How successful was sir robert peel as prime minister
How Successful was Sir Robert Peel as Prime Minister 1841-1846? Sir Robert Peel is a figure of history that not only embodies the traditional nature of nineteenth century politics, but also a historical reputation constructed by one historian, namely Norman Gash. Gash's hagiography of Peel has become the traditional and accepted view that historians such as Boyd Hilton and David Eastwood have chosen to challenge and oppose. It is these polarized views that make Peel's political career one of such interest. When considering Peel's success as prime minister, the changed nature of politics post the 1832 Reform Act, makes success difficult to define, it seems to depend on the focus of individual historians, be it social, political or economic. But a strong point for determining success is surely Peel's own definition. Peel defined the duties of a prime minister, as 'he will do his best for the great principles that his party supported and for the public welfare' .It is with this in mind that one may begin to unravel Peel's career and challenge his reputation and place in history as 'the model of all prime ministers' .One of the great debates of Peel's career is his attitude towards his party and his conception of the responsib
Hilton also grounds his argument in the Bank Charter Act as evidence for Peel's rigidity based on the assumption that it was in defense of his previous support for bullionism and 'Peel's Bill' (1819), but this argument is unsubstantiated. This view is supported by Peel's financial measures, as they can be seen as responses to situations, rather than as part of a long term mediated plan. The traditional 'statesman' defence is becoming weaker and weaker as evidence of Peel's attitudes become clearer such as his neglect of social policy. Without the support of his party, he could not be a successful and strong prime minister in a party political system. In light of the industrial revolution, Peel realized the root of success in the economy lay in industry and business, and he was subsequently described by Gladstone as 'the best man of business who was ever prime minister' . However, as Anthony Wood points out, the economic slump of 1847 demonstrates the failure of the act as it prevented the necessary free flow of cash required to counter the slump. The concept of 'Party' being a power that the prime minister was subject to, is a relatively new notion, created in the late nineteenth century and seems unfair to judge Peel by these modern political standards as Foster does. Gash shares Symons view, but both historians do not consider the wider effects of income tax and the free trade system on the party. Another area where historians have argued Peel had less success was finance. Peel's expertise in the economy was unquestioned during his premiership, however historians are now challenging the appellation 'Prosperity Peel' and his approach to the economy as a whole. Finance was an area that Peel made himself personally responsible for, disregarding his party and in particular his Chancellor of the Exchequer, a fault even Gash will admit to . However, this was a long term achievement; Symons does not acknowledge that the deficit was not cleared until 1844, possibly due to the continuing industrial depression and also as a historian writing in 1856, may be caught up in the hype surrounding Peel's death that led to a sudden surge in his popularity. Wood credits Peel for his efforts in Ireland and bases his view on the spending of L160,000 on public works projects and acts such as The Irish Colleges Bill 1844 and the setting up of the Devon Commission which investigated tenant landlord relationships. On the other hand, one must consider that, as David Eastwood points out, 'a statesman without a party is a politician without power. One is therefore inclined to support Adelman's view on Peel, that he neglected social policy and his notion of focusing on the economy as the root of social harmony was a solution in the long term but unsuccessful in dealing with the problems in the short term that required it .
Common topics in this essay:
Secretary Liverpool,
Jelinger Symons,
Norman Gash,
David Eastwood,
Chancellor Exchequer,
Reform Act,
Anthony Wood,
Peel Liverpool,
Charter Act,
Ruscombe Foster,
prime minister,
social policy,
political system,
social legislation,
social reform,
evidence peel's,
nineteenth century,
party political,
bank charter act,
argues peel,
norman gash,
appellation 'prosperity peel',
party political system,
success prime minister,
peel's success prime,
|
Acceptance Essays
