|
This ministry was known as "The Ministry of all troubles" In the 1880s, the Liberal party splits over home rule. But Gladstone's Second Ministry is troubled from the outset. What problems face Gladstone? Not much Administrative achievements. There were two instances of political reform: 1) 1883 Corrupt Practices Act 2) 1884/5 3rd Reform Act & Redistribution Act There wasn't much administrative achievement because of :
- OBSTRUCTIONISM - mainly from the 4th party: a backbench group led by Randolph Churchill, and which contained Balfour, Drummond-Wolf, and Gorst. It aimed to embarrass the government - it could do this because the Conservative hierarchy couldn't control them.
- FILIBUSTING - was practised by the IPP (led by Parnell): this was the continued discussion of bills to ensure they ran out of parliamentary time. The IPP had been formed in 1870, and grew considerably when secret ballot was introduced in 1872.
- IRELAND begins to eclipse other problems
- FOREIGN POLICY absorbs Gladstone's attention after 1882 (e.g.: Egypt and Sudan - Sudan was the Gordon issue)
- The fact that Gladstone's attention is divided exacerbates divisions among the Liberals.
In 1880, the Whig faction of the Liberal party is still dominant in Gladstone's cabinet: there are two radicals in the cabinet. The Whigs aren't entirely happy with Gladstone's leadership: they believe that he has stolen it from Hartington and Granville - they also would prefer Palmerstonian foreign policy. The Whigs were becoming increasingly disillusioned by the Irish policy: the Land Act especially annoyed them. The radicals were reluctantly included in the cabinet by Gladstone because their 'love' of social reform is a threat to the policy of retrenchment. Gladstone has to include Chamberlain due to his organisational success in the West Midlands with the Birmingham 'caucus'. Chamberlain is a representative of New Radicalism. Chamberlain provides a challenge to Gladstone on two levels: organisation & policy. 1) Organisation.
Chamberlain 's power comes from new techniques of political mobilisation - this is shown by the effectiveness of the Birmingham caucus in mobilising voters: all 3 Liberal candidates were returned in Birmingham in 1868. Chamberlain is seeking to use the NLF (National Liberal Federation: an association of local Liberal associations) to translate this mobilisation to a national level. Chamberlain claimed that the co-ordination provided by the NLF was responsible for the 1880 victory. But the NLF wasn't as successful as Chamberlain claimed. This was because: - It was never truly national - It was dominated by Birmingham. London was underrepresented in it, and Lancashire refused to participate in it, as they saw it purely as a vehicle to further Chamberlain 's career.
- Chamberlain 's motives were:
- To extend his power base from Birmingham.
- To give representation to the radicalism of the grass roots of the party.
- Put pressure on less radical leaders.
2) Policy.
Organisation & policy call for a program of reform to offer the electorate (unlike the Faddists and other earlier radicals), so there is a great emphasis on material and practical goods, whereas Gladstone's emphasis is on missions and morality. Chamberlain was disillusioned with the lack of progress on reform in the 1880 ministry. By 1884-85, he was compiling "The Radical programme: a series of articles". It became the unauthorised programme when it was rejected by the leadership. (SEE "JUGGLER JOE ARTICLE FOR POINTS: IMPORTANT). Chamberlain makes much more noise over the unauthorised programme than others. There are few new points, and his rhetoric is more violent than his proposals. Old radicals were anti Chamberlain as he isn't against government intervention - they don't want an active state: indeed, the old style of radicalism wanted the government to stop interfering! The situation in the Liberal party pre-home rule.
- Whigs are bitter over leadership and foreign policy
- Radicals are divided amongst themselves (old and new)
- Obstructionism has further alienated the Radicals due to a lack of achievement.
- Chamberlain is very vocal - his failure to dominate the party agenda makes him even more resentful.
