Big question! I think the first point is that 'Continental Europe' can't be viewed as a cohesive entity in any way between those dates, so it's difficult to say why England (or to be strictly correct, Britain) is 'different'. But putting all that aside, history generally views this specific period in Europe as a battle of 'isms'. Ideas, for perhaps the first time, were becoming a real driving force in history. Previously, ideas would take a very very long time to create actions, re-actions and change, but in this (relatively) peaceful, post-Napoleonic period, ideas began to change the European landscape.

Now England was in a very different place economically and politically from most of Europe. As a result, its experiences differed markedly from some of the things hitting Europe. For example, the Rise of Nationalism was a big deal in Europe and had had huge impact in Germany and Central Europe, as well as Italy. Britain, relatively, was just not affected in the same way, with the Act Of Union in 1707 between England and Scotland, and 1801, adding Ireland, meaning much of that journey had already been completed (at least for now...).

In England, the main ism was industrialism, and in this time, Britain was the so called 'sweatshop of the world'. But the industrial revolution changed the whole of Europe over this period, so that shouldn't be seen as really being that much of a point of difference, although England arguably was simply more economically focused than much of Europe, a knock-on effect of the previous century, and the rise of a global English navy, and dominance of world trade.

There was a difference in the fact that England had the largest and quickest growing middle class, who brought their own ideas to the table, and it eventually ended in the 1832 Great Reform Act, and then later, the ultimately unsuccessful Chartist movement which wanted near universal suffrage. But in 1848, the French overthrew the Monarchy and actually instated universal suffrage, before electing Napoleon III. Again - is there as much difference as you first thought? You might say Europe had more revolutionary zeal, partly due to the nationalism issue, but you had plenty of uprisings, attempted revolutions and rebellions in Britain in this period too (see Gagging Acts of 1817), whilst the Corn Laws caused quite a stir too.

Therefore, over the period, Britain was intellectually different in terms of what issues were dominating political and philosophical thought, and avoiding the touch of nationalism. It was also ahead economically, and its middle class created a different set of pressures and problems. However, if you take a large industrial European city like Frankfurt and compare it to say, Manchester in England at the time, you'd see a huge amount of similarity.

In conclusion, England was different in a few ways, and was a step away from much of the European scuffles simply through being an island nation - but in reality, the differences are often highly over-stated.