Page 18 - History 2020

sleeping dogs lie”; a cynic who knew the price of men; the creator of parties, cabinet

government and the office of Prime Minister. Plumb however modifies this image. He
points to Walpole’s long pursuit of power, his desperate, calculated political risks,
and his vast appetite for detail – and his policy of peace.

Hard-headed and obstinate, Walpole rejected demands from aggressive merchants
for wars of commercial plunder. He was averse to debt and wanted to lower the
land-tax by avoiding wars. He thought that if governments followed sensible,
common-sense policies, trade would take care of itself. Peace which would bring its

own prosperity; his simple, consistent, policy. But it demanded all his statesmanship.
Politics was extraordinarily complex. With no modern parties, factions, personal and
family connections and the pursuit of power were as, or more, important, as issues;
politicians changed sides (and back again with remarkable ease. To modern eyes, it
has, says Plumb, “a cynical air of unreality”.

The point was, as Plumb stressed, that in the absence of modern parties, the House

of Commons had become a source of instability. Then, the king chose his ministers,
his servants, who had to find a majority in the House of Commons; today, following
an election, majority parliamentary party leaders present their ministers to the
th
monarch). 18 century majorities were fragile. Minor disputes over policy detail,
local loyalties, personal views and idiosyncrasies, could cause them to disintegrate.
Ministries rose and fell rapidly. Parliamentary politics were uncertain and always on
th
the brink of anarchy. 18 century historian Hume wisely observed that governments
were forced to appeal to MP’s individual self-interest to secure continuing support

for their policies. Patronage offered a chance of more stable government. This began
under the Tory, Harley. Offices (“places”) in Church or State in which the monarch
had the power to appoint, began to be used for political ends. As a young politician,
Walpole saw this expansion of patronage and the increasingly “wolfish appetite for
places” (Plumb), both for financial and social gain.

Crucially, Walpole realized that the key to a minister dominating parliament was to
have the complete and loyal support of the King in the distribution of patronage. To
be dominant, such a minister must become the undisputed fount of all patronage; if
there were two or three ministers who could influence the monarch, it wouldn’t
work; it would simply move the political instability from the Commons to the Court.
So Walpole's first priority was to win and keep the favour and confidence of the king;
his absolute priority after that was to keep it. He must have no rivals in this;
historians note that he often chose colleagues for their loyalty rather than their
ability.