• 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...


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.


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 Peel also used the argument that if the Corn Laws were repealed then the Irish would be able to afford cheap grain through the famine, this was not the case however because the peasantry could still not afford the cheap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 There was also a threat of revolution from the Anti-Corn Law League if the Laws weren't repealed and Peel didn't realise that one of the long term aims of the Anti-Corn Law League was to get rid of the aristocracy! Peel also was now a believer in free trade and personally wanted the Corn Laws repealed.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.


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. Free essay

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

    all legislation and this work in the initial period because the conservative hadn't been in power for nearly a decade and didn't want the newfound power to be taken from them by Peel resigning. So every bit of legislation peel put to Parliament was supported by his party.

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

    Illegal practices never became policy, and the leadership were constantly reinforcing the importance of legality. The last significant aspect of the ACLL's tactics was the actions aimed at directly influencing Parliament. In 1841, Cobden stressed the importance of leaders of the league standing for election.

  1. 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,

  2. How far do you agree that it was Cavour's diplomacy rather that Garibaldi's ideas ...

    If unification were left to Cavour alone, it is possible we would not have seen the unification of the South. However, Cavour did possess the necessary qualities for unification. He was an opportunist and a pragmatist and he was also able to protect Italian unity in times of potential danger

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

    When domestic wheat cost 73/- per quarter, the duty would only be 1/-. Other measures included the introduction of Income Tax, reduction of tariffs. This sort of legislation gained approval in parliament from all parties but Peel's own. By 1844 Peel's increasing unpopularity amongst his own back-bench MPs stemmed from failure to consult them on matters of policy and proposition.

  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

  1. Was Daniel O'Connell a Great Irish National Leader?

    with the backing of the Association and local priests, the Catholic voters defied their Protestant landlords and O'Connell won the seat with ease. This posed a huge problem for the government as O'Connell would not have been able to take a seat in the commons without a change of law, so effectively he forced Catholic Emancipation on Peel.

  2. Serfdom – Emancipation, etc

    They were strongly opposed to the Holy Synod (created by Peter the Great) on the grounds that it made the Church too servile towards the State. In the Church, they claimed to find the perfect Christian society; a society which combined unity with individual freedom; in which the authority of

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