Also shut up I knew this was meant to be a quick series but University happened.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In contrast to
Cromwell's lightning strike approach to constitutional change, Walpole's
position of Prime Minister (in all but name) began to develop before he was
even born. Under Charles II, who was restored with little limitations to his
power to return the country to a somewhat constitutionally stable state, Lord Councillor Clarendon became a prominent,
but was deposed of in 1667 and replaced by a collection of Charles' influential
favourites, known as the Cabal. Graham Goodlad writes that 'the name suggests a misleading sense of unity'[1]
which I feel was precisely the restored monarch's aim; he was still very
much in control of his ministry, never allowing more than one or two key
ministers to know of a new or different line of policy, so there was little
opportunity for them to oppose it. Despite this, the group, who appeared
worryingly Catholic, proved to be far more unpopular than Clarendon, with
Parliament fearing that they were too corrupt and powerful to be trusted with
representing their views on policy. Discontent for the Cabal grew organised, as
the Parliament created a country opposition who would represent their opinions.
The fall of the Cabal in 1673 (mainly due to the internal conflict between
Buckingham and Arlington) seemed to prove to the Parliament that organised
opposition could be successful and wouldn't lead to impeachment, which in turn
led to many members of parliament allying themselves with the pro-monarchy
Tories or the more radical Whigs, where they would find a power base through
which any opposition or lines of policy could be channelled in an organised
manner.
The theme of two party politics and influential favoured
ministers continued under the rule of William and Mary. William initially
attempted to balance the influence of both the newly formed parties, and their
importance in running the country, ensuring that he was still a key component
in the running of government in a similar manner to Charles II. However by 1690
he fully supported the Whigs and appointed a group of young Whigs- the Junto-
to be his leading ministers. They compensated for the his lack of knowledge
concerning the English political system and his vendetta against the French
Louis XIV which left England with the more passive Mary to rule in his absence,
and, following her death in 1694, his ministers. An example of his reliance on
ministers during his absence came shortly after the quelling of the Irish
Jacobite rebellion in October 1691; it was his ministers who managed Irelands
return to peace, instead of overseeing it himself or delegating the duty to his
wife.
But the increase in ministerial influence grew most
quickly under Queen Anne, whose rule was dominated by political parties and
divided by most historians not by her life, but by the rule of her ministers;
1702-1710 was the period of the Marlborough-Godolphin ministry, and 1710-1714
was the time of Harley's Tory ministry. Marlborough was a military genius,
negotiating expensive battles in the War of Spanish Succession that disrupted
(as of 1707's Act of Union) Britain's European trade. Godolphin was promoted
from his position in William's ministry to Lord High Treasurer. Evidence of the
two party system's influence can be found in the fact that neither Marlborough
or Godolphin were favourites of Queen Anne, but rather had their party behind
them. Anne may have removed their influence eventually, but it could be argued
that this was down to Godolphin moving towards the Whigs and away from the
Tories, who eventually orchestrated his downfall through the manipulation of
clergyman Secheverell's impeachment. The Tories appealed not to the Queen to
dismiss the Whig dominated ministry, but instead for the politically astute
public to rally for him against the Whigs in February 1710. However, Richard
Wilkinson dismisses this argument in his History Review Article 'Queen Anne'[2],
stating that Anne didn't bow to ministerial power and instead was far more in
control than most historians have given her credit for. I personally largely
disagree with Wilkinson's argument. If Anne was in complete control then why
did it take so long for Anne to dismiss Marlborough, whose position depended
not just on Parliamentary support but also his wife Sarah's influence; the
Queen's relationship with the couple deteriorated due to political differences
as early as 1704.
It was under George I that Walpole gained what was, in
effect, the office of Prime Minister. Described as having an 'admirable degree of dedication,
perseverance, and ambition to become known, in an age of corrupt and venal
politicians, as a particularly corrupt and venal politician' [3]-An
accurate description considering that politics at this point was based on
personal gain, without consideration for contemporaries- it is suggested that
Walpole used the now solidly established two-party system and manipulated
George I's lack of knowledge of both English, and British politics, to become leading
minister. George was only interested in what aid Britain could provide for the
Electorate of Hanover to make it the dominant Protestant power in mainland
Europe. Therefore, when it came to domestic issues that would affect the
nation, but not the King's interests, Walpole was only too willing to step in
and save Britain from ruin. One example of this follows the South Sea Bubble
crisis in 1721, which led to the ruination of thousands of investors in the
company; Walpole directed Parliament to restore public confidence so that it
would retain investment and avoid the problems of the investors trickling down
to affect the everyday man of England through inflation and redundancies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.historytoday.com/graham-goodlad/charles-ii-and-politics-survival
[Accessed 27 February 2013]
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-wilkinson/queen-anne
[Accessed 26 February 2013]
[Accessed 2nd
February 2013 via iTunes podcasts]
Bibliography
Cabal Ministry-Wikipedia [online]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabal_Ministry
[Accessed 19th January 2013]
Charles
II of England-Wikipedia [online]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_England
[Accessed 19th January 2013]
Charles II- BBC History [online]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/charles_ii_king.shtml
[Accessed 13th December 2012]
Black, J. Georges I & II: Limited
Monarchs. Published in History Today Volume 5, Issue 2 2011 [online]
http://www.historytoday.com/jeremy-black/georges-i-ii-limited-monarchs
[Accessed 26th February 2013]
D'Aubigne, J.H.M. The Protector: A
Vindication (1848) Kindle Version
Falkus, C. The Life and Times of Charles
II (1984)
Fraser, A. (2008) Cromwell, Our Chief of
Men, Kindle Version
George I-Wikipedia [online]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_I_of_Great_Britain
[Accessed 29th December 2012]
George II-Wikipedia [online]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_II_of_Great_Britain
[Accessed 29th December 2012]
Goldie, M. The Bill of Rights, 1688 and 1998.
Published in History Today Volume 48, issue: 9[online] http://www.historytoday.com/mark-goldie/bill-rights-1689-and-1998
[Accessed 27 February 2013]
Goodlad, G. Charles II and the Politics
of Survival. Published in History Review 2010 [online]
http://www.historytoday.com/graham-goodlad/charles-ii-and-politics-survival
[Accessed 27 February 2013]
Lynch, M. In the
Interregnum (2008)
O'Gorman, F. The
Long Eighteenth Century British Political& Social History 1688-1832 (2009)
Oliver
Cromwell-Wikipedia [online]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Cromwell
[Accessed 19th
November 2012]
Richard
Cromwell-Wikipedia [online]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Cromwell
[Accessed 17th January 2013]
Smith, D.L. A History of the Modern
British Isles 1603-1707 The Double Crown (2002)
Tumath,
A. Today in History from A New History Podcast, 16th June: John Churchill, The
Duke of Marlborough
[Accessed
1st February 2013 via iTunes podcasts]
Tumath, A. Today in History from A New History
Podcast, 26th August: Robert Walpole
[Accessed 2nd February 2013 via iTunes
podcasts]
Tumath,
A. Today in History from A New History Podcast, 30th January: The Execution of
Charles I
[Accessed
1st February 2013 via iTunes podcasts]
Wilkinson, R. Queen Anne. Published in
History Review 1998 [online]
http://www.historytoday.com/richard-wilkinson/queen-anne
[Accessed 26 February 2013]
William III- Wikipedia [online]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_III_of_England
[Accessed 29th December 2012]
