Age Of Peel Research Articles

The Economic Achievement of Sir Robert Peel 1841–6*

AbstractNorman Gash (1912–2009), the leading authority on the ‘age of Peel’, died on 1 May 2009, having left instructions to his daughters that the bulk of his private correspondence and personal papers should be destroyed. A small exception was made in respect of material relating to Sir Robert Peel (1788–1850), the subject of his most famous historical and biographical labours. A collection of papers and correspondence was bequeathed to the Peel Society at Tamworth, on strict condition that it should never be sold.1 Among the ‘Gash Bequest’ was a hitherto unpublished essay on ‘The Economic Achievement of Sir Robert Peel 1841–1846’. Typed in characteristic style on Gash's Remington typewriter, with only occasional manuscript insertions, the essay aptly summarises the position which he had developed in the final volume of his biography of Peel, the second volume of which was published 50 years ago this autumn.2 The essay is republished below as written, without any supporting notes or references. It acts not only as a commemoration of the half‐century since Gash's life of Peel was completed, but of the 40 years which have elapsed since he published an equally ground‐breaking article on the Conservative Party in the first volume of Parliamentary History.3

Lord George Bentinck and the Protectionists: a lost cause?

In The processes by which a political cause is defeated, there are significant, sometimes unexpected achievements. This proposition is as true of protectionism before and after the repeal of the corn laws as it is for example of Jacobitism or Gladstonian Home Rule. But while the supporters and fellow-travellers of free trade have had abundant attention, the protectionists have suffered from historical neglect redeemed in recent years only by the distinguished contributions of Robert Stewart and Travis Crosby. A certain absence both of historical sympathy and of interest in the arguments of the enemies of free trade has produced a widely-held view of the protectionists as mererevanchistesand political untouchables, ‘wild men of the right’ who had to be ‘dragged kicking and screaming from their last ditches’ while others made proper preparations for ‘a generation of bourgeois prosperity’. Norman Gash, the doyen of ‘the age of Peel’, while keenly aware of the mixed motives—intellectual, political and economic—which influenced men's conduct in 1845–6 and beyond, writes of the protectionists as ‘the dead weight’ of the conservative party: their cause was too monolithic, too representative of ‘a latent hostility to the other great interests of the country’, to form the basis of a national party; and their leader Lord George Bentinck was principally and destructively inspired by revenge.

Some Recent Writings in British Political History, 1832-1914

Has the wealth of new and interesting writing on the political history and institutions of Britain since 1832 radically altered the general framework of understanding? It is a logical question to ask when confronted by so much recent activity, however selective the list of studies, and by the need to tell the story of modern Britain in a fashion that retains coherence and meaning, as well as pattern, and has the merit of fitting into the requirements of the American university survey course. The answer to the opening question is no, and it is offered with a sigh of relief. General historical frameworks are hard to come by, and if for a brief period-it will inevitably be a brief period-we have one that saves the appearances, accommodates most of the basic facts, and still allows for considerable intellectual activity, we ought to be grateful. The lines of present research into British political history were set down within the last thirty years -naturally there were antecedents -and the overall picture of the structure of Victorian and Edwardian politics and the role of famous personalities are still remarkably unchanged. The success of present political history is greatly attributable to the care and good sense of Norman Gash. Nearly thirty years ago Politics in the Age of Peel appeared and suddenly cleared the air. Much of the mythology surrounding the historiography of the Great Reform Bill was pulled away. It was Gash who reviewed the connection between electoral reform and the existing structure of political influence, analyzed constituency politics as a system, and challenged the assumption that a sudden turnover of power had occurred. It was Gash who made us see that old actors do not instantly roll off the stage blowing kisses to the crowd. Settled constituencies do not suddenly slough off old habits of as-

Working-Class Education and the State, 1839–1849: The Sources of Government Policy

