Abstract
Recent work on the relationship between politicians and voters in Victorian Britain is surveyed, with particular attention to the administrations of Peel and Gladstone. It is shown that rational-choice interpretations of behaviour may be more powerful than traditional Namierite or structuralist approaches. But mainstream rational choice alone is too thin to explain why Peel repealed the Corn Laws or why Gladstone tried to give Home Rule to Ireland.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.