Trans. Bristol & Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 130 (2012), 279–293

The 1895 by-election in Bristol East

By W. JOHN LYES

I trust that the information put together in these pages may not be altogether without interest to Bristolians, and may be found useful for reference, both now and hereafter, if not to a wide public, at least to the members of that good old family of Dryasdust, which concerns itself with the records of persons and institutions of byegone times, and which, I hope, will always number some representatives among the natives and citizens of Bristol.1 This account of a by-election in late Victorian Bristol may not constitute one of the major events in the city’s history but it took place during a period that was important in the development of early socialism. Following the Reform Acts of 1867 and 1884 the parliamentary franchise was extended to urban working men and agricultural labourers and attention turned to the election of members of parliament who would promote the interests of the new electorate. The movement was spearheaded by the trade unions but they did not seek to form a new party and were content to return members in collaboration with the Liberal party. Any candidate aspiring to defeat a Liberal nominee had to contend with the fact that members were not paid and that no party organisation existed to support him. In 1880 organisations whose aim was to promote socialism were few and far between; as G.M. Young put it: Any-one who set himself to collect all occurrences of the word Socialism in the Victorian age would probably conclude that it might be taken, or made to mean everything which a respectable man saw reason to disapprove of or to fear.2 In 1881 H.M. Hyndman invited representatives from a number of organisations to a meeting the object of which was to facilitate the election of radical members of parliament. This resulted in the formation of the Democratic Federation (later the Social Democratic Federation) to which a number of bodies, including the Fabians, were affiliated but it did not succeed in achieving the election of a member. The trade unions continued to resist the formation of a party to encourage the election of working-class members of parliament and at the Trades Union Congress held at Swansea in 1887 a young Scottish miners’ delegate called James Keir Hardie had an ill-tempered disagreement with Henry Broadhurst, a Liberal MP and the secretary of the Parliamentary Committee about the issue. Despite these difficulties Hardie was elected as member for West Ham South in the 1892 general election, thanks in part to the withdrawal of the Liberal at the last moment. At the same election Joseph Havelock Wilson, the seamen’s leader, succeeded in Middlesborough, assisted by the fact that he was opposed by both a Liberal and a Liberal Unionist candidate, and John Burns defeated a Liberal candidate in Battersea. Once elected, there was little or no co-operation between the three of them as Wilson and Burns aligned themselves with the Liberals; they played no part in

1. Alfred B. Beaven, Bristol Lists: Municipal and Miscellaneous (Bristol, 1899). 2. Portrait of an Age (Oxford, 1936).

279-293 - Lyes.indd 279 19/02/2013 13:48 280 W. JOHN LYES

the Independent Labour Party (ILP) which was formed on Hardie’s initiative at a conference in Bradford Jan. 1893. Thus, at the time of the by-election in Bristol East (March 1895) there were just three socialist Members of Parliament who had been elected in straight fights against Liberal candidates. The campaign in Bristol East is an early example of a contest between a socialist candidate and the official Liberal candidate and is noteworthy for the fact that the former came within 182 votes of winning the seat. This account attempts to illustrate the nature of the constituency, the way in which the candidates were selected, the issues that concerned the electors and the manner in which the election was contested. The personalities of the candidates are not without interest. The Liberal party was represented by Sir William Henry Wills, a member of the Wills tobacco dynasty (Fig. 1). He was aged 65 at the time of the by-election and had been chairman of the company but retired from active involvement in order to enter politics in 1880. The independent socialist candidate was Hugh Holmes Gore, a Christian Socialist solicitor aged 30 who had moved from the family home in Clifton to live in a working-class area of the city (Fig. 2). The Conservative party proposed no candidate.

Fig. 1. Sir William Henry Wills. Bristol Candidates: Their Portraits and Biographies by F.G. Warne (1892).

279-293 - Lyes.indd 280 19/02/2013 13:48 THE 1895 BY-ELECTION IN BRISTOL EAST 281

Fig. 2. Hugh Holmes Gore. Fabian Society archives. British Library of Political and Economic Science.

