In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

REVIEWS 317 wouldhavevotedfor thegovernment with or withoutcontracts. The Treasury had contracted with the wealthiest and most reliable merchants. Baker's accountof their background and business versatilityis interesting. Anthony Baconownediron worksand ships, wasa coalcontractor in Cumberland and South Wales, owned propertyin Virginia, and had family connections in Maryland.RichardAtkinsonhad plantations in the West Indieswherehis rum wasmade,and ships to carryit to the armyin America.HenryDrummond ,whowith RobertHarleywasthe commissioner whohandledthe supply of œ•7,ooo,ooo in specie betweeni77o and I783 at i• per cent,had impeccable bankingconnections. Making moneywasthe concernof thesemen. Theyweredependable andhonest; fewof themhadpoliticalambitions. On the otherhand theywerenot specialists in supplying armies:militarycontractorswere a special breedwhichthe smallBritishstanding army did not encourage. It is now generallyunderstood that individualmerchants did not greatly influence Britishgovernments in theeighteenth century. Baker's work,incidentally ,underlines thepointagain.Moreimportant isthatit provides a newbase for studies of theimpactof eighteenth-century warsonfamilyfortunes, regional industry, trade,employment, andstandards of living.I hopethatmorewill be donein thisdirectionaswell ason government administration. D.S. GRAI-IAM University of New Brunswick The HistoryofLondon:Hanoverian London•7•4-•8o8. cv, oxm•, RUDe,. London, Secker& Warburg [Toronto,William Heinemann],I97•. Pp. xvi, 27I, illus. $•3-95. 'He who is tired of London is tired of life.' Dr Johnson's dictum reflects eighteenth-century London's mostnotablecharacteristic-its growing sense of being,not merelythe majormetropolis of the kingdom,but the greatest city in the world.Alreadyone-sixth of the wholekingdomat the beginning of the eighteenth century, it increased bytwo-thirds to nearlya millionpeople in the course of thecentury, largelybydrawingyoung people(liketheyoungSamuel Johnson) fromtheprovinces, theCelticFringe,andoverseas. It became much the largestport in the world and one of the greatest consumer markets;it facedtheproblems of majorurbanizationincluding those of large-scale water supply, planneddevelopment, andurbanrenewal- morethana centurybefore the othergreatindustrial cities.In the process, asthe gulfbetween privileged and unprivileged widened,it becamethe first greatforcinghouseof urban radicalism and discontent. Professor Rud• hasmadea comprehensive, highlyreadable, and generally excellent presentation of the elements of thisdevelopment. He wiselymakes gooduseof theworkof hisdistinguished predecessors in thehistoriography of Londonwherethesehaveparticularexpertise to offer,and cutshisownline in his own fieldsof interest-the mob,popularradicalism, and socialprotest $18 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW movements. The discussions of the economic life, property-holding, highsocial life, the arts,religion,and government of Londontendto run into catalogues of itemsand changes, andsignificant generalizations abouttheebbandflowof prosperity, the changes in socialmobility,and the day-to-day relationships of the variousordersof society tendto be lostin a mass of detail. But Professor Rud• takesfirein portraying the 'otherLondon'of theunderprivileged , the radicals, and the rioters. Asin hisprevious works,he makes the pointthat the 'poor'werea distinct social entity,notmerely,norevenincluding ,thedregs of society; andhegives a detailedandenlightening study of their rolesand their conditions in the variousneighbourhoods. This is a necessary introduction to what the authorregards asthe centralthemeof thebook-the studyof the protestfrom below,especially asmanifested in the politicalriot. Within thistheme,Professor Rud• develops the significant difference between the socialprotestundertakenby the lower ordersfor their own purposes (mostly economic), andthepolitical riot- undertaken bythemforthepolitical purposes of leaders outside theirranks. As one would hope in sucha distinguished series, the centralthemeraises someserious questions of interpretation. Professor Rud• isobviously anxious to get awayfrom the simplistic equationof crime,protest,riot, and radicalism with economic privation.Yet hismodifications of thisequationare sometimes so contradictory as to forcehim backon crudeeconomic determinism. His attributionof increases in crimein various epochs of thecenturyto a combination of increasing harvestfailuresandincreasing population(surelysomething of a paradox)seems unsophisticated in thelight of hisownadmission that the nature of crime changedduring the Frenchwars. This suggests, what any moderncriminologist couldhave told him, that the natureof crimechanges with economic circumstances, and that violentcrimeis relatedmoreto prosperoustimesthan to hard ones.The fact that periodsof greatestcrimeand hence,according to Professor Rude, of greatest privation,are alsodecades of very great populationincrease, hasto be accounted for. Professor Rud• attemptsit by suggesting large-scale improvements in medicalcare,a proposition that no historianof science, mindfulof the absence of a scientific pathology until Pasteur, wouldsupport. Similarly,Professor Rud• fallsinto someawkwardalignments in discussing riots,especially the GordonRiotsof •78o. In politicalriots,he believes, the workingclass playedonlya marginalpart; the rioters werenot of thecriminal classes nor of the slumpopulation,and the violence wasstrictlydiscriminating and directedagainst selected targets, asthe 'respectable' poorworkedoff their socialresentments againstthe rich.But to accountfor the intense violence and apparently undiscriminating natureof it in the GordonRiots,he...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 317-319
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.