Editing Corn Laws (section)

==Motivations==
Scholars have advanced several explanations to resolve the puzzle of why Peel made the seemingly irrational decision to sacrifice his government to repeal the Corn Laws, a policy which he had long opposed.  Lusztig (1995) argues that his actions were sensible when considered in the context of his concern for preserving aristocratic government and a limited franchise in the face of threats from popular unrest. Peel was concerned primarily with preserving the institutions of government, and he considered reform as an occasional necessary evil to preclude the possibility of much more radical or tumultuous actions. He acted to check the expansion of democracy by ameliorating conditions which could provoke democratic agitation. He also took care to ensure that the concessions would represent no threat to the British constitution.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Michael |last=Lusztig |title=Solving Peel's puzzle: Repeal of the Corn Laws and institutional preservation |journal=[[Comparative Politics]] |year=1994 |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=393–408 |doi= 10.2307/422226|jstor=422226 }}</ref>

According to [[Dartmouth College]] economic historian [[Douglas Irwin]], Peel was influenced by economic ideas in his shift from protectionism to free trade in agriculture: "Economic ideas, and not the pressure of interests, were central to Peel's conversion to favor repeal of the Corn Laws."<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Irwin|first=Douglas A.|date=1989-03-01|title=Political Economy and Peel's Repeal of the Corn Laws|journal=Economics & Politics|language=en|volume=1|issue=1|pages=41–59|doi=10.1111/j.1468-0343.1989.tb00004.x|issn=1468-0343}}</ref>