Full accounts of the election are contained in Western Daily Press, Bristol Times and Mirror and Bristol Mercury. The minutes of the Bristol Socialist Society relating to the election have survived and some of Gore’s election material is also available.3

The Constituency Since the middle ages Bristol had been represented in parliament by two members elected by the city’s freemen. Following the Reform Act of 1830 the electorate was enlarged. However, representation by two members continued until the Redistribution Act of 1885 from which time

3. B[ristol] R[eference] L[ibrary] 21595; British Library of Political and Economic Science, Fabian Society Archives B/2/2, hereafter Fab. Arch.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 281 19/02/2013 13:48 282 W. JOHN LYES

the city was divided into four single-member constituencies with a total electorate of 36,549 (33,233 householders, 1,930 freeholders, 939 lodgers and 447 freemen). Bristol East comprised part of the ward of St Philip North (bounded by Wade Street on the east and Stapleton Road on the north), the ward of St Philip South and the parish of St George. In 1885 the constituency had a population of 61,986 and an electorate of 9,506 and was predominantly a working-class area. Many of the constituents were employed in the boot manufacturing industry and relations between employers and workers had become strained. New machinery and working practices had led to the breakdown of the arbitration procedure which had regulated disputes. The federation of employers sought to impose new conditions which were not accepted by the union and this led to lock-outs and strikes. Matters came to a head at the beginning of March 1895 and at the time of the election a substantial number of the residents in the constituency were unemployed as a result. The first election in the constituency took place in November 1885 when Handel Cossham, a colliery owner and philanthropist, representing the Liberal party, defeated his Conservative opponent by 4,647 votes to 2,383. There was a further general election in June 1886 when Cossham increased his majority. On 23 April 1890 Cossham was taken ill in the House of Commons and died about two hours later. He was replaced by Sir Joseph Dodge Weston who, at the resulting by-election secured 4,775 votes; the Conservative candidate James Inskip, a local solicitor and chairman of the Taff Valley Railway Company gained 1900 votes.4 It was originally intended that the socialist candidate would be William Whitefield, the local miners’ agent, and that Gore would be his election agent but Whitefield withdrew at the last moment and was replaced by James Havelock Wilson, the secretary of the seamens’ union, who polled 602 votes. There was a general election in June 1892 when, following an arrangement between the political leaders, contests were avoided in Bristol West and Bristol East. As a young man Weston joined the prosperous iron and hardware business founded by his father. He later became chairman of the Patent Nut and Bolt Company, the Bristol Wagon Works Company and the Great Western Cotton Works Company. He was a councillor and served as mayor for four successive years and as President of the Grateful and Anchor Societies.5 After a short illness Weston died on 5 March 1895 thus prompting the by-election which is the subject of this paper. Latimer records that the funeral, was attended by the Duke and Duchess of Beaufort, the magistrates, the members of the Council, and a great number of leading citizens. The procession, which was upwards of half a mile in length, passed through the city in the presence of tens of thousands of spectators.6

The Liberal Candidate The Liberal Association’s general committee of the division (‘the Liberal 250’) met at Russell Town schoolroom on 11 March; Mr W.H. Butler, a local industrialist and the chairman of the association, presided, and Mr Charles Townsend, MP for Bristol North and chairman of the Liberal Federation, was present. Townsend told the meeting that he had spoken to the whips in London who took the view that the present opportunity was a great one for returning a radical working man; this view was greeted with applause. He then outlined three categories of candidates: a ‘local gentleman’, a ‘radical

4. He had ceased to occupy this position in 1901 when the company won the action against the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants. 5. F.G. Warne, Bristol Candidates: Their Portraits and Biographies (Bristol, 1892). 6. The Annals of Bristol 1887–1900 (Bristol, 1902).

279-293 - Lyes.indd 282 19/02/2013 13:48 THE 1895 BY-ELECTION IN BRISTOL EAST 283

