Yahoo Web Search

  1. About 38,400,000 search results
  1. The Tories were a political faction (and, later, a political party) in the parliaments of England, Scotland, Great Britain, Ireland and the United Kingdom. Between the 1670s and 1830s, the Tories contested power with their rivals, the Whigs . In 1678, the first Tories emerged in England as Jacobites, when they opposed the Whig -supported ...

    • Toryism

      The Tory political faction originally emerged within the...

    • Name

      As a political term, Tory was an insult that entered English...

    • History

      The first Tory party could trace its principles and politics...

  2. Conservative Party (UK) The Conservative Party, officially the Conservative and Unionist Party, and also known colloquially as the Tories, Tory Party, or simply the Conservatives, is a political party in the United Kingdom. Ideologically, the Conservatives sit on the centre-right of the political spectrum. The Conservatives formed a fixed term ...

  3. People also ask

    When did the Tories become a political party?

    When did the Ultra Tories break away from the Whig Party?

    What was the difference between the Whigs and Tories?

    What are the different factions of the Conservative Party?

    • Name
    • History
    • Electoral Performance
    • Further Reading
    • External Links

    As a po­lit­i­cal term, Tory was an in­sult (de­rived from the Mid­dle Irish word tóraidhe, mod­ern Irish tóraí, mean­ing "out­law", "rob­ber", from the Irish word tóir, mean­ing "pur­suit" since out­laws were "pur­sued men") that en­tered Eng­lish pol­i­tics dur­ing the Ex­clu­sion Bill cri­sis of 1678–1681. Whig (from whigg­amore, a "cat­tle dri­ver") was ini­tially a Scot­tish in­sult for the Covenan­ter fac­tion in Scot­land who op­posed the En­gagers (a fac­tion who sup­ported Charles I dur­ing the Sec­ond Eng­lish Civil War) and sup­ported the Whigg­amore Raid that took place in Sep­tem­ber 1648. While the Whigs were those who sup­ported the ex­clu­sion of James, the Duke of York from the suc­ces­sion to thrones of Scot­land and Eng­land and Ire­land (the Pe­ti­tion­ers), the To­ries were those who op­posed the Ex­clu­sion Bill (the Ab­hor­rers). In 1757, David Humewrote:

    English Civil War

    The first Tory party could trace its prin­ci­ples and pol­i­tics to the Eng­lish Civil War which di­vided Eng­land be­tween the Roy­al­ist or Cav­a­lier sup­port­ers of King Charles I and the sup­port­ers of the Long Par­lia­ment upon which the King had de­clared war. This ac­tion re­sulted from this par­lia­ment not al­low­ing him to levy taxes with­out yield­ing to its terms. In the be­gin­ning of the Long Par­lia­ment (1641), the King's sup­port­ers were few, and the Par­lia­ment pur­sued...

    Glorious Revolution

    In a more gen­eral sense, the To­ries rep­re­sented the more con­ser­v­a­tive roy­al­ist sup­port­ers of Charles II, who en­dorsed a strong monar­chy as a coun­ter­bal­ance to the power of Par­lia­ment, and who saw in the Whig op­po­nents of the Court a quasi-Re­pub­li­can ten­dency (sim­i­lar to that seen in the Long Par­lia­ment) to strip the monar­chy of its es­sen­tial pre­rog­a­tivepow­ers and leave the Crown as a pup­pet en­tirely de­pen­dent upon Par­lia­ment. That the Ex­clu­sion Bill...

    Balanced ministries and opposition

    De­spite the fail­ure of their found­ing prin­ci­ples, the To­ries re­mained a pow­er­ful po­lit­i­cal party dur­ing the reigns of the next two mon­archs, par­tic­u­larly that of Queen Anne. Dur­ing this time, the To­ries fiercely com­peted with the Whigs for power, and there were fre­quent Par­lia­men­tary elec­tions in which the two par­ties mea­sured their strength. William III saw that the To­ries were gen­er­ally more friendly to royal au­thor­ity than the Whigs, and he em­ployed both gr...

