Opinion in the House of Commons 1955–59 (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1961Google Scholar); Jackson, Robert J., Rebels and Whips (London: Macmillan, 1968).Google Scholar

2 For instance, see Jewell, Malcolm E. and Patterson, Samuel C., The Legislative Process in the United States, 2nd ed. (New York: Random House, 1973)Google Scholar, which synthesizes the rather massive American research on Congress and the state legislatures.

3 Bagehot, Walter, The English Constitution (New York:Appleton, 1898), p.207.Google Scholar

4 Jackson, , Rebels and Whips, p. xi.Google Scholar See also Rose, Richard, People in Politics: Observations Across the Atlantic (London: Faber, 1970), esp. pp. 21–38.Google Scholar

5 Wilson, Woodrow, Congressional Government (New York: Meridian Books, 1956Google Scholar; first published in 1885).

6 Crick, Bernard, ‘Parliament in the British Political System’, in Kornberg, Allan and Musolf, Lloyd D., eds., Legislatures in Developmental Perspective (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1970), pp. 33–54.Google Scholar

7 Young, Roland, The American Congress (New York: Harper, 1958)Google Scholar, and The British Parliament (London: Faber, 1962).Google Scholar

8 Young, , The American Congress, p. viii.Google Scholar

9 Young, , The British Parliament, p. 9.Google Scholar

10 Crick, , The Reform of Parliament, p. 11.Google Scholar

11 Crick, , The Reform of Parliament, p. 251.Google Scholar

12 Walkland, , The Legislative Process in Great Britain, p. 102.Google Scholar

13 Crick, , The Reform of Parliament, p. 252.Google Scholar

14 Butt, , The Power of Parliament, p. 413.Google Scholar

15 Nevil Johnson, ‘Select Committees as Tools of Parliamentary Reform’, in Hanson, and Crick, , eds., The Commons in Transition, p. 247.Google Scholar

16 Ranney, , Pathways to Parliament, p. 10.Google Scholar

17 Ranney, , Pathways to Parliament, p. 280.Google Scholar

18 Ranney, , Pathways to Parliament, p. 281.Google Scholar

19 Richards, , The Backbenchers, p. 234.Google Scholar

20 Mackintosh, John P., The Government and Politics of Britain (London: Hutchinson University Library, 1970), p. 114.Google Scholar

21 Leonard, and Herman, , eds., The Backbencher and Parliament, pp. 171–91.Google Scholar

22 Ovenden, Keith, ‘Policy and Self-perception: Some Aspects of Parliamentary Behaviour’, in Leonard, and Herman, , eds., The Backbencher and Parliament, pp. 179–81, 186.Google Scholar

23 Barker, and Rush, , The Member of Parliament and his Information, p. 388.Google Scholar

24 Johnson, , Parliament and Administration, p. 13.Google Scholar

25 Johnson, , Parliament and Administration, p. 172.Google Scholar

26 Richards, , Parliament and Conscience, p. 193.Google Scholar

27 Richards, , Parliament and Conscience, p. 193.Google Scholar

28 Richards, , Parliament and Conscience, p. 215.Google Scholar

29 Finer, Berrington, and Bartholomew, , Backbench Opinion, p. 104.Google Scholar

30 Finer, Berrington, and Bartholomew, , Backbench Opinion, p. 106.Google Scholar

31 For more recent data on Conservatives, see Frasure, Robert C., ‘Backbench Opinion Revisited: the Case of the Conservatives’, Political Studies, XX (1972), 325–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 Jackson, , Rebels and Whips, p. 245.Google Scholar

33 Jackson, , Rebels and Whips, p. 309.Google Scholar For an analysis of the party loyalty of Conservative backbenchers which assesses the ‘constraints’ of career vulnerability, career aspirations, and group feeling see Schwarz, John E. and Lambert, Geoffrey, ‘The Voting Behavior of British Conservative Backbenchers’, in Patterson, Samuel C. and Wahlke, John C., eds., Comparative Legislative Behavior: Frontiers of Research (New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1972), pp. 65–85.Google Scholar

34 Crick, , The Reform of Parliament, p. ix.Google Scholar

35 Wahlke, John C., Eulau, Heinz, Buchanan, William, and Ferguson, Leroy C., The Legislative System: Explorations in Legislative Behavior (New York: Wiley, 1962), p. 377.Google Scholar

36 I refer here to the kind of studies referred to in Patterson, Samuel C., ‘Comparative Legislative Behavior: A Review Essay’, Midwest Journal of Political Science, XII (1968), 599–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

37 Bailey, Stephen K., Congress Makes a Law: the Story Behind the Employment Act of 1946 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1950), p. 236.Google Scholar

38 For a recent summary, see Rieselbach, Leroy N., Congressional Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973).Google Scholar

39 For progress in the direction of more comparative studies, see Kornberg and Musolf Legislatures in Developmental Perspective; Patterson and Wahlke, Comparative Legislative Behavior; Hirsch, Herbert and Hancock, M. Donald, eds., Comparative Legislative Systems (New York: Free Press, 1971);Google Scholar and Kornberg, Allan, ed., Legislatures in Comparative Perspective (New York: McKay, 1973).Google Scholar

40 For a very interesting illustration, see Hart, Henry C., ‘Parliament and Nation-Building: England and India’, in Loewenberg, Gerhard, ed., Modem Parliaments: Change or Decline? (Chicago: Aldine-Atherton, 1971), pp. 111–40.Google Scholar

41 See Kornberg, Allan, Canadian Legislative Behavior (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967);Google Scholar and Loewenberg, Gerhard, Parliament in the German Political System (Ithaca, N. Y.: Cornell University Press, 1966).Google Scholar

42 See Macrae, Duncan Jr, Issues and Parties in Legislative Voting: Methods of Statistical Analysis (New York: Harper and Row, 1970)Google Scholar for an illustration of the kind of sophisticated work being done elsewhere.

43 See Beer, Samuel H., ‘The British Legislature and the Problem of Mobilizing Consent’, in Franke, Elke, ed., Lawmakers in a Changing World (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966), pp. 30–48.Google Scholar

44 The most fully-developed elaboration of this concept is in Easton, David, A Systems Analysis of Political Life (New York: Wiley, 1965).Google Scholar

45 Wahlke, John C., ‘Policy Demands and System Support: The Role of the Represented’, British Journal of Political Science, I (1971), 271–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For examples of existing empirical research see Boynton, G. R., Patterson, Samuel C., and Hedlund, Ronald D., ‘The Structure of Support for Legislative Institutions,‘Midwest Journal of Political Science,XII (1968), 163–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Patterson, Samuel C., Boynton, G. R., and Hedlund, Ronald D., ‘Perceptions and Expectations of the Legislature and Support for It’, American Journal of Sociology, LXXV (1969), 62–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and, Samuel C. Patterson, John C. Wahlke, and G. R. Boynton, ‘Dimensions of Support in Legislative Systems’, in Kornberg, ed., Legislatures in Comparative Perspective, pp. 282–313.

46 Bagehot, Walter, ‘Parliamentary Reform’, National Review, VIII (1859), 228–73Google Scholar; reprinted in Norman St John-Stevas, ed., Bagehot's Historical Essays (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1965). pp. 296–347. quoted at p. 305.