working man’ and a ‘prominent London man’. In so doing Townsend neatly illustrated the party’s dilemma following the enlargement of the franchise; in G.M. Young’s phrase it was ‘anxiously reckoning the gain of the workman’s vote against the loss of the employer’s subscription’. The names he suggested aptly reflected the categories he had described. In the first group he mentioned Mr John Swaish and Sir William Henry Wills. As to the second he referred to Mr David Holmes, the chairman of the Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress, and Mr Albert Stanley, the secretary of the Midland Miners’ Association. Finally, he suggested Mr A.E. Fletcher, the editor of the Daily Chronicle. The meeting then opened for general discussion and various names were suggested. Few members spoke in support of Holmes or Stanley. As to the local candidates there was clear support for Swaish who had worked in the constituency on behalf of the party.7 When Wills’ name was mentioned there were some cries of ‘No’ but the view was expressed that ‘it was a great blessing to have a rich member who was willing to dispense some of his wealth’ and this comment was greeted with applause. The matter was then put to a series of votes with the nominee gaining the least number being removed from the list. In the first ballot Holmes gained five votes and Stanley three and both names were removed for the second ballot the result of which was: Swaish 108 Fletcher 35 Wills 21 The final vote was: Swaish 105 Fletcher 52 It appeared, then, that Swaish was to be adopted as the candidate but he expressed great reluctance to serve and said that he would need to consider his position. The meeting then adjourned and the following morning the chairman received a letter from Swaish in which he said that he would prefer to continue working in the constituency as an organiser and, accordingly, was not willing to stand in the by-election. The adjourned meeting was convened to take place on 13 March and Wills and Fletcher were invited to address the members. Fletcher spoke first and commented that the conditions in the constituency illustrated the most important problems which the Government had to deal with, namely those relating to the poor and the unemployed. He believed in Home Rule not only for Ireland but also for Scotland, England and India. He would abolish the House of Lords and was in favour of one man one vote. Taxation should be adjusted so that the heaviest burden fell on the broadest shoulders. Secondary schools should be established so that every working man’s child should have the opportunity to progress all the way from elementary school to university. He was not in favour of any established church and considered that MPs should be paid. His speech was greeted with loud applause. Wills told the members that five generations of his family had been consistent advocates of Liberalism and Nonconformity. He was not ashamed to be an employer of labour; his firm had been the first in Bristol to introduce an eight-hour day and he spoke of the company’s policy of paying an annual bonus to its employees. He referred to his service as a councillor and member of the Chamber of Commerce and as a director of the Great Western Railway Company. He reminded them that he had already served as a Member of Parliament for six years and had never given the whips any cause for anxiety. He was unsure whether old age pensions were possible but at any rate considered that, with more intelligent and painstaking Boards of Guardians, it should be possible to ‘bring a great deal more comfort and sunshine into the lives of their old people’.

7. Swaish was a pawnbroker and a city councillor. He became Lord Mayor in 1913 and was knighted in 1920.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 283 19/02/2013 13:48 284 W. JOHN LYES

He was not opposed theoretically to registered manhood suffrage and was in favour of paying moderate remuneration to MPs. After some questions a vote was taken and the result was: Wills 98 Fletcher 68 Blanks 1 Fletcher then withdrew his candidacy and the chairman asked for a unanimous vote for Wills, the result of which was: Yes 140 No 23 Blanks 4 William Henry Wills therefore became the official Liberal party candidate at the by-election albeit with a marked lack of wholehearted enthusiasm. In July 1895 Fletcher contested the Greenock constituency as a Lib/Lab candidate and in 1900 he represented the Scottish Workers’ Representation Committee at Glasgow Calmachie; he was unsuccessful on both occasions. Wills was born in 1830 and after an education at Mill Hill School entered the business of W.D. and H.O. Wills that had been founded by his grandfather. He was a councillor from 1862 to 1880, High Sheriff in 1877/78 and President of the Anchor Society in 1866. He sat as MP for Coventry from 1880 until 1885 when Coventry lost one of its seats. He contested South East Essex in 1885 and 1886 and was not successful. At the 1892 general election he contested Bristol South, a constituency where many of his employees would have lived, and was defeated by the Conservative candidate. He had a similar lack of success in parochial matters; at an election for the Blagdon Parish Council where there were seven vacancies Wills polled 32 votes and came 12th.8 He was a generous donor and at the time of his adoption he had provided scholarships and an organ for Bristol Grammar School and guaranteed the cost of a new organ for the Colston Hall. He also bore the cost of the statue of Edmund Burke that stood on the bridge at St Augustine’s and was unveiled in 1894.

The Socialist Candidate Hugh Holmes Gore was born in 1864 and qualified as a solicitor in 1886. He was the eldest son of Thomas Holmes Gore, the clerk to the Bristol justices. Thomas Gore had been appointed in 1875 and had previously served as assistant clerk to the City of London justices. Hugh Gore had two brothers: Arthur who qualified as a solicitor and practised for two years before taking up a career as an actor9 and Gerard who became a clerk in holy orders. Bale describes how, during the winter of 1885/6 whilst addressing a meeting of the unemployed at the Ropewalk, Hugh Gore expressed the view that it was better to steal than to starve.10 It seems reasonable to conclude that this view set him at odds with his father and he left the parental home in Clifton to live in the poorest parts of the city. He did not conform to the conventional picture of a Victorian solicitor: Helen Meller describes him as, an old Cliftonian, inspired by Percival to dedicate his life to the improvement of working-class life. He was an Anglo-Catholic, eccentric in his personal appearance, since he always wore flowing robes and

8. Bristol Times & Mirror, 7 Dec. 1894. 9. He appeared on stage and screen, playing the part of Black Michael in the 1915 version of The Prisoner of Zenda. He was killed at the Dardanelles. Obituary in Western Daily Press, 31 Aug. 1915. 10. S. Bryher (pseud. S. Bale) An Account of the Labour and Socialist Movement in Bristol (Bristol, 1931).

