Perceptions and Reality: the Effects of the Corn Laws and their Repeal in England, 1815–1906

Abstract

The repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 has been seen by many historians as one of the defining moments of nineteenth-century British history: a pivotal development of the first magnitude. It was the moment at which, in the long arm-wrestling match between agriculturist and industrialist, the back of the agriculturist’s hand hit the table top with a resounding crash. The beginning of the end of landed domination of national government could much more justifiably be dated from 1846 than from 1832.¹ Equally, by many in the agricultural community of the time, the Corn Laws were seen as the pass at Thermopylae: if that pass could be held, all would be well: but if the pass were sold, the Persian hordes would burst through, wreaking havoc upon a noble civilization.² Sir Robert Peel’s ‘selling’ of that pass was regarded as a monstrous act of betrayal by the very party that he led, and which he himself had done so much to rename and reshape in a more progressive image. It could well be argued that Robert Peel both created and destroyed the first Conservative Party, leaving its ruins to be reconstructed again at last along Disraelian lines, since the Party’s disastrous split over the Corn Law issue allowed them only 26 months in office over the following 20 years.³ But the full significance of the 1846 repeal of the Corn Laws remains a debatable issue. Other historians have argued that, since the Corn Laws were ineffective and irrelevant, therefore their repeal was an event of no great significance, in either economic or political terms.⁴

I would like to thank Michael Turner and Ewen Green for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts of this chapter.