It is undeniable that between December 1832 and the election of 1841, under the leadership of Peel, the Tory party enjoyed a revival in terms of its popularity and organisation, under the leader ship of Robert Peel. Although some historians believe that this success can mainly be attributed to the actions of Peel, such as the Tamworth Manifesto, strong evidence, argued by reputed historians such as Eric Evans exists to suggest that the successes of the Conservative Party in the 1830’s can only partially be attributed to Peel himself.
It is argued by some that Peel was greatly successful up to 1841 due to the fact that he brought the Tory Party from being a “beleaguered minority” (Adelman, 1989) to being a strong, relevant power once again. However, this ‘low point’ of 1832 is often greatly exaggerated by admirers of Peel. Arguably the high levels of support that the Whig’s received in the election of 1832 was predominantly down to the fact that they advocated the issue of Parliamentary Reform, meaning that it can be argued that the period of unpopularity that the Tory party suffered in 1832 could only ever have been temporary.
Arguably even if Peel had not advocated the policies which many consider to be very ‘successful’, the fortunes of the Tory Party would have still recovered, as many of the newly enfranchised voters, far from punishing the Tories, enjoyed the exclusivity of Parliament and wanted to retain that exclusivity through conservative policies. Although the skills of Peel as an orator did contribute to the Tory revival to a certain extent, the Whig majority in Parliament was so fundamentally fragile that it hardly needed exploitation by Peel.
The Essay on To What Extent Has The Conservative Party Abandoned “Thatcherism”?
Thatcherism well-liked the idea of privatising, so she privatised industries such as oil, coal and gas. The current Conservative party has not made any changes to this policies in fact they have kept to it. In 2013 the Royal Mail was privatised. This shows us that the party has not completely abandoned Thatcherism, however many would argue that the Conservative party is not privatising as much as ...
Although Peel did contribute to disuniting the Whig majority by, for example, exploiting the Whig difficulties in the management of Anglican Church funds in Ireland, the opportunity to do so arose spontaneously, and merely needed to be exploited, and did not require brilliance in leadership from Peel. Similarly, the weakness of the Whig’s financial policy was highlighted by the economic downturn from 1838 – 41, a factor out of the control of Peel.
Therefore it can be argued that Tory fortunes in 1841 had more to do with Whig problems than the strengths of the Tories. Essentially although Peel did achieve his aim in encouraging divisions to form within the Whig government and encouraging moderate Whig’s to defect to the Tory party, this success can only be attributed to Peel to some extent; it must also be attributed to the significant weaknesses that existed within the Whig party. 0 Whig supporters of parliamentary reform crossed over the Conservatives between 1832 and 1837, partially due to Peel’s ability to pose as a man of no party, and therefore be viewed by ‘loose’ Whig’s as ‘the fittest man to govern the country’ (Jenkins 1999), but arguably mainly due to the lack of permanent unity within the Whig party, a unity that had been made to appear much greater than it actually was by the issue of parliamentary reform.
Arguably Peel’s attempts to broaden the Tory party’s electoral appeal and to modernise the Tory party into being the ‘Conservative Party’, through the Tamworth Manifesto of December 1834, appear to be successful at first, were in fact arguably very limited in terms of its effectiveness. Certain historians argue that by redefining conservatism broadening the appeal of conservatism, Peel pragmatically and cleverly managed to transform the Conservative party in to a national entity.
Although on paper the Tamworth manifesto may seem like a successful strategy in allowing the Tory party to survive in a new, more liberal political climate, in reality arguably little success can be credited to Peel personally. The Tamworth Manifesto made some impact in the short term, but it can not in itself be considered to have been sufficient to either transform the party or to convince large numbers of middle class voters of the superiority of the Conservative Party.
The Essay on Republican Party
We all know that slavery was not the main reason of the Civil War, the main reason was Sectionalism and the south trying to seceding from the Union. One good thing that the opposition to slavery did do is launch three different parties, two of which did not last for a long time. Some anti-slavery leaders looked to political methods as a way of attacking the institution. When these men were unable ...
Although it can be argued that under Peel reform to the party’s electoral organisation did occur, this electoral organisation was brought about mainly by the work of F. R. Bonham. It was F. R. Bonham that established the Carlton Club, the party’s new headquarter under which new systems of coordinating electoral performance were implemented, greatly improving the efficiency of the party, not Peel, meaning that the re-organisation of the Tory party can not be considered a success of Peel as a leader to a minor extent.
Peel, despite his skills in debating against parliamentary opponents and making effective speeches, was generally unsuccessful in his communication with members of his party and understanding the feelings of the backbenchers, which can be considered an important role in leading a democratic political party. He often reacted badly to extra-Parliamentary pressure; in the words of Evans, ‘Anyone less like a populist politician would be difficult to imagine’.
Therefore it can be argued that his success as a leader of a party was limited in this way. It could be argued that the Conservative Associations that were established throughout the country were successful in that they mobilised support for the party, and therefore contributing to the 1841 Election victory of over 70 seats, which is describes by Eric Evans as ‘perhaps the most significant in the entire nineteenth century’.
However, these associations were not set up as part of any central direction from Peel, meaning that their success in maximising voter support for the Conservatives is not demonstrative of Peel’s success as a leader of the Conservative Party. The new Conservative associations were mainly established by ‘traditional’ Tories, who essentially instead of supporting the new ‘Conservative’ policies of the Tamworth manifesto fought the 1841 election campaign on the basis of protectionist i. e. Tory policies. This is backed by data from the election.
The majority of constituencies, which the Conservatives won, were traditional Tory strongholds, not industrial areas where many newly enfranchised middle classed people lived. Therefore it can be argued that the Conservative victory in 1841 was not the result of an immensely successful Conservative campaign to win over the middle classes, but rather the result of the regaining of traditional Tory areas, through no incentive of Peel himself, and that therefore Peel as a leader achieved almost no actual success through the Tamworth Manifesto.
The Term Paper on Mrs Thatcher Party Conservative Thatcherism
How far, if at all, does Thatcherism as a political creed deviate from traditional Conservatism? Margaret Thatcher is perhaps one of the most influential politicians that has ever been seen in the British Isles and it is undeniable that her influence has left an indelible mark on the contemporary political scene. The extent as to which her ideologies were innovative or simply re-invention of the ...
Historian Norman Gash sees the victory of 1841 as evidence of Peel’s success in broadening Conservative appeal, saying that it was the ‘practical reward for all that he had worked for in the previous decade’. However, Evans points out the flaw in this argument, and argues that the Tories were only able to gain the support of ‘small market towns’: and that the Tories were ‘not strong in the United Kingdom as a whole’. Essentially Peel can be considered to be a Conservative leader of a Tory party.
In conclusion, although Peel did manage the Conservative Party well, and successes did occur under his leadership, often he is given much greater praise for his years in opposition than he deserves. Many of the opportunities for creating divisions and luring moderate Whigs in to his party arose out of luck. The Tamworth Manifesto did not have the effect upon the party that was intended, and much of the re-organisation of the Conservative party was not actually done by Peel and left the party more Conservative than before.
The majority of the 370 conservative MP’s elected in 1841 were staunchly protectionist. We can therefore draw the conclusion that Peel only succeeded as a leader in the very superficial sense that he exploited the mainly naturally failing Whig party – other changes that occurred within the party either can not be credited to him personally, or were not truly successful changes, meaning that Peel was only successful as a leader of the Conservatives to a minor extent.
