No Gladstone

The famous British parliamentarian disappears from history. How does this effect politics in the latter half of the 19th century in Britain?
 

maverick

Banned
Its hard to say how much of his influence was really his and how much of what he did would have been done eventually, but by someone else?

For example, would Gladstonian Liberalism take hold under a different leader and name?

Would the Aberdeen Government have found such an Able Chancellor of the Exchequer following the failures of Wood and Disraeli?

Not sure who'd take the leadership of the Liberals, maybe this guy, who was leader in the House of Lords...the Foreign secretary in the Russel Ministry, the Earl of Clarendon might also be an option
 
Without his anti-Muslim tirades, Disraeli might have been able to intervene against Russia in the Russo-Ottoman War in 1877, and stopped the death-spiral into WWI.
 
Without his anti-Muslim tirades, Disraeli might have been able to intervene against Russia in the Russo-Ottoman War in 1877, and stopped the death-spiral into WWI.

Ooh, excellent side-effect, especially for where I want to use these particular butterflies!

*Scribbles notes down for timeline*
 
Home Rule for Ireland was a personal hobby-horse of his - without him in the lead, the Liberals will be less vocal about it (many of them supported it simply because he supported it), potentially leading to an even nastier Ireland situation in, say, the early 20th...
 
Ooh, excellent side-effect, especially for where I want to use these particular butterflies!

*Scribbles notes down for timeline*

You'd also have to wonder if a less weak and distracted (Home Rule, etc) leader with more foreign policy experience would have blundered into Egypt like he did. And dependent upon the approval of the rest of the powers to maintain their control there, they were more or less blackmailed everywhere else and thus Africa got munched and Britain's predominance there dismantled and replaced by the Partition.
 
A very interesting question. There was no one of Gladstone's stature in the Liberal Party. Assuming a general election in 1868 which the Liberals win, Earl Granville or the Earl of Clarendon would most likely become Prime Minister. If Clarendon, then Granville when Clarendon died in June 1870.

Probably Spencer Cavendish (the Marquis of Hartington) later the Duke of Devonshire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spencer_Cavendish,_8th_Duke_of_Devonshire )would have become leader after Granville, though I don't know if Hugh Childers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Childers ) would be a feasible possibility. Of course there was Joseph Chamberlain, but he would probably have been regarded as too radical.

Although there were enthusiasts in the Liberal Party besides Gladstone for Irish Home Rule, such as John Morley, none of them had his passion, eloquence or stature.

Without Gladstone many trees would otherwise have been left standing on his estate at Hawarden Castle.
 
Well I think avodied a Home Rule/Unionist split might be the most obvious effect. However the issue of protectionism will still raise its ugly head
 
Guys

A lot would depend on when it happened. If right at the start then so many butterflies. Apart from anything else he had some many impacts over such a long period. Financial reformer, his long opposition to imperialism, championship of free trade, change from reactionary opposed to election reform to 'the People's William', his support of Irish Home Rule, which split the Liberals.

If you presume he never came to promiance then a lot of what he did would probably be promoted by others, but as effectively? Probably see a more conservative Britain, a bit slower to reform and more miltant. Contrary to what Pasha says you would probably see an earlier European scramble for Africa without his attempts at restraint. [On the plus side this could have meant no free state as that was set up initially to try and develop the region without explicit outside control and preserving free access to the area. Unfortunately it ended up with Leopold in charge:(:mad:]..Might have seen a bigger war at some point depending on how things had developed. Without his high moral attitude dominanting much of the country for so long you might have seen a more realpolitik British policy which could have had impacts in so many places.

Far too many butterflies to tell with any accuracy however. Could have virtually anything.

Steve
 
Top