279-293 - Lyes.indd 284 19/02/2013 13:48 THE 1895 BY-ELECTION IN BRISTOL EAST 285

sandals, although he earned his living as a solicitor. He chose, however to live in a slum court and devote his free time to socio-religious work and the Socialist and Labour movements.11 Bale records that in the autumn of 1889 ‘Bristol became a seething centre of revolt’. A committee, of which Gore was a member, was set up to support the striking operatives at the Barton Hill cotton works. Local trade unionists organised support for the striking London dock workers. The Trades Council vigorously collected funds for the London dockers and … arranged the demonstration to mark their victory at which H.H. Gore, the Christian Socialist, made the most dramatic speech calling on Bristolians to support the Londoners since they were fighting the battle the same as Bristol men would be fighting.12 The Bristol School Board was established in 1871 and one of its regulations was that there should be no denominational teaching.13 Gore became a member in 1889 with the endorsement of the Bristol Socialist Society but he fell out of favour with them in 1894 when ‘he opposed the appointment of a young Jewess as a pupil teacher on the grounds that … she was a member of the Jewish faith’.14 During his membership he advocated the opening of playgrounds after school hours and during holidays, free school meals and good wages for teachers. Robert Gray Tovey became the first Labour councillor in 1887, representing the St Pauls ward until 1891. In 1889 the Bristol Socialists asked Gore if he was prepared to be nominated as a candidate for the St Philip and Jacob South seat. Bale records that at first he was reluctant to do so but eventually agreed; he was successful and served as a councillor until 1895. The Bristol Socialist Society had been formed in 1884 and, following Weston’s death, the Bristol East committee met at the Shepherds Hall on 9 March jointly with the Labour Electoral Association15 to consider the parliamentary vacancy. Several names were mentioned including Gore and Tom Mann, the Secretary of the ILP. The committee had heard from Keir Hardie who told them that Mann was not available but enquiring if Gore would stand and whether they would support him. After considerable discussion the meeting resolved that they would not run anyone for the seat except a bona fide Labour candidate and this would exclude Gore. On 13 March a meeting of ratepayers expressed concern that the Liberal party had not selected a working man as candidate and resolved to send a deputation to meet the Socialist Society and the Electoral Association. That meeting took place the following night. Gore attended as a member of the Socialist executive; he was asked to retire when the meeting discussed his candidature and did so reluctantly. The members considered a letter from Keir Hardie in which he suggested that Gore should stand with the support of the ILP on giving an undertaking that he would give way to the local party’s nominee at the following general election. They declined to accept the suggestion, adding that under no circumstances would they support Gore and the press reported that the society and association resolved that ‘after communication with Mr Will Thorne16 we find that he cannot stand for Bristol East and we therefore regret that there is no available candidate in the field for Labour. To correct rumours associating Mr Hugh Holmes Gore with these associations with regard to his selection as candidate, we decide that under no circumstances can we support

11. Leisure and the Changing City (London, 1976). The description of his appearance and life-style is doubtless accurate but he was not an old Cliftonian, having been educated at Christ’s Hospital in the City of London from 1873 until 1880 and then at Bristol Grammar School. 12. Davis Large and Robert Whitfield, The Bristol Trades Council 1873–1973 (Bristol, 1973). 13. Cyril Gibson, The Bristol School Board 1871–1903 (Bristol Branch of the Historical Association, 1997). 14. Bale op cit. pt. ii p. 55. 15. This organisation, formed in 1892, was in many respects the political arm of the Trades Council. Large and Whitfieldop cit. 16. The General Secretary of the Gas Workers and General Labourers Union.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 285 19/02/2013 13:48 286 W. JOHN LYES