    Great Britain and England

    1. Note that the results for 1661–1708 are England only.

    Black, Jeremy (1984). Britain in the Age of Walpole.
    Bulmer-Thomas, Ivor (1967). The Growth of the British Party System: 1640-1923. Vol. 1. John Baker.
    Colley, Linda (1985). In Defiance of Oligarchy: The Tory Party 1714-60. (Cambridge University Press.
    Feiling, Keith (1938). The Second Tory Party, 1714-1832. London: Macmillan.
    "Whig and Tory" . Encyclopædia Britannica(11th ed.). 1911.
    Gilman, D. C.; Peck, H. T.; Colby, F. M., eds. (1905). "Whig and Tory" . New International Encyclopedia(1st ed.). New York: Dodd, Mead.
    • Party vs. Faction
    • Naming of Articles
    • Moved Again
    • Status of James, Duke of York
    • External Links Modified
    • Update and Expand
    • Silly Addition
    • Table
    • Improve The Clarity in The History?

    There seems to be no good reason to be squeamish about using the term "party" to refer to either of the two political organizations that operated under that name in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. The term "Tory Party" was frequently used in the contemporary political discourse, and referred to a group of people sharing common political principles, as well as a smaller group of politicians operating under a common leader, debating and (generally) voting together in the Parliament. This is close enough to the modern definition of "party" as not to require further comment. The term "faction" was also used of the Tories in contemporary literature, but the words "faction" and "party" were not used in distinctive or contrasting ways at the time. At the present, however, "faction" may imply a splinter or dissident group of a larger party, and it seems inappropriate to use it with reference to the historical Tories.RandomCritic (talk) 10:43, 29 July 2009 (UTC) 1. Will the article on th...

    BTW, for the sake of consistency a change to the name of this article should be mirrored in a change to the name of the article Whig (British political faction) (which still uses the silly faction thing). What is wrong with "party"? (See comment immediately above.)Jubilee♫clipman03:11, 7 October 2009 (UTC) 1. 1.1. I didn't realise you'd moved this one to party, so I moved the tory one to grouping for the sake of consistency. 1. 1.1. What is a modern political party? It is a permanent organisation with paying members, structure, a single manifesto, and a single leadership. The whigs and tories had none of these things, and people unfamiliar with this political history might assume that they did if we call them parties. 1.2. It is true that they called themselves parties, but they also used several other names for themselves which are not at all ambiguous. Why not use one of their non-ambiguous names? BillMasen (talk) 11:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC) 1. 1.1. 1.1.1. Under this definition, m...

    Explanation: I moved Whig back to "party" and previously moved Tory to the same for the following reasons: 1. The word "grouping" is rarely used in either of the actual articles to describe either the Tories or the Whigs, and even then only as part of the formation history. 2. The word "party", on the other hand, is used consistently throughout both articles to describe both groups of politicians. eg A few decades later, a new Tory party would rise..., The first Tory party could trace its principles and politics..., The Whigs are often described as one of the two original political parties (the other being the Tories), etc etc. 3. The actual distinction between the modern word "Party" and older uses is not addressed in either article. 4. Most modern readers will not understand the meaning of the word "grouping" and will misunderstand "faction". 5. Modern readers will understand "Party" in the wide context of "a group of politicians sharing common policies and working together in opp...

    In the section on the exclusion crisis, James is referred to as "heir apparent". This is incorrect as he was only ever heir presumptive. The key point is that Charles II could- in theory at least- have produced a legitimate male heir who would have overtaken James in the line of succession. I don't think this needs any discussion so I'm going to be bold and just change it. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 10:06, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

    Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Tories (British political party). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQfor additional information. I made the following changes: 1. Added archive to When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to...