The education of working-class children was a major governmental concern during the age of Peel and Cobden. In this period the state's financial commitment grew from £30,000 to £125,000, and a new department of state — the Education Committee of the Privy Council, with its bureaucratic establishment, the Education Department — was created to direct central policy. But who made that policy? Who guided education reform into channels which still, to some extent, contained the British educational establishment a century later? And does this example of Victorian reform suggest the dynamics of state intervention in other fields up to then left to private enterprise?Civil servants, it has been alleged, were the responsible agents of change in this area. James Kay-Shuttleworth, the Education Department's first permanent secretary, has today a reputation as great as Chadwick's or Trevelyan's among historians. Henry Parris believes that he “organized” the department and made its policy; he calls his retirement in 1849 perhaps “the greatest single misfortune in the country's educational history.” David Roberts calls him “the chief architect of England's educational system;” he attributes to him all major government education policy between 1846 and 1849. That policy “came from the mind of a man who possessed not only a clear view of the ends which he wished to attain but also a sense of the possible means to those ends….” George Kitson Clark contended that his “services to public education have probably never been properly valued.”

The Mid-Nineteenth Century Electoral Structure

It is far too early to talk with any real certainty about the mid-nineteenth century electoral structure. The very materials of which it was built are in dispute, let alone the shape of the edifice. A deference school of historians is challenging traditional notions of the growth of political individualism in the period, while so-called quantitative historians are beginning to question the assumptions and approach of both deference historians and traditionalists. Serious and detailed study of the questions involved has hardly begun. Still, some comment on the present state of the controversy may not be entirely out of place. An enduring interpretation can only be constructed of sound materials; and I am by no means certain of the soundness of some of those now being put forward for our use.W. O. Aydelotte, in a paper read a couple of years ago and soon to be published in a series of essays entitled The History of Parliamentary Behavior, notes the divergence of opinion among historians on the role of the electorate in shaping parliamentary opinion after 1832. As he rightly suggests, Norman Gash in his Politics in the Age of Peel appears to be of two minds on the subject, depending on whether one reads his introduction or his text. In the former Professor Gash stresses the increase of popular influence on Parliament, in the latter the continuance of traditional influences over the mass of the electorate. D. C. Moore comes down heavily on the side of the latter influences, contending that a relatively few leaders of what he has called “deference communities” represented effective electoral opinion, which was simply registered by the mass of the electorate.

The Matter of the Missing Contests: Towards a Theory of the Mid-19th Century British Political System

General elections occurred in mid-19th century Britain for various reasons. Sovereigns died; prime ministers tried to enlarge their xsmajorities in the House of Commons—or to reduce their miniorities; and, of course, the Septennial Act put an outside limit upon the length of time a given Parliament might last. The seven year limit has since been replaced by a five year limit. Also, the death of a sovereign no longer requires the summoning of a new House of Commons. These changes are important. They have often been noted. But they are far less important than certain other changes to which less attention has been given. As a rule today a contest takes place in every constituency on every possible occasion. But at some general elections in the mid-19th century a contest took place in fewer than half of the constituencies.Presumably, historians have always been vaguely aware that such was the case. But until fairly recently this awareness was indeed rather vague. To my knowledge Professor Gash was the first person to make a systematic count of the numbers of constituencies from which candidates were returned to Parliament without opposition. He made the count for each of the general elections between 1832 and 1847. And then, in a way that suggests his uncertainty what the phenomenon of the uncontested election really meant, when he published his figures in 1953 in his Politics in the Age of Peel, he did so not in the body of the book but in an appendix to which no significant reference was made. Since then others have continued to count. In 1965 Trevor Lloyd published a short piece entitled “Uncontested Seats in British General Elections, 1852-1910.”

