The first main difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives in the mid-1860s is their beliefs. The Liberals led by William Gladstone, were general believers of Gladstonian Liberalism. This was essentially “peace reform and retrenchment”. Gladstone’s own financial policies that were based on balanced budgets, low taxes, and laissez-faire (self-help) were better suited to the developing capitalist society of Britain in the mid-1860s. The Liberals were not very big supporters of the Monarch and wanted the Monarchy out of the political area and it just to be solely the government.
It's clear to see that Lord Liverpool's government between the years 1822 and 1827 was not in fact liberal, it was just the fact that the measures he took and the laws he passed merely seemed liberal to the general public, therefore he gained a good reputation from British citizens in the sense that a lot of the laws he passed such as the Gaols act were initially seen as liberal because of the fact that now female prisoners were guarded by female guards for the first time, however there were a few drawbacks to Peel's ideas which make it hard to view these reforms as entirely liberal. I believe that Liverpool had a good idea and good intentions to make the British economy become more stable after a poor economic situation, he also wanted to make the country more liberal in the sense that there will be more freedom and equality, however the way in which the laws and reforms were carried out were not necessarily as liberal as Liverpool had hoped. The Penal reform acts that Liverpool passed were initially seen as liberal, however it is possible to argue that there are several different limitations and factors that prove it to be not necessarily liberal. Initially, the idea of a reduction of transportable offences under the Gaols act, and also the reduction of the number of crimes punishable by death from around 200 to 20 makes Liverpool's government seem liberal due to the fact that it is giving the people of Great Britain more freedom and shows that the toleration across Britain is a lot more than it used to be. This Gaols act however was not necessarily new, as some people believe that it was based on campaigning from Fry and Howard several years before.
• Free Trade – According to Adam Smith, free trade leads to competition – Merchants have larger markets (since they can now ship to foreign markets) – Prices come down due to the competition – Those against free trade were merchants who benefited from tariffs (taxes) on foreign goods • A Series of Reforms – During the early and mid 1800s, Parliament instituted reforms in the areas of; • protective tariffs (repealing the Corn Laws), • slavery (banning it in all British colonies), • criminal punishments (reducing the number of capital offenses). • Victories for the Working Class – In the 1800s and early 1900s, Parliament passed laws aimed at improving social conditions. – Such laws limited the workday of; • women and children,
It started off by forbidding the import of all goods, unless they were imported in English ships. This meant that other colonies or countries would have to buy ships off the English, meaning they gained more wealth, thus helping the growth of the British Empire. This provoked shit building which thus boosted the economy of the English. The English continues to
The Third way was a way to defuse the fight between socialism and capitalism. In the early 20th, a number of governments began to implement Third Way programs, including both the progressive movements of countries like the United States under Roosevelt, and the Fascist governments of countries like Spain and Italy. Following World War 2, capitalism was the ascendant philosophy, and although the Third Way remained a viable economic movement, it had much less steam than it had in the past. This remained true until centre-left governments began springing up throughout Europe, a process that was exacerbated by the fall of the Berlin Wall. As socialist ideologies began to take hold in traditional capitalist bastions, the strong free-market philosophies seen in leaders the likes of Ronald Reagan and Thatcher needed a way to move forward.
This corresponds to source 15 which mentions the “machinery of British rule” this agrees with the idea of the concessions only being made to allow further British control because there is a set of cogs that all need to work and India needs to be running smoothly in the British eyes to allow maximum profit from the ventures. India was the home of the cotton industry and tea and indigo was taken and sold by the British from India to keep Britain which allowed Britain to remain at highest economic prosperity. The cotton industry in England relied heavily on that in India not only was the economy at risk in Britain so was work. Without control in India this would have been lost so the reforms that were made such as the Morley Minto were aimed at keeping India under British control. These were not
Unquestionably, the primary benefit of the silver to Europe was that for the first time it gave Europeans a commodity that could be traded in Asia. Subsequent consequences of the discovery of silver were an increase in the practicality of new, European controlled sea-trade routes connecting parts of America, Asia and Europe; the accumulation of capital in Europe allowing the shift from feudalism to capitalism to take place; and ultimately, an increase in the power of Western European nations. The importance of Silver to the "World Economy" will first be described. Other important consequences of American silver will then be examined, as will the impact of these on "World Trade". The discovery of American silver was made in a world that wanted
Liberals; 1906-1914 The Liberal Reforms – Points to Note ~ They were an impressive legislative achievement ~ The Liberals were seen to be responding to specifically identified social problems ~ For the first time the state was interfering in matters previously considered to be the duty and responsibility of the individual; the diet and health of children, the standard of living of the aged poor, the levels of wages and hours of adult workers, unemployment. ~ The poor were no longer to be considered as inferior, but were accepted as unfortunate but equal citizens ~ The roles of Asquith, Lloyd George and Churchill need to be noted. Liberal Timeline 1905. December; Balfour’s Govt resigns. 1906.
Before the Liberal Reforms of 1905, poverty was an ever present endemic within the working-class of Britain. The general attitude towards those who suffered from poverty, as defined by ideas of Victorian Liberalism, gave the government little imperative to take any real action against poverty. However, after two major studies on the conditions of England had been conducted by Seebohm Rowntree and Charles Booth, the Liberal government introduced a series reforms aimed at improving the lives of the poor. Naturally there is a degree of importance to these two studies concerning how they led to government awareness of poverty; however a series of events around this era also served as possible catalysts for the introduction of social reforms, for example, the Boer War displayed the impact of poverty on war, which compromised the British concept of imperialism at the time. The main question is to what extent were the social reforms of the Liberal Government between 1905 and 1914 a response to more in depth knowledge about the extent and impact of poverty in British affairs.
The requirement was to buy fewer foreign products but sell more of their own goods in order to achieve the purpose of maximizing the accumulation of precious metals. However, with the development of commercial economic, the worldwide economic exchanges and the merchandise trade are growing prosperity, but the trade expansion of the competition is increasing. Thus the mercantilists began to promote “Trade Surplus Differential theory” they thought they only need to ensure the sufficient trade surplus in order to increase in national currency. This is the late mercantilism. The center of the late mercantilist is Britain.