GLADSTONE AND IRELAND 1) Record before 1880 2) Problems faced in 1880 3) How effectively were they tackled? 4) Home Rule 1) Gladstone's record on Ireland In his early career, he had no particular interest in Ireland at all. But Ireland wasn't easy to avoid because:
- It comes into his interest in religion
- The 1800 Act of Union puts Ireland at the heart of British politics: as early as the 1830s, the Irish MPs have an impact due to the Lichfield House Compact - also, the issue of Catholic Emancipation broke up the Tories (1829-30)
Gladstone's first involvement is over the Maynooth issue - he resigns in 1844 over the giving of a grant to train Catholic priests. This is the issue of Gladstone's conversion: he later votes to support Maynooth ("Free Church in a free state"). Irish issues become important in 1868 - Gladstone runs on the disestablishment of the Irish Church, as this is a clear moral issue that will rally the support of the nonconformists and reunify the party (as it's Reform to Preserve). The theme of Gladstone's Second Ministry: remove grievances to consolidate the Union: 3 major issues:1) Church 2) Land 3) Alien Rule By tacking the first, Gladstone hoped to avoid the third. The disestablishment of the Church of Ireland in 1869 was a success: Gladstone had a leading role in formulating the policies (see previous notes). The First Land Act (1870) attempted to legalise the Ulster Custom and tried to give protection to tenants against eviction. The act was a failure as it was too weak: no definition of exorbitant allowed rack-renting, and thus there was little security of tenure - it was a missed opportunity. Why was the First Land Act so ineffectual?
- WASN'T BOLD ENOUGH - Gladstone is afraid of the Whigs and has a commitment to the rights of private property.
- GOVERNMENT WAS TOO COMMITTED TO RETRENCHMENT - this is shown in the under-funding of Bright's clause.
- GOVERNMENT HAS A COMMITMENT TO THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY - thus, "exorbitant" isn't defined.
- A MORE RADICAL BILL WOULDN'T HAVE GOT THROUGH THE LORDS - it was better to have a first step than nothing at all.
Acknowledgement of the failure of the First Land Act can be seen in the introduction of the Coercion Act (1871). Gladstone had sought to avoid coercion as it was expensive and illiberal. The pattern of Irish policy in Gladstone's first ministry.
- Mixture of concession and coercion
- Gladstone makes a real effort to deal with grievances (E.g.: The Church of Ireland). Peel's attempts, such as Maynooth, were merely symbolic.
- Reactive as opposed to proactive.
In his second ministry, Gladstone responds to the civil disturbances in Ireland. Gladstone's 'mission' is supposed to be on foreign policy, but evens in Ireland force it onto the agenda. E.g.: RURAL TERRORISM, which originated in the Land League (1879), which was led by Michael Davitt, and arose from agricultural depression in 1877. There is also nationalist obstructionism in parliament from the IPP. Davitt was trying to harness the dissatisfaction for political ends, and hence he works closely with the leadership of the IPP (Parnell). This is known as the "New Departure" - the exploitation of grievances for political capital, and the association of constitutional nationalists with violence. The Land League demanded "The Three F's":
- Fixety of Tenure
- Fair Rent
- Free Sale
Gladstone's response to this situation of coercion and conciliation. Instinctively, Gladstone wants to deal with land problems - he doesn't want coercion. Gladstone's instincts conflict with the instincts of Whigs such as Hartington (who was chief secretary to Ireland (1870-1874)) - the Whigs believed in firm government coercion, and then minor concession. Gladstone's first initiative alienates the Whigs:
1880The Compensation for Disturbance Bill was introduced by Forster (Irish Chief Secretary). The act aims to provide compensation to tenants for eviction. The Whigs don't like it as they believe in the sanctity of private property - the owner has the right to do what he wants with it. Also, many Whigs own land in Ireland and don't want the act to apply - there is also a danger of it applying in England as well. The Whigs believed that this act was the first step to independence and will damage the sanctity of the empire: devolving somewhere will lead to devolving everywhere. The Bill is rejected and results in more violence, evictions and Land League activity in Ireland. The Whigs get what they want: a coercion bill in 1881 (Hartington has said that "further concession is impossible"). To Gladstone. Further coercion wasn't enough: it must be accompanied with the settlement of the land issue. Chamberlain also supports this: he is looking for allies in Ireland to support his radical ideas. Gladstone thinks coercion isn't enough: the land issue must be revived. The Second Land Act essentially did too little, too late. The Significance of the Second Land Act: - Too Little too late - the solutions were outdated, and couldn't resolve the existing problem, which was now linked with the issue of home rule
- Gladstone expended political capital in the party: 58 sittings of commons were needed in order to get the act through.
