To what extent may Chartism be considered a successful movement? (Pre-U Specimen paper 13, 2019)

Historiographical orthodoxy has long considered Chartism to have been a failure. However, revisionist historians have emphasised how many proposals of the 'People's Charter' (published in 1838) were successful. For instance; the Secret Ballot Act (1872), Abolition of the Property Qualification Act for MPs (1858) and Universal Manhood suffrage (1918) can all be considered part of the Chartist legacy.How valuable was this inheritance? It should be remembered that after the Kennington Common fiasco of 1848, the Chartists' leadership was in disarray, it had failed to make much impression in the Commons and was dwarfed in importance by the Anti Corn Law League. Though Chartism failed within its own lifetime it could be argued that its most significant achievement was the template it provided for later radical extra-parliament groups to influence political reform. It could be argued that the Chartists achieved varying success in the methods they utilised such as the National Press; the Northern Star achieved a peak readership over 10,000. It also demonstrated the galvanising effect of mass petitioning which became more effective after the Third Reform Act in a more democratic age. Yet Chartism equally demonstrated how recourse to violence tended to alienate public support such as at Newport in 1839. Furthermore, it could be argued that Chartism's greatest legacy was its effective creation of a national, politicised working class movement. Therefore, it could be argued that Chartism's was a success in pioneering some of the methods used later by the Suffragette and Labour movements in enforcing political change.