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

Peel 'The Great Betrayer Of his Party' - How Far Do You Agree?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Michael Bradley Peel. 'The Great Betrayer Of his Party' -How Far Do You Agree? In 1845 during Peel's third ministry, after Russell could not take office because he was a known supporter of free trade, Peel faced 5 months of having to face accusations that he had betrayed his party and they no longer had their confidence. These accusations were not from the Whigs, however, but from his own party, mainly the backbenchers, who were fed up with Peel for ignoring them. I am going to analyse if Peel really betrayed his Party and why through events such as the protectionists argument of the Corn Laws, the backbenchers, the Maynooth Grant, Peel's opposition to Catholic Emancipation, Peel's coercion Bill's and Peel himself. In 1946 Peel's ministry ended because his Party had no confidence in him anymore and Peel ended his time as leader of the Conservative Party. Was this because he betrayed his Party? When Peel was elected into Government in 1941, he was elected on a commitment to maintain the Corn Laws; therefore in this he breached the confidence and trust of the landed elite. ...read more.

Middle

Peel effectively did betray his party in this matter but he did have his reasons to repeal the Corn Laws. He had already taken the tariffs off many goods and to repeal the Corn Laws was just another tariff to be taken off and it was evolutionary not revolutionary. Peel also used the argument that if the Corn Laws were repealed then the Irish would be able to afford cheap grain through the famine, this was not the case however because the peasantry could still not afford the cheap grain and many died from starvation. There was also a threat of revolution from the Anti-Corn Law League if the Laws weren't repealed and Peel didn't realise that one of the long term aims of the Anti-Corn Law League was to get rid of the aristocracy! Peel also was now a believer in free trade and personally wanted the Corn Laws repealed. Peel may have betrayed his Party but he believed that repeal was beneficial for the country and ultimately, his party. This was the case whether Peel really believed it or not because the Repeal of the Corn Laws led to 30 years of economic prosperity afterwards. ...read more.

Conclusion

Even though 149 Conservative Backbenchers revolted and voted against this, Peel continued with it and it was passed with the help of the Whigs. This event attracted the attention of the press and Punch magazine described Peel as 'a twisting eel, ascending through the slime' and also stated that Peel had changed with time, meaning his opinion to the Irish Catholics had changed now they could become MPs. Gladstone, Peel's President of the Board of Trade resigned over the Maynooth Grant, which shows the amount of opposition it faced within the Conservative Party because Gladstone was a well known Peelite. In conclusion I believe that Peel was 'the great betrayer of his party' because he never agreed with his party's decisions and he went against them and relied on the opposition for support. I believe that Peel had the country's best interests at heart but could not persuade his party to have the same philosophy. I think Peel also betrayed his party because he only went with the decisions he wanted and if he didn't get what he wanted he would behave immaturely and threaten to resign and the Conservatives didn't want the Whigs in power so they had to support him. For this reason I think that Peel was a great Prime Minister but a poor party leader and a betrayer of his party. ...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. Compare and contrast the Chartist and Anti -Corn Law League movements. Explain and illustrate ...

    This did not, however, prove to be very fruitful, and so the government conceded defeat, and made all newspaper affordable. This enabled paper like the Northern Star to prosper. Peel would have been against radical newspapers and magazines stirring up unnecessary agitation amongst the masses.

  2. British History Coursework: The Irish Famine 1845-1849

    He replied: "I don't know, I think it is terrible to reflect upon" Nassau Senior Despite this dire warning, nothing was done to remedy the situation in Ireland, even though it was known that the result would be devastating. This shows great contempt or neglect on behalf of the British,

  1. Serfdom – Emancipation, etc

    The events of 1848 seemed to prove the Slavophil point. The messianic theme in Slavophilism was easily corrupted. Originally, the Slavophils had been content just to indicate and criticise the evils of Western bourgeois society; their successors, the Panslavs, thought more in terms of conquest than of the peaceful transmission of ideas.

  2. How far were the Anti Corn Law League responsible for Peel's repeal of the ...

    It was becoming clear that the Tory wing of his party was reluctant to give him the support he demanded and only a Vote of Confidence was keeping him in power. The League capitalised on this situation, mustering further support inside Parliament despite new groups such as the Anti-League in

  1. Conservative Victory of 1941, Peel and the Weakness of the Whigs.

    So, now on top of being unpopular with the public, the party itself was now under scrutiny over whether it could be trusted. More problems in weakness engulfed the Whigs, more specifically, in reference to the way in which they provoked working class hostility in the late 1830's.

  2. Free essay

    To what extent was Sir Robert Peel responsible for the conservative party break up ...

    When he presented this proposal to his cabinet in the November it became very clear to Peel the serious division within the cabinet. Only three support the repeal where the rest were either unconvinced that the Irish problem was bad or just didn't want to face the moral or political implications.

  1. How effective was Peel in restoring and reuniting his party in the period from ...

    This shift was reflected in Peel's first address to the reformed parliament and in the Tamworth Manifesto, in which he stressed his party's new-found acceptance of the Reform Act, thus staunchly positioning the new Conservatives as a party that would be seen to be fighting for the national interest into

  2. Why did the Conservative Party split in 1846? - Ed Pearson When Peel announced ...

    Heavy blame can be placed on Peel not only on the single issue of repeal but also on most other major issues that led to the split of the Conservative party (however these will be addressed later). The most obvious reason blame can be placed on Peel is because it

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