him’. Over the next few days the local organisation made further attempts to secure a working man candidate without success. Gore was present at a further meeting on 16 March and explained that, as there appeared to be no suitable candidate, he had been approached and had consented to stand. He read part of his proposed election address. At a subsequent meeting a member reported to the committee that Keir Hardie’s sole object was to strike a blow at the Government as a protest against the apathy displayed over the unemployment question and that he did not care how the blow was struck and by whom. Hardie was said to deplore the position of things in Bristol as he thought that they were more likely to be successful if they were united. On 16 March the following letter was published in the Bristol Mercury: Sir, I read with much astonishment in this morning’s papers that the Trades Council was party to the resolution discountenancing Mr. Gore’s candidature for Bristol East. I hope that some justification will be offered for so damaging a slur on the reputation of one who has served the trades unionists and the Trades Council itself so faithfully as I have always understood he has. One is not surprised that the Socialists, who opposed his candidature at the School Board, should do so again at a Parliamentary election but the action of the Trades Council is at present inexplicable. A WORKER. The Western Daily Press reported that ‘on Saturday [16 March] morning Mr. Gore was again waited upon by a deputation of electors … Mr. Gore shortly stated his political views and consented to contest the seat as an independent working man’s candidate’. Nominations took place on 19 March and one of those supporting Gore was William Whitefield, the much respected agent of the Bristol Miners Association.

The Campaign The date of the election was fixed for 21 March; the campaign was thus a very short one. Both candidates published their election address in the press on 18 March. Wills reminded voters that for the whole of his life he had supported the city’s commercial interests and the Liberal Party. He added that it would be his intention to support ‘the important measures which Lord Rosebery’s Government [had] introduced … in which [were] included Home Rule, Welsh Disestablishment, Local Veto and Registration Reform with ‘One Man One Vote’’ (Fig. 3). Gore’s statement was somewhat longer and covered a wider field. He advocated Government action to organise labour so efficiently that there would be work for all, the provision of municipal dwellings, more adequate inspection of factories and the nationalisation of the railways. He proposed the provision of old age pensions, a vote for every-one of full age, the abolition of the hereditary privileges of the House of Lords and the disestablishment of the Church in Wales and indicated that he was in favour of municipalising the drinks trade. He maintained that ‘Ireland should have like laws and privileges with the rest of the United Kingdom, and a generous measure of Local Government should be extended to it’. For the three days before the election both Wills and Gore undertook a punishing schedule of open-air meetings; one newspaper reported that on one day Gore addressed 11 meetings (Fig. 4). Meetings were well attended by both supporters and critics and on some occasions an overflow meeting with another speaker had to be arranged. At one meeting Wills was accompanied by a junior minister and at others by Liberal MPs and once by T.P. O’Connor the Home Rule member for Galway who was also President of the Irish National League of Great Britain. Keir Hardie and Tom Mann were on Gore’s platform and spoke at his meetings and Gore addressed two mass

279-293 - Lyes.indd 286 19/02/2013 13:48 THE 1895 BY-ELECTION IN BRISTOL EAST 287

Fig.3. Wills’ election address. Fabian Society archives. British Library of Political and Economic Science.

meetings of unemployed boot and shoe operatives. On one occasion the 29 year-old James Ramsey MacDonald, the ILP candidate for Southampton, was present on Gore’s platform. Gore had such a busy schedule that his professional work must have suffered; on one occasion his brother Arthur, who was appearing at the Theatre Royal, Bath, forsook the stage for a day and appeared on his behalf in Lawford’s Gate Magistrates Court. Despite the attitude of the Labour Electoral Association Gore was supported by some local trade unionists. Among the signatories on his nomination papers were the president and secretary of the Kingswood boot makers. Mr J. Walker of the Gasworkers’ Union presided over one of his public meetings at Barton Hill and William Whitefield, besides supporting his nomination, also

279-293 - Lyes.indd 287 19/02/2013 13:48 288 W. JOHN LYES

Fig.4. Gore’s election leaflet detailing his meetings for 20 March. Fabian Society archives. British Library of Political and Eonomic Science.

presided at one of Gore’s public meetings and spoke in his support. It cannot have been an easy decision for Whitefield as he explained in a letter to the press; he was a firm supporter of Home Rule but he was influenced by Gore’s untiring interest on behalf of the poor and the working class and the Liberal party’s treatment of Holmes and Stanley and he could not accept that a ‘huge capitalist’ like Wills could represent a constituency containing 85% weekly wage earners.17 Gore

