WI: No Corn Law Split?

During the period from 1820 onwards, there was strong opposition to the existence of the Corn Laws, particularly after 1841 when Richard Cobden was elected to Parliament. It was he who Peel described as the main driving force behind the Repeal of the Corn Laws, and John Bright was his main ally, they had founded the Anti-Corn law League in 1838.

My idea is not to block the repeal of the Corn Laws, but rather delay it. If one or both of them never becomes an MP, it might delay the Repeal of the Corn Laws. The last general election had been in 1841, so an election was needed in 1847 or 1848. If The debate on the Corn laws is delayed long enough that the split is only just beginning by the time of the election, and hopefully the Whigs win it, then the Corn laws may be repealed without the Conservative Party splitting over it. This might occur even if some Conservatives votes for Repeal.

My question is, what will the effects be?

Obviously, Peel is going to remain at the political forefront for a bit longer. Gladstone is going to remain a Conservative for a bit longer, although he strikes me as someone who may vote with the Whigs on this issue, and may eventually migrate over to the Whigs.

As for the long term effects, that's tricky. All the administrations are going to be different. Crimea will probably still occur and something like the Liberal Party may be founded - free trade was a major uniting force - but neither will be like they were in our history.

The later ministries will of course be very different, especially as, without Disraeli's speech castigating Peel or Disraeli becoming Chancellor and have his budget fail in 1852 thanks to Gladstone, there won't be the big rivalry between the two that existed in our timeline.

In fact, without the split, Disraeli might not ever become Prime Minister, and neither will Gladstone, although I am sure both will still be somewhat prominent politicians.

Any thoughts?
 
I find this a most interesting question.

In a general election in 1847 or 1848 the Corn Laws would be a major issue, and one on which it would difficult to paper over Conservative divisions on the issue. A Whig government comes to power after the general election with Lord John Russell as Prime Minister. In 1848 it introduces legislation to repeal the Corn Laws. The Conservative party is split. To give an idea of the balance of opinion in that party on the issue in OTL, in the vote in the House of Commons on 15 May 1846 on the third reading of the bill to repeal the Corn Laws, of the Conservatives present 106 voted for the government, 222 against. If around 40 members of the government are deducted from the 106, only about 65 independent Conservatives were still loyal to their government. The bill was passed by 327 votes to 229 votes.

In a Corn Laws vote in the House of Commons in 1848, there would be fewer Conservative MPs than in OTL, so fewer voting for repeal. Perhaps as many as 70 to 80, depending on how many free trade Conservatives are elected. In OTL in the general election of 1847 ninety Peelites were elected.

If Peel continues as Tory leader after an 1847/1848 general election, I don't know if he would resign because most of his party vote against repeal of the Corn Laws. Anyway in OTL he died on 2 July 1850.

If the Peelite split in the Conservative party was only over the repeal of the Corn Laws, they would have returned to that party in the early 1850s when it was no longer an issue. So even with the Corn Laws being repealed by a Whig government, it is probable that a significant minority of Conservatives cross over to the Whigs.
 
Top