London Debating Societies

Topics ranged from current events and governmental policy, to love and marriage, and the societies welcomed participants from all genders and all social backgrounds, exemplifying the enlarged public sphere of the Age of Enlightenment.

Arising throughout Europe, Enlightenment philosophy emphasised reason as the foremost source of authority in all matters, and was simultaneously linked to increased secularisation and often political upheaval.

[5] This new arena, which Habermas termed the "bourgeois public sphere," was characterised as separate from traditional authorities and accessible to all people, and could therefore act as a platform for criticism and the development of new ideas and philosophy.

[11] Goring also points out that, in spite of the burgeoning print culture of the eighteenth century, oratory was still the most effective way of communicating with a public that was basically only half literate in 1750.

[12] The "British elocutionary movement" is linked to Thomas Sheridan, an Irish actor turned orator and author who was an avid proponent of educational reform.

[17] Along with the growing emphasis on politeness and elocution, Donna Andrew suggests four main institutional precursors of the formal debating societies of later eighteenth-century London.

[30] The debating societies were therefore more accessible to members of the working, middle, and lower classes, truly bringing the "rational entertainment" so favoured during the Enlightenment into the public sphere.

An advertisement in the London Courant for the University of Rational Amusement on 28 March 1780 read:"Horns and clarinets will assist to fill up the vacancy of time previous to the commencement of the debate.

The Gazetteer reported the results of the debate:[43]On behalf of Mr. Wilkes and his supporters it was urged, that as friends of free elections, they were consistent in endeavouring to destroy the effect of one, wherein freedom had been grossly violated.

On the other hand it was argued, that a scrutiny would have been much better, as by it every one who affirmed a privilege to which by law or equity they had no claim, would have been detected; and, that declining this, shewed an attachment to private interest more than to public justice.

"[44] on 7 September, and, three months later, the Pantheon society debated "Can the conduct of Lord George Gordon respecting the Protestant Association be construed into High Treason?

"[46] and, less than two weeks later, "Ought the Public Debating Societies and the late Meetings at Copenhagen House to be supported, as friendly to the Rights of the People; or suppressed, as the Causes of the Insult offered to His Majesty, and justifiable Reasons for introducing the Convention Bill?

In May, the Robin Hood again took on the colonial dispute and asked, "Is it now compatible with the dignity, interest, and duty of Great Britain, to treat with America on terms of accommodation?

After the storming of the Bastille in July 1789, the society at Coachmaker's Hall advertised a debate on "Whether the late Destruction of the Bastile, and the spirited Conduct of the French, do not prove that the general Opinion of their being possessed by a slavish Disposition was founded in National Prejudice?

"[52] Later that year, they again asked, "Is the Conduct of the French Assembly, in declaring the Possession of the Church to be the Property of the Nation, and their Care in providing for the inferior Clergy, worthy the Imitation of this Country?

"[55] A 1780 debate at the Carlisle House School of Eloquence asked, "Whether it will be most conducive to the general good of the Community that the East India Company should be dissolved, or their Charter renewed?

The 3 April 1780 masquerade meeting of The Oratorical Hall in Spring Gardens asked, "Is it not detrimental to the world to restrain the female sex from the pursuit of classical and mathematical learning?"

"[59] An October meeting of the society at Coachmaker's Hall investigated the question: "Would it not tend to the happiness of mankind, if women were allowed a scientific education?

For example, the 14 May 1780 Theological Question of the University for Rational Amusements was based on Romans 4:5: "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Andrew describes some of the negative reaction to the societies thus:[71]Critics of public debate were clearly upset by what they saw as a raggle-taggle collection of poor and uniformed folk discussing issues of the day, as though anything they would have to say could be of any interest of importance."

The active presence of women in the societies inevitably raised some eyebrows among more traditional types, and the debates on religious matters could not have been met with mere acceptance by the church and the clergy.

After their peak in 1780, the London debating societies generally declined in number and frequency, rising again slightly around the late 1780s, only to fall off completely by the end of the century.

Without specific legislation to block the meetings, the government often intimidated or threatened the landlords of the venues where debates were held, who in turn closed the buildings to the public.

[75] The LCS met in pubs and taverns, discussed openly radical works such as Thomas Paine's Rights of Man, and issued proclamations in newspapers calling for adult male suffrage and parliamentary reform.

The acts restricted public meetings to fifty persons, allowed licences to be revoked at any time, and invoked much stiffer penalties for any anti-monarchist sentiment.

[78] These acts effectively eliminated public, political debate, and, while the societies did continue until the turn of the century, their content was decidedly less radical and challenging.

An advertisement for the London Forum in the 7 November 1796 Morning Herald warned that "Political allusion is utterly inadmissible,"[79] a stark contrast to the debates of previous years.

Historian Iain McCalman has argued that in the wake of the repression of the formal debating clubs, more informal societies continued to meet in taverns and alehouses, as they were harder to control.

Shaped by the initial tolerance of British politics of the time, and demonstrating a progressive, democratic, and equality-minded attitude, the debating societies are perhaps the best example of truly Enlightened ideals and the rise of the public sphere.

Though it was strongly affected by the closure of major newspaper offices in Fleet Street from the 1960s, fragmenting into three separately-run clubs by the late 1990s as a result, ultimately those coalesced into a single Cogers organisation.