17. Bristol Mercury, 21 March 1895.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 288 19/02/2013 13:48 THE 1895 BY-ELECTION IN BRISTOL EAST 289

had a number of local supporters: Dr A.G. Cunningham, a Barton Hill GP, and Paul Stacey with his sister Enid, both prominent Bristol socialists spoke on his behalf. Wills’ uncompromising support for the government’s Home Rule proposals ensured him the support of his fellow Liberals and bodies such as the Irish National League of Great Britain. Gore, on the other hand, was less positive but during the course of his public meetings he said that he did not agree with some of the provisions contained in the bill which was then before Parliament and, if elected, would not vote for it. Such a stance ensured that many of those Conservatives and Unionists within the constituency who had strong views on this matter would conclude that they had nothing to lose by voting for him. The supporters’ stance in the Home Rule debate illustrates the dilemmas they must have experienced. O’Connor, despite his radical views, nevertheless supported the Liberal candidate. On the other hand, Hardie, Mann and Whitefield who supported Home Rule spoke on behalf of the candidate who said that he would vote against the administration’s bill. It has to be said, however, that Hardie did not regard the matter as having any great priority; in the 1895 general election he asked Irish voters ‘Do you say that it is a case of Home Rule first? I can understand an Irishman in Connemara saying that but here in West Ham it is Labour first’.18 Both candidates agreed that the Church in Wales should be disestablished. They differed in the treatment of the church’s endowments. Wills considered that they should be confiscated while Gore stated that ‘an enquiry into its revenues [should be] instituted’. Whilst this matter may not have been of great concern to Bristol voters it may have encouraged some free churchmen to vote for Wills and some Anglicans for Gore. However, allegiances were not clear-cut; Revd. H.J. Wilkins, Vicar of St Judes supported Wills while Revd. A.H. Easton, curate of St Francis, Ashton Gate spoke on Gore’s behalf. Of more concern to the electorate was the question of the local veto (also known as the local option). This measure provided that a relatively small body of electors could requisition a referendum to decide whether there should be any (and, if so, how many) public houses or off- licences within the district. Those premises denied a licence would have three years’ notice and then closed down without payment of compensation. When questioned about this aspect at a public meeting Wills expressed the view that he was not opposed to the payment of compensation if it was provided by the surviving licensees. In his initial election address Gore did not refer to the local veto but stated that he was in favour of ‘municipalising the drink traffic’; he did not elaborate on this view. In the course of the campaign he expressed strong opposition to the measure and said that, if elected, he would vote against it (Fig. 5). The candidates’ differing views ensured that Gore was supported by the licensed victuallers who campaigned vigorously on his behalf and that Wills had the votes of many free churchmen and temperance workers whose influence was strong in the constituency. Revd. W. Jeffery, a Bible Christian, and Revd. D.S. Prosser, a Primitive Methodist minister, were present on Wills’ platform and spoke on his behalf. Wills expressed himself to be in favour of ‘one man one vote’ and when questioned at a meeting said he thought that women should also be entitled to vote but, in both cases, subject to a property qualification. Gore favoured universal suffrage. Policies were not the only matters ventilated at the hustings; the personalities of the candidates also came in for comment. At a public meeting following the nominations Gore commented: He met Mr. Wills some 4 or 5 years ago when he (Gore) was leading some of their Bristol children through the Cheddar Cliffs while they were in the neighbourhood on a few weeks’ holiday. As Sir W. Wills enquired in a patronising sort of way who the children were and where they came from he remembered telling him apologetically that they were poor children from the streets of Bristol whom

18. Kenneth O. Morgan, Keir Hardie, Radical and Socialist (London, 1975), p. 80.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 289 19/02/2013 13:48 290 W. JOHN LYES

Fig. 5. Gore’s election leaflet stating his opposition to the local option. Fabian Society archives. British Library of Political and Economic Science.

a few friends had taken down into Somersetshire that they might enjoy the fresh air and glories of an English country. He remembered how Sir Wm. Wills said it was a rattling good work and, shaking his money in his trouser pocket, turned round and walked away.19 The candidate followed this observation by urging his supporters to avoid personalities. For his part Wills and those speaking on his behalf emphasised what a benevolent employer he was