- Queen Victoria had to put pressure on the Lords to get it thorough
- Parnell sees the effectiveness of continued pressure, therefore continues to press for home rule.
- National league replaces land league (NL becomes league for HR)
- LA2 didn't pacify Ireland, and Parnell directs a campaign to sabotage and boycott land courts (look up). Because of this, he was sent to Kilmainham jail - no trial - this was a bad move on the part of the government because it doesn't end the violence, and it absolves Parnell of any responsibility for the violence (which continues), and the act throws Parnell onto the moral 'high ground', making him a moral martyr to the cause.
But, after spending time in prison, Parnell feels he is losing control of his party to more radical people, and so six months later, there is the KILMAINHAM TREATY - this shows Parnell is ready to negotiate because he wants to get out of prison. Parnell is freed on the condition that he calls off the rent strikes, and ends violence. In return, Gladstone would introduce an arrears bill. The importance of Kilmainham: - Confirms the political importance of Parnell
- Shows that co-operation is essential for the solution of the Irish problem
- BUT four days after Parnell is released - PHOENIX PARK MURDERS, which involved Cavendish and Burke. This is important because Cavendish is Hartington's brother (H. is leader of the Whigs).
- This confirms Hartington's hostility to Gladstone's Irish policy. H. believes in coercion. This means that the chance of home rule without a split is seriously diminished. But there is a temporary peace between 1883-5 as the Land League is uncertain of its new role.
The question revives in the last weeks of Gladstone's government due to Chamberlain: Chamberlain proposes the setting up of a central board in Dublin to give the Irish more control over legislation. The purpose of this proposition was to win Irish support for the "Unauthorised programme". The idea doesn't get the support of the cabinet: in any case, Parnell wouldn't have accepted it as a final solution. As a result, Parnell transfers his support for the 1885 election to the Conservatives, as Churchill and Canarvon were making encouraging noises. The Conservatives win the 1885 election: there are 86 seats between the Conservatives and Liberals, and Parnell holds 86 seats due to the 1884 3rd Reform Act . The issue of Home Rule revives because it becomes apparent due to Parnell's unshakeable hold on the Irish population. Immediately after the general election, Parnell backs the Conservatives, but:
- They don't deliver home rule
- The "HAWARDEN KITE" (December 1885), which was a leak by Herbert Gladstone that announced Gladstone's conversion over home rule. Some see this as cynical opportunism because it is convenient to win back the support of the IPP in order to get back into office.
More recent interpretations are more sympathetic. Gladstone had been in negotiations with Parnell through O'Shea during the Summer and Autumn of 1885. This is shown in a quote from Derby's diary Derby on Gladstone (October 1885) "He had come to the conclusion that the union was a mistake and that no adequate justification had been shown for taking away the national life of Ireland… … he did not agree in the assertion that the Irish would be content with less than absolute legislative independence" (Here, Derby is pointing out that home rule won't be enough The Irish will want independence. Gladstone doesn't agree: Parnell said he only wanted home rule, but he wasn't trusted because he had said that Gladstone had supported home rule in other places (Bulgaria got independence from the Ottoman Empire - although this is a completely different situation). (Parnell: "You can't fix boundaries in the march of the nation") . See photocopied book on Parnell.
The issue also appeals to Gladstone as a moral issue, and becomes a crusade of his only after the first home rule bill was rejected. Why didn't Gladstone fight the election pro-home rule?
- It would split his party
- He felt it would be better for the Conservatives to deal with it, or it would be better to present a cross-party approach (i.e.: not saying that it is his issue). In this approach, the Hawarden Kite issue is detrimental, as it blew Gladstone's cover. HK was done on Herbert Gladstone's initiative to prevent Chamberlain's radicalism from overshadowing the party. Gladstone refused to confirm the rumours, and in Jan 1886, he asks a colleague to join the cabinet on the basis of considering home rule: hence, Chamberlain joins the cabinet.
|
