organiser par excellence By Lawrence Iles Reading Cooper’s wearisomely dull entry in the old Dictionary herbert gladstone (1854 – 1930) of National Biography on the youngest son of Victorian Prime Minister William Gladstone, one could be forgiven for thinking that Herbert Gladstone’s career was one of effortless progression: from Modern History Lecturer at an Oxford college, to Liberal Chief Whip, Home Secretary and first UK Governor- General of the new South African Union, with a fine end as an active Liberal Viscount, staunchly protective of his father’s good name. Indeed, the Whig politician Robert Lowe, who supported both of Herbert Gladstone’s first two parliamentary candidacies, even thought him future prime ministerial material.1

24 Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 organiser par excellence herbert gladstone (1854 – 1930)

ut with this flattering neither Herbert Gladstone’s auto- on ‘condition’ that he obtained impression, much biography, After 30 Years (1928), for the town the ‘eminence’ of contemporary and nor his official biography, Herbert national office. Yet in reality his subsequent opinion Gladstone: A Memoir (1932), by the role as Chief Whip nearly twenty begs to differ. Pio- former Liberal MP, Sir Charles years later was his first major post, Bneering Liberal Party historian Mallet, do justice to the subject’s and his local organiser, Alder- Roy Douglas, in an acerbic series controversial side.4 man Joseph Henry, had to be of observations, accused Glad- If we go beyond these books persuaded that this office was of stone of being both too ‘high- and consider his public utter- any real importance. Fortunately, principled’ and too secretively ances, faithfully recorded by the as Neville Masterman, the biog- and cunningly base as regards his newspapers of the day, and the rapher of Gladstone’s ill-fated 1903 Liberal–Labour pact, which papers of the Leeds Liberal Party predecessor Tom Ellis, has shown, gave Labour its first opportunity for the period 1880–1910 when the office had recently become to grow.2 For his part, the Tory he sat in the Commons, new light more important as a result of Ellis’ politician Henry Chaplin casti- can be shed on the career of this insistence on both financing it gated Gladstone for being a ‘chip often unfairly maligned figure. more effectively and extending off the old block’ in his ability What emerges from using its consultative role to encompass to be ‘casuistical’ in appearing to such sources for the first time is a all kinds of radicals beyond West- agree with both sides of an argu- very different politician from his minster’s cliquish clubbery. What ment simultaneously. Chaplin illustrious father. Herbert Glad- was lacking, however, was flair was not the only contemporary stone was very much a twentieth- and drive and, in terms of repair- to compare Gladstone unfavour- century politician, particularly ing this deficiency, Gladstone’s ably with his father. Joe Biggar, a in terms of his organisational flamboyant determination was to leading Irish Nationalist MP, told abilities, which helped the Liberal prove ideal.5 the Leeds branch of the United Party achieve its landslide victory Out of office, Gladstone had Irish League that their local MP in 1906 and a significant, if short- been increasingly frustrated at would be ‘nothing’ without his lived, measure of revival in 1923. the very deliberate minimisa- father’s name; and Lloyd George Before surveying how Glad- tion of his talents for innovatory once described Gladstone as liv- stone contributed to these leadership. He had contemplated ing proof of the ‘Liberal doctrine achievements, it is worth con- leaving Liberal politics altogether, that quality and intellect were not sidering the impression left by especially after he survived the hereditary’.3 Cooper that, as a result of his 1895 general election with a If nothing else, all these ver- name, Gladstone was a shoo-in majority of only ninety-seven dicts show that, in Cooper’s own (Left) Herbert for all the high offices of state he votes, amid allegations of treat- inadequate assessment, Gladstone Gladstone in held. The Leeds Mercury in 1880 ing aimed at his wealthy Tory was a ‘hearty controversialist’. Yet 1906. had welcomed him as their MP opponent. Before he became

Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 25 organiser par excellence Chief Whip in 1899, senior Lib- Senior and pro-Boer