    I was looking through this and I started to make notes on all the things that are either factually wrong or misleading but there's too many; what I'd like to do is to start, explain the changes and I'm happy to make corrections and as when raised. It seems a lot easier to do it that way than argue individual points. It also needs more references. Any objections? Robinvp11 (talk) 10:32, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

    Someone's tried to be funny and added a comment about modern Conservative party policy at the end of the first section. I'm afraid I'm not tech savvy enough to fix it, sorry. Rowanwphillips (talk) 21:13, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

    The table in the "Electoral performance" section needs modification: it states that Henry Seymour Conway, a Rockingham Whig, as a Tory leader for the 1770 and 1780 elections. Another Rockingham Whig, Edmund Burke, is listed as a Tory leader for the elections of 1780, 1784 and 1790. For the 1784 and 1790 elections the table lists the Whig leader the Duke of Portland, along with Burke, as the leaders of the Tory Party. In the article H. T. Dickinson is quoted as saying: "All historians are agreed that the Tory party...ceased to be an organized party by 1760". Perhaps the table after 1754 should therefore be removed?--Britannicus (talk) 19:32, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

    In the first history section pertaining to the Civil War, I struggled to get the sense of what the original party's purpose or goals were, why they banded together. There's statements re. the divide, but it's not clear what side the Tories were on. There's mention of how the Whigs coalesced as pro-Protestant, pro-Parliament - did the Tories form as an oposition to that, or where they a faction within the Whigs? There's a mention of a prominent Irish Tory, but no explanation of how this nascent party had Irish representation . Is it feasible to have some clarification here?Chumpih (talk) 06:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

  4. › wiki › Ultra-ToriesUltra-Tories - Wikipedia

    The Ultra-Tories were an Anglican faction of British and Irish politics that appeared in the 1820s in opposition to Catholic emancipation. The faction was later called the " extreme right-wing " of British and Irish politics. The Ultra-Tories faction broke away from the governing party in 1829 after the passing of the Catholic Relief Act 1829.

    • Overview
    • Name
    • Origins
    • History
    • In popular culture

    The Whigs were a political faction and then a political party in the parliaments of England, Scotland, Great Britain, Ireland and the United Kingdom. Between the 1680s and 1850s, the Whigs contested power with their rivals, the Tories. The Whigs merged into the new Liberal Party in the 1850s, though some Whig aristocrats left the Liberal Party in 1885 to form the Liberal Unionist Party, which merged into the Liberals' rival, the modern day Conservative Party, in 1912. The Whigs' origin lay in co

    The term Whig was originally short for whiggamor, a term meaning "cattle driver" used to describe western Scots who came to Leith for corn. The cattle drivers would call out "Chuig" or "Chuig an bothar", and the sound was converted by English people to the pejorative term "Whig" or "Whiggamore". In the reign of Charles I the term was used during the English Civil Wars to refer derisively to a radical faction of the Scottish Covenanters who called themselves the Kirk Party. It was then applied to

    Under Lord Shaftesbury's leadership, the Whigs in the Parliament of England wished to exclude the Duke of York from the throne due to his Roman Catholicism, his favouring of monarchical absolutism, and his connections to France. They believed the heir presumptive, if allowed to i

    After the Glorious Revolution of 1688, Queen Mary II and King William III governed with both Whigs and Tories, despite the fact that many of the Tories still supported the deposed Roman Catholic James II. William saw that the Tories were generally friendlier to royal authority th

    Although William's successor Anne had considerable Tory sympathies and excluded the Junto Whigs from power, after a brief and unsuccessful experiment with an exclusively Tory government she generally continued William's policy of balancing the parties, supported by her moderate T

    Many of the Whigs who had joined with Pitt would eventually return to the fold, joining again with Fox in the Ministry of All the Talents following Pitt's death in 1806. The followers of Pitt—led until 1809 by Fox's old colleague the Duke of Portland—rejected the label ...

    "The British Whig March" for piano was written by Oscar Telgmann in Kingston, Ontario, c. 1900. The colours of the Whig party were particularly associated with Charles James Fox. Poet Robert Burns in "Here's a health to them that's awa" wrote: It's guid to support Caledonia's cause And bide by the Buff and the Blue. Steampunk band The Men That Will Not Be Blamed For Nothing have a song named "Doing It for the Whigs".

    • 1678; 343 years ago
    • Centre-left
  1. People also search for