New Sources and Methods In the Study of the Nineteenth Century Parliament

The study of the nineteenth century British Parliament cannot be limited to the institution itself, nor to the constitutional relations of its par ts. The great electoral reforms of the century increased the importance of the electorate in political decision-making. Coupled with these changes, the vast transformations of economy and society altered the very functions of Parliament. Thus nineteenth century parliamentary history requires an understanding of the whole political system, as well as the events within the House. Many of the recent works bearing on the history of Parliament reflect these facts. While good narrative history of parliamentary events continues to be needed and produced, the most innovative recent work raises different kinds of problems entirely and is not limited to affairs at Westminster. The newer types of work can be viewed as coming in two waves: first, a detailed analysis of political structure, utilizing traditional kinds of sources; and second, a proliferation of analytical approaches, using new sources and methods. Both waves are basically analytical, but they differ in questions asked and in routes to the answers.The analysis of political structure has been inspired by the questions, if not the methods and interpretations, of Sir Lewis Namier. The best of many examples are still Norman Gash's Politics in the Age of Peel and H. J. Hanham's Elections and Party Management. The main questions asked in such works are: What was the real, as opposed to the theoretical, framework of politics? How were politics actually conducted outside the House of Commons? How did the various reform acts affect the functioning of the electoral system? These works stress, in Gash' terminology, the “medium” in which the ordinary politician operated. In each case, they seem to emphasize continuity rather than change, and the enduring power of bribery, corruption, and influence. They have added a great deal to what the narratives tell us about Victorian politics, especially in regard to the realities of constituency operations, the origins and workings of party machinery, the problems of party finance, and the cost of elections. Structural investigations of parties, like Conor Cruise O'Brien's Parnell and His Party and E. J. Feuchtwanger's Disraeli, Democracy and the Tory Party have given a new dimension to party history. Perhaps most important, the structural studies have established the crucial significance of local factors and the comparative inconsequence of national issues in most elections.

Uncontested Seats in British General Elections, 1852–1910

From the mid-nineteenth century until the First World War the number of seats contested at general elections in the United Kingdom rose sharply though not altogether steadily. This note contains tables of uncontested seats and constituencies for the fifteen elections from 1852 to December 1910; earlier elections have already been tabulated, in a slightly less detailed form, by Professor Gash in Appendix E of his Politics in the Age of Peel, and after 1918 uncontested seats no longer made up a significant part of the total. (It is true that over a hundred seats went uncontested in the Coupon Election of 1918, because the parties in opposition were not prepared for the struggle. But this has little to do with the lack of contests in earlier elections.)

The Independents Reconsidered

It seems impossible to begin an article these days without invoking, either as saint or devil, the shade of Sir Lewis Namier. Those who inhabit regions remote from the classic years around 1760 are absolved from acquiring more than a general understanding of the reversionary interest, the Court and Treasury party, and the rest of the Namierite stock in trade. Yet the merits and limitations of the methodology must concern and fascinate scholars who reassess the traditional interpretations of other periods of English history. They should not, as the Master of Peterhouse has warned, swallow the Namier method whole. But used with due caution, it may offer valuable insights for other centuries besides the eighteenth. The rigorous compilation and analysis of biographical data, the penetration of ideological smokescreens to the deeper motives behind them, the ruthless discarding of outworn shibboleths like “party,” the careful use of sociological criteria: at their best the Namierites have much to offer historians of other periods. Sir John Neale has applied the method, with modifications, to the reign of Elizabeth I, Norman Gash has carried it into the age of Peel, while the authentic members of the school proceed with their task of cleaning up the eighteenth century.The winds of Namierite change have begun to blow only fitfully, however, in the seventeenth century. One reason for this, perhaps, is that historians of the Stuart period have generally been absorbed in destroying each other on the gentry battlefield, or attempting in more constructive ways to solve the politico-economic problems of the “Century of Revolution”; there has been less effort applied to the details of parliamentary affairs.

Politics in the age of Peel. By Norman Gash. Pp. xxi, 496. London: Longmans. 1953. 45s.

Politics in the age of Peel. By Norman Gash. Pp. xxi, 496. London: Longmans. 1953. 45<i>s</i>.

