• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How effective was the response of Lord Liverpool's government to the domestic problems they faced between 1812 to 1822?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

How effective was the response of Lord Liverpool's government to the domestic problems they faced between 1812 to 1822? Lord Liverpool gained the premiership at a changing and unpredictable time. The end of war with France, and Napoleon's readiness to create peace between France and Britain had taken the government and the country as a whole by surprise, surprise that can be seen through the repercussions that followed. This time, peace really did seem assured, and this was recognised in the now useless war economy. Around 300,000 men were demobilized, creating many unemployed men and much discourse among the working classes up and down the country from whence these men came. Employment was not particularly plentiful at this time, and the economy could not hope to absorb so many so quickly. The apparent injustice done against these brave patriots created discontent and fuel for reformists and opposition to Liverpool's government. Industry suffered as well, since demand for weapons of war had died out, rendering machinery and military focused factories would need to invest much money in finding alternate industrial markets to break into. One of the most controversial problems to arise were the issues over government intervention in the agricultural economy. The end of the Napoleonic wars spelt trouble for land owners and land workers. During the wars, the best source of corn was at home, since Britain's relations with Europe were shaky to say the least. ...read more.

Middle

Industrialists and industrial workers were also embittered against the government, feeling that it was grossly unfair to give favours to one division of the economy and not the other. From what we can see here, it is obvious that when it comes down to it, this was just a blatant piece of class bias. For all people may say, about Liverpool doing it to protect the economy to benefit all the people, if the poor, the majority of the population, can't get bread on their tables, then these laws are not benefiting the people, even with any indirect economic benefits. Liverpool and his government rushed out this law because of the pressures of other people, without thinking of the greater good, to protect the rich and make the poor poorer. It wasn't even that effective in boosting the domestic agricultural market anyway. However, Liverpool did introduce a sliding scale for corn prices in the 1920s, where he successfully managed to adapt the desires of reactionary land owners for the changing economic times, which may have redeemed him somewhat. The rest of his domestic problems seem to stem from social discord among the middle and working classes. Well-educated middle class radicals were now taking the fight against the aristocracy and the landed gentry to the oppressed working men of England. These people could be seen congregating around pubs and giving speeches to the workers assembled there, informing them of the injustices of government ...read more.

Conclusion

From what we have seen, one might suppose that Liverpool is exclusively looking after the interests of himself and his government colleagues, but he also genuinely wanted to help the poor. He passed a Poor Employment bill in 1817, which set aside State loans of �750,000 encouraging the poor to work in local public schemes. This shows he was not averse to attempting to make life easier for the poor by providing unemployment, but he could not do much for fear of being labelled a reformist and a radical, and then losing support and gaining dislike. Much like Pitt before him, he tried to appeal to all sides, rich and poor. We can see that helping his rich piers was, not unfairly considering the times, part of his agenda, through acts like the 1815 Corn Laws. This may have been due to pier pressure, which shows a weakness in Liverpool that reduced his effectiveness throughout 1812 to 1822. But most of the time he tried to do what was best for Britain at a time of social and economic turmoil, and in answer to how effective his replies to these were, we just have to see that towards the end of this period, the greatest proportion of domestic difficulties seemed to leave his period in office. Peter Stonor Mr. Kovacevic 6C3 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Politics section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Politics essays

  1. Minority Rights, Identity Politics and Gender in Bangladesh: Current Problems and Issues

    This latter group lives off mainly the shrimp farm owners in the area and is engaged in other anti-social activities in this border area like playing mercenaries to arms traffickers and smugglers. It is an area where the cash economy is fast penetrating the subsistence peasant economy and as such

  2. How successful was Lord Liverpool in responding to radical challenge from 1812-1822?

    The whole point of the bill, as far as the government was concerned, was to guarantee landowners profits at a level to which they had become accustomed during the war. Most people saw it as apiece of class legislation in that it saved the landowners from cheaper foreign grain, established prices and made it more expensive for the consumer.

  1. Compare and contrast the Chartist and Anti -Corn Law League movements. Explain and illustrate ...

    One of their faults was the support of radicals. Instead of being committed to the cause of repeal of the Corn Laws, they were more intent on creating a class war. This would have damaged the respectability of movement. The Chartists had more weaknesses.

  2. Assess Mao's domestic policies

    Ignoring the failure of the "Hundred Flowers Campaign", the CCP launched "The Great Leap Forward" in 1958. It was aimed at accomplishing the economic and technical development of the country at a vastly faster pace and with greater results. The announcement of such expectations led the party to an intensified

  1. Does Hobbes's Sovereign or Locke's Civil Government provide better protection for the citizen?

    The issue of self-preservation like Hobbes in another one of Locke's important theories, which lead onto how a civil government help the protection of citizens. "Everyone, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his situation wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes

  2. Why was there popular discontent between 1815-1822? How was it expressed and did the ...

    Lord Liverpool and his ministers knew something had to be done, but to be seen to be giving in to public pressure would set a terrible precedent as far as they were concerned. It was therefore necessary to crush the current uprising and quietly introduce reforms afterwards.

  1. 'Asses the success of the Liberals from 1906-1914 in dealing with their domestic problems.'

    unrest, with days lost escalating to 41 million, in 1914 and the Suffragettes continuing with their violent protests. Actions such as 'The Cat and Mouse Act' and force-feeding were a shrewd way of dealing with the Suffragettes but could be seen as inhumane towards the women.

  2. To what extent was the weakness of the radicals the cause of Pitt surviving ...

    He had no time for drastic revolution. He opposed rapid, uncontrolled change, as was happening in France, particularly since the demolition of the Ancien R�gime was in the hands of amateurs who had little or no political expertise.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work