19. Bristol Mercury, 20 March 1895.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 290 19/02/2013 13:48 THE 1895 BY-ELECTION IN BRISTOL EAST 291

and frequently referred to the company’s practice of paying a bonus to his workers. During the campaign Gore received a letter, apparently from one of Wills’ employees: … the lowest weekly union pay [for tobacco cutters] is 33/-per week. Wills pay their cutters 20/- per week, add to that the 21 per cent bonus … and we find men in receipt of the munificent sum of 24/- … .Wills have of late bought up two firms … in London [and] both these firms employed a large number of union men [and when] bought up by Wills every man was discharged and the work taken to Bristol and given to cheap female labour.20 The writer added that he would be at Gore’s next meeting and would be prepared to substantiate his statements. It seems likely that Gore used this information because a letter from an anonymous employee contradicting the information later appeared in the Bristol Mercury. Criticism of Gore not only came from the Wills platform but also in the two Liberal newspapers the Bristol Mercury and the Western Daily Press. Although lip service was paid to his service in the community on behalf of the poor and disadvantaged, he was said to be more suited to be a representative on the School Board than in parliament. A Liberal MP opined that independent members were cranks and that, as there were only two lobbies in the House, he must be regarded as a Tory. The view was often expressed that, although he lived in St Philips, by no stretch of the imagination could a solicitor be considered to be a working man and that, in any case, there were already too many lawyers in Parliament.

The Result Voting took place at eight polling stations. As the Bristol Mercury reported: On the Liberal side there was no lack of carriages and willing workers were to be numbered by the hundred. Mr. Gore was badly off as regards vehicles, but he was fortunate in having a sturdy band of zealous supporters who threw themselves heart and soul into the contest. Laggard voters were sharply looked after on both sides. After the poll closed ballot boxes were taken to the St George Parochial Office, the last arriving at about 20:30 and the count commenced under the supervision of Alderman Pethick, the Returning Officer and G.H. Chilton, the Under Sheriff. Shortly after 23:00 the High Sheriff, Councillor Todd, leaning from an open window in the Board Room, shouted the figures which were: Sir W.H. Wills 3,740 Mr. H.H. Gore 3,608 Majority 132 There were 50 spoilt votes. After the vote had been declared, it was noticed that the ballot papers containing the 50 split votes had been erroneously included with Gore’s and the number of votes cast for him had, in fact, been 3558. The Liberal majority was therefore 182. The total electorate at the time of the election was 10,310 and the turnout was 71.75%. Wills’ share of the vote was 50.5% whereas the share achieved by Handel Cossham and Sir Joseph Weston had been in the region of 65%. At a general election held in July 1895 Wills gained 68% of the vote against a Socialist opponent. Despite not having the backing of any of the Bristol newspapers Gore’s achievement was a remarkable one and was due to a number of factors. His residence and service in the community ensured a substantial personal following and he was a practised and capable orator; of Wills even

20. Fab. Arch.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 291 19/02/2013 13:48 292 W. JOHN LYES

the Bristol Mercury said ‘although others may excel him in the arts of the platform.’ The support of the local licensees must have ensured some votes and Gore’s attitude to Home Rule may well have tempted some Conservatives and Unionists to vote for him. It was also commented that Kingswood and St George boot operatives may have used the election to take revenge on their employers. At any rate both candidates appear to have been pleased with the result. Wills made a speech from one of the upper windows and then went to celebrate with his friends at the Liberal Club. Gore’s supporters carried him shoulder-high to the St George Higher Grade School where he thanked them for their efforts. However, not everyone was satisfied. The local Labour party prepared a lengthy exculpatory statement, the opening paragraph of which read: Socialists must always welcome a moral victory for their cause: but it is distinctly dishonest to claim any such thing with regard to Mr. Gore’s large vote in Bristol East unless it is right to appropriate what justly belongs to others; for all the victory of a moral character lies on the side of the brewers and publicans, the Unionists, the Church, the vivisectors and others. … there seems very little to be admired in the spectacle of a so-called Socialist craft setting its sails to every breeze to catch votes for the personal aggrandisement of an individual.21