REVIEWS

Rome et son Empire. By André Aymard and Jeannine Auboyer.The Cambridge Economic History of Europe; vol. ii, Trade and Industry in the Middle Ages. Edited by M. Postan and E. E. RichThe Place‐Names of Oxfordshire. Edited by Margaret GellingThe Origin of Russia. By Henryk PaszkiewiczA History of the Crusades: vol. iii, The Kingdom of Acre and the Later Crusades. By Steven RuncimanThe Normans in Scotland. By R. L. Graeme RitchieEnglish Art, 1100‐1216. By T. S. R. BoaseEnglish Sculptures of the Twelfth Century. By F. SaxlEnglish Stained and Painted Glass. By C. WoodfordeThe Age of the Sturlungs. By Einar O. SveinssonSt Bridget of Sweden. By Johannes JørgensenThe Receipt of the Exchequer, 1377‐1485. By Anthony SteelThe Commons in the Parliament of 1422: English Society and Parliamentary Representation under the Lancastrians. By J. S. RoskellThe Tudor Revolution in Government, By G. R. EltonThe Navy as an Instrument of Policy, 1558‐1727. By Sir Herbert RichmondEngland and Scotland, 1560‐1707. By Douglas NobbsGustavus Adolphus: A History of Sweden, 1611‐1632English Historical Documents (edit. D. C. Douglas)Lord Chatham. By O. A. SherrardBoswell on the Grand Tour: ItalyThe Williamson Letters, 1748‐1765. Edited by F. J. ManningThe Letters and Papers of the Banks Family of Revesby AbbeyTwo Yorkshire Diaries: The Diary of Arthur Jessop and Ralph Ward's JournalHelvétius: his Life and Place in the History of Educational Thought. By Ian CummingFriedrich Froebel and English Education.John Adams and the Prophets of Progress. By Z. HarasztiCommentaries on the Constitution, 1790‐1860. By Elizabeth K. BauerPublic Opinion and Government Policy in Ireland, 1801‐1846. By R. B. McDowellThe Catholic Emancipation Crisis in Ireland, 1823‐1829. By James A. Reynolds.James Stephen and the British Colonial System, 1813‐47. By Paul KnaplundPolitics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830‐50. By NORMAN GASHLincoln the President. By J. G. RandallRussia, Past and Present. By Anatole G. MazourThe Soviet Impact on Society: A Recollection. By Dagobert D. RunesHistoire diplomatique de 1919 &amp; nos jours. By J. B. DuroselleDocuments on German Foreign Policy, 1918‐1945The Nemesis of Power: The German Army in Politics, 1918‐1945. By J. W. Wheeler‐BennettAmerica, Britain and Russia: their Co‐operation and Conflict, 1941‐1946. By William Hardy McNeill

The house of lords and Ireland in the age of Peel, 1832–50

Before considering the manner in which the house of lords handled Irish questions in the age of Peel a brief examination of the ties between the United Kingdom upper house and Ireland is necessary A striking fact that requires emphasis is the growth between 1783 and 1832 of the ‘Irish interest’ in the lords. In the eighteenth century, when the British house of lords was a relatively small body of little over 200 members, the number of peers with a stake in Irish land was only about one eighth of the whole body. Several of these, too, owned wide lands in England and their main interests lay there. But by the time the first reformed parliament was opened on 29 January 1833 the Irish interest’ in the lords had become a formidable body In a house that had doubled in numbers since 1783 virtually one peer out of every four had a stake in Ireland through the ownership of land, and the majority of these were men whose economic interests were exclusively centred on their Irish estates. Moreover this ‘Irish interest’ maintained its strength in the lords right down to the formation of Gladstone's first ministry as the table below makes clear.

Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830-1850. Norman Gash

Previous articleNext article No AccessReviews of BooksPolitics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830-1850. Norman Gash William O. AydelotteWilliam O. Aydelotte Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Journal of Modern History Volume 27, Number 3Sep., 1955 Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/237822 Views: 1Total views on this site Copyright 1955 The University of ChicagoPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830-1850

Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830-1850

Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830–1850. By &lt;italic&gt;Norman Gash&lt;/italic&gt;. (New York: Longmans, Green and Company. 1953. Pp. xxi, 496. $8.75.)

Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830–1850. By &lt;italic&gt;Norman Gash&lt;/italic&gt;. (New York: Longmans, Green and Company. 1953. Pp. xxi, 496. $8.75.)

Politics in the Age of Peel: A Study in the Technique of Parliamentary Representation, 1830–1850. By Norman Gash. (New York: Longmans, Green and Co. 1953. Pp. xxi, 496. $8.75.)

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

Reviews of Books

Journal Article Reviews of Books Get access Politics in the Age of Peel. By NORMAN GASH. (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1952.) ASA BRIGGS ASA BRIGGS Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The English Historical Review, Volume LXIX, Issue CCLXXII, July 1954, Pages 457–460, https://doi.org/10.1093/ehr/LXIX.CCLXXII.457 Published: 01 July 1954

The Electorate and the Repeal of the Corn Laws

I Must start by saying that everything in this paper must be subject to correction from two quarters. Mr. Norman Gash has written but not yet published a book entitled Politics in the age of Peel, which will be a study of the representative system in the twenty years after the Reform Bill, and which will explain to us very much that we need to understand. Secondly, all generalizations about elections are open to correction, indeed are normally in urgent need of correction, by those historians who are prepared to make a more or less intensive study of local conditions in some district. Failure to realize the significance of local conditions vitiates the value of some of the conclusions in that otherwise useful book, Mr. Seymour's Electoral Reform in England and Wales, but it has vitiated other books of more general reference than Mr. Seymour's. In fact we have all been content to describe far too much of the history of the nineteenth century in the terms of the play of a few principal actors posturing before a back-cloth painted with conventional figures, the landlord, the manufacturer, the artisan and worst of all a mass of undifferentiated ciphers without faces which we are pleased to call the middle class. The local historian, and only the local historian, can tear this cloth aside. What he will reveal will not always be a decorous picture; the artist best suited to portray it is obviously Hogarth more often than seems appropriate for the background to such highly respectable figures as Lord John Russell, Sir Robert Peel, John Bright and William Ewart Gladstone.

British Colonial Policy in the Age of Peel and Russell

<i>British Colonial Policy in the Age of Peel and Russell</i>

REVIEWS

Book reviewed in this article: Borrowing and Business in Australia. By Gordon L. Wood Australia, by W. K. Hancock Wealth and Life. A Study in Values. By J. A. Hobson Emigration from the British Isles. By W. A. Carrothers Select Documents in Canadian Economic History, 1497–1783. By H. A. Innis A Review of Economic Theory, by Edwin Caiman An Economic History of Australia, by Edward Shann Problems of the Pacific, 1929, edited by J. B The Farm Export Debenture Plan. By Joseph Staneliffe Davis British Colonial Policy in the Age of Peel and Russell. By W. P. Morrell A Geographical Enquiry into the Growth, Distribution and Movement of Population in South Australia, 1836–1927, by Charles Fenner Principles of Economics. By L. A. Rufener Everyday Economics. By L. M. Rutledge Rational Organisation and Industrial Relations—A Symposium of Views from Management, Labour and the Social Sciences. Edited by M. L. Fledderus British Budgets, Second Series, 1913‐14 to 1920‐21. By Sir Bernard Mallet and C. O. George, 1929 A Bibliography of Social Surveys, by Allen Eaton &amp; Shelby M. Harrison Volkswirtschaftliches Worterbuch. By Dr. H. T. Price. Das Standortsproblem in Der Landwirtschafts‐Geographie. By Dr. Alfred Ruhl.Statistisches Jahrbuch Fur Den Freistaat Preussen.