How Far Would You Agree That Pitt's Success As A Reformer To 1793 Was Dependent On Royal Support?
William Pitt the Younger's political success revolved around an effective working relationship with King George III, without which Pitt never could have maintained the support needed for his economically revolutionary reform policies such as Income Tax. Lacking the selfish eloquence to thrive among Lords, Pitt's support depended upon those who were tryiing to please the king. The more feble minded were content with Pitt's success at the progess he made towards financial recovery kept the public from questioning the rise of the aloof lifestyles of the Lords and furthermore the king. Pitt's dependency on the king should not be cause to question his strength as rime minister but highights a house without intention to prioritise a discipline on organisations amongst the cabinet.
The Regency Crisis of 1788 is a pefect example of his reliance on the king, moreover the concept of George having confidence in Pitt's abilities can be lessened by the King's despisition of Charles James Fox, nd his selfish social nature. The French Revolution had shown that this typica aristocratic behaviour could have catastrophic results, and so caused fear for the monarchy despite the heavy loyalism in Britain. The crisis showed the weakness of Pitt's position, as with the King no longer in the political equation, Pitt's grasp on his position rapidly declined. It was essential for Pitt that he held the kings support. Had the Kings sudden incapability been permanent then a regency, headed by the Prince of Wales would have gone ahead and either Fox himself, or a Foxite would have been instated in Pitt's position. It was Fox's intention to restrict the monarchys influence, as this was the easiest solution to overcome Pitt. Pitt was unable to tsand y himself as an 'independent whig,' without the general support given to Pitt for having the Kings backing, the few supporters Pitt could...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document