Even Lloyd George, who took a much tougher political approach towards the reparations, received criticism. Also, at the beginning of the period, Keynes was unsuccessful and his view of the Treaty of Versailles had very little influence at all. However, there was an acceptance during the 1920s that the Weimar Republic, a new democratic Germany, had emerged. There was perhaps, a realisation that the permanent peace of Europe should be based on mutually accepted agreements. In addition, the British governments under Prime Ministers such as Lloyd George, Bonar Law, Baldwin and
This tells us that he had firm control of the country, and was allowing change in the safest of manors. On the other hand the lack of rebellions may have been due to Northumberland’s ruthless nature during previous rebellions making people afraid of repeating the same outcome. The movement to Protestantism can be attributed more to the Kings wishes, and not represent what Northumberland himself wanted. Northumberland’s social and economic ideas were primarily aiming towards getting the government’s finances back to stability. After Henry VIII’s erratic spending the crown and country were in financial crisis and this systematic and logical approach made by Northumberland towards the crisis shows his ability in this area of ruling.
There are many ways that Gladstone’s First Ministry could be considered to be successful. Firstly, Gladstone had a passion to pacify Ireland, this was because he feared other countries would use Ireland as an invasion base to attack Britain. Also Irish nationalists called Fenians tried to seize power of churches, which lead to the ‘Disestablishment of the Anglican Church in Ireland 1869’ The terms of the act allowed the church to govern itself as it was no longer legally established by parliament. It was seen as so liberal it was radical and extended the principal of religious liberalism to Ireland. Another successful act passed involving Ireland was the ‘Irish Land Act 1870’ Tenants were now given compensation for eviction and there were limitations of landlord power, it was a step to improving Ireland, even though it was not as successful as the previous act, and had more opposition as Irish nationalists wanted British landlords to leave Ireland completely.
How successful was Gladstone’s first ministry? If ‘achieving what you set out to do’ defines successful, then Gladstone’s First Ministry was certainly a success. The Acts that were passed during his time as leader of the Liberal party had great impact on the population both then, and in some cases, still now. However not all his Acts were well received and this created some controversy. Gladstone’s main goal was to pacify Ireland and he was the first British politician to tackle the unfair way in which Ireland was run.
Do you agree with the view that, in the years 1534-40, Protestantism made only limited gains in England? At face value source 7 appears to show that Protestantism made only gains in England between the years of 1534-40, however, when we take into account the fact that it mentions Tyndale and how his translation of the Bible was “unacceptable” due to its “protestant interpretation”. We can see that Protestantism was not fully accepted, and people still felt more comfortable with having a Catholic interpretation. This is rather contradicting, seeing as not even 4 months after Tyndale was executed due to heresy because of his protestant translations, there was an act of treason passed. This act of treason meant that anyone who disagreed with the break with Rome would be executed due to heresy.
Palmer writes about how Wolsey successfully brought about peace between England and France in 1514, and that he engineered the universal peace of London in 1518. Wolsey also planned the Field of the Cloth of Gold in 1520 and negotiated peace between the Empire and France at Calais in 1521. Wolsey’s peaceful approach also benefitted England in that it reduced costs at a time when the country could not afford another war, and successfully made England a major ‘player’ in Europe, which was a desire of Henry’s. Another point in support of the view that the successes in foreign policy outweighed the failures is that Wolsey was sly and flexible in his diplomacy. We can see this in source 4, which shows us how Wolsey used the
How far do the sources suggest that James Callaghan was a good prime minister? As sources 1 and 2 would suggest James Callaghan was indeed a good prime minister. James Callaghan is a great prime minister who had the qualities that made him capable of running Britain but daunting economic circumstances led to his downfall. By the end of his government, Britain was deemed “The sick man of Europe”. Source 3 shows a clear disagreement though, as it states Callaghan “struggled to rule effectively until a vote of no-confidence” was called upon.
So then Law reforms were made in 1826. In addition when Britain was in a war against France the government had banned trade unions, and combinations of working men, since the government was afraid of men joining together to form unions and might challenge the government. In addition in the 1820’s Britain was more prosperous and peaceful, and there was less fear of trade unions. Also conditions were improved, so it was safe to allow the working class to form unions and bargain with their employers over wages and working conditions. As a result the Liberal Tories
Do you agree with the view that conscientious objectors were treated fairly by the authorities during the First World War? It can be argued that conscientious objectors were not taken seriously at all during WW1 and were treated significantly unfairly during tribunals, which decided their role in the war for instance, and were merely seen as selfish and cowardly, with no worthy role to offer the country in a time of war. Alternatively however it could be argued that conscientious objectors were treated with fairness and respected and judged on their religious objections, taken seriously in a strict and proper court formality, this idea in particular is supported by aspects of each source, and to an extent is also challenged somewhat by the content of certain sources. Source 7, an extract by Historian Adrian Gregory, provides the statistic that “the odds of gaining at least a temporary exemption at a
Policymakers in the US were not interested in peace, but rather what they could get out of peace. When it came to negotiating, they blatantly denied Britain’s proposal to allow their Native American allies to stay in their Midwest territories when such a limitation would require the ever growing population of the States to sacrifice precious farmland. Also, the British conceded valuable fishing rights to the American government for the Gulf of Saint Lawrence. The treaty did not even mention the problem of impressments that the US tried to pass as justification for declaring war in the first place. The participation in this war also resulted in an explosion within the US Navy that made future overseas endeavors possible, and the United States gained serious respect from European powers that had previously noted the budding country as a cute experiment.