The Aftermath Wills remained the Member for Bristol East until 1900; there was a general election in September of that year which he did not contest. He returned to a more active business life when thirteen United Kingdom tobacco companies joined forces to combat an attempt by an American firm to take over the industry and was appointed chairman of the Imperial Tobacco Company that was formed in 1901. He became Lord Winterstoke in 1905. His philanthropic activities lasted for the whole of his life; in 1896 he provided St George public library and gave generously to the fund set up to honour the queen’s diamond jubilee. He provided a substantial part of the cost of the Art Gallery in Queen’s Road and gave generously to the Shaftesbury Crusade in St Philips, the Red Maids School, Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital and to the fund raised to rebuild the Colston Hall after its fire in 1898. In 1896 he gave the sum of £30,000 to provide the nucleus of the endowment fund which led to the grant of Bristol University’s’ charter. Lord Winterstoke died at his home at Blagdon on 29 Jan. 1911 in his 81st year. Wills’ activities are well documented but it is more difficult to establish what happened to Gore after the election. On 2 April 1895 Hugh Holmes Gore chaired a meeting that led to the formation of a local branch of the ILP. A general election was held in July of that year but he did not contest it. The ILP’s candidate was Samuel George Hobson, a Fabian and a founder member of the party who later developed a theory of socialism based on Medieval type guilds; he wrote for the Labour Leader and The New Age. Hobson explained ‘their dear old colleague Holmes Gore was unable to contest the constituency through ill health’. The Bristol Mercury reported on 5 July: The latest news from Mr. Hugh Holmes Gore to whose breakdown in health we referred to recently is recovering. He is benefiting by his change in Lucerne to such an extent that his friends may expect to see him at business again by the 22nd. His brother Mr. Arthur Holmes Gore is due to open with Mrs. Langtry in Gossip on that date at Portsmouth after the summer vacation. He returned to Bristol on 15 July, the day of the election and resumed his professional and social activities. He became president of the Bristol Bicycle Club in 1897 and the club’s gazette recorded:

21. BRL 21595. There is also a copy in Fab. Arch. in the margin of which has been written ‘drivel’.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 292 19/02/2013 13:48 THE 1895 BY-ELECTION IN BRISTOL EAST 293

We have known him as fostering athletic games of every description amongst the poorer folk … and whether it was that little political game in Bristol East, which, much to his vexation, nearly won him a seat in Parliament, or whether football or cricket, swimming or foot racing , or his excellent hobby of sailing, he shows the same deep interest in healthy exercise of mind and body, as he has shown in the doings of the B.B.& T.C. since it was our good fortune to get him to consent to act as our President.22 In Oct. 1897 Gore entertained the club members to a social evening following the season’s closing run. For the three years following the by-election Gore led a busy professional and social life. He was evidently an effective and popular advocate appearing regularly in local courts and frequently conducting prosecutions on behalf of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC). He regularly attended meetings of the School Board and was chairman of a sub-committee. All these activities ceased, however, in Sept. 1898. Gore attended a School Board meeting on 26 Sept. and appeared in the County Court on the following day but there is no record of his subsequent activities. Thereafter prosecutions for the NSPCC were undertaken by his partner and at the Oct. meeting of the School Board another member was elected to take his place as chairman of the sub-committee. He did not practise as a solicitor after 1898, either in Bristol or elsewhere, and his name is not in the Bristol directory after that date. He failed to appear at any subsequent meetings of the School Board but did not resign his membership; in April 1899 a special meeting was held to nominate a member to replace him because his membership automatically ceased by reason of his failure to attend meetings for six consecutive months. There is no record of him in the 1901 or the 1911 census and no record of his death has been found. In 1911 the local branch of the ILP held a celebration to mark the opening of the Kingsley Hall in Old Market Street. Keir Hardie and his wife were there and the souvenir programme gives a history of the branch:23 In the year 1894 (sic) a bye-election took place in Bristol East, and although we had no organisation of the I.L.P in Bristol at the time, it was thought a fitting opportunity to test the feeling of the electors in that division. The seat was strongly held by the Liberals, but that was a difficulty to be overcome and not to be shirked. We had no money, but we had something better, enthusiasm and faith. A local comrade was chosen as our candidate. He was a man well beloved by the people because of his self- sacrificing zeal for their welfare … . We immediately wired to the Father and Prophet of our movement, our honoured guest of today, Comrade J. Keir Hardie for his advice … . How we toiled and sweated in those few glorious days and nights of struggle … . Victory was deferred. At the close of the poll we found we had been beaten by one hundred and fifty sic( ) odd votes. Gore does not appear to have been present to join in the celebration. Gore’s father, Thomas Holmes Gore, died in 1919 and his obituary noted that: He leaves a daughter and two sons, the elder [Hugh] an officer in the Navy and the other (the Rev. Gerard H. Gore) Vicar of St Werburghs Derby.24 His name does not appear in the Navy List. What happened to him after Sept. 1898 remains to be discovered. The constituency continued to return a Liberal member to Parliament until 1918 when the Conservative Liberal coalition candidate was successful. In 1922 the National Liberal candidate had a majority of less than 200 votes against his Labour party opponent but in 1923 the seat was gained by the Labour party and held by them until it was abolished in 1950.25

22. BRL B 6950–51. 23. BRL B 24623. 24. Clifton Chronicle, 1 Oct. 1919. 25. The present constituency was created in 1983.

279-293 - Lyes.indd 293 19/02/2013 13:48