The elections of 1881 gave Ch. Trikoupis the chance to form a government of parliamentary majority for the first time and to attempt the promotion of his reform work. From then until the elections of 1895, which marked the end of his political career, he was elected prime minister three more times, governing in total for about six years. In this period his main concern was the reorganization of the economy and of the administrative apparatus. A supporter of the British development model, Trikoupis intended by his intervention to reduce state control of the economy. In fact, he claimed that only through economic recovery would the Greek kingdom be able to promote efficiently its claims on the territory of the collapsing Ottoman Empire. Conversely, Th. Diligiannis, round whom were rallied the political powers opposed to Trikoupis, agitated against 'plutocracy', exaggerated state control of economic life and introduced a different development route. According to Trikoupis, economic development would be followed by the extension of the Greek state, through the exploitation of the regions that were to be annexed to Greece.

It has been shrewdly observed that Th. Diligiannis showed a greater ability in winning the elections than remaining prime minister. It is characteristic that despite his overwhelming victory in the elections of 1885, when he elected 184 deputies against 56 deputies of Trikoupis, he remained in power for only a year. In this period he showed lack of will-power and impotence during the crisis of Eastern Rumelia, despite the courage of the combatants. In this entire period (1882-1895) the antagonism of the two parties, the Neoterikon of Trikoupis and the Ethniko of Diligiannis, raised political tension which reached the limits of disunity. The rallies, the incidents and clashes between their supporters, intensified during electoral periods. In addition, they constituted a permanent political tactic, especially for the party of Diligiannis. The defeat of Ch. Trikoupis in the elections of April 1895, his immediate return to Paris and his death a year later, seem to have contributed to the decline in the demand for modernization of the economy and public life which had been supported and fought for with passion and intensity over the previous twenty years. On the other hand, the victory of Th. Diligiannis marks the country's turning towards the application of an expansionist-irredentist policy. The appearance and exponential growth of the National Society and the destructive war of 1897 with the Ottoman Empire revealed the limits of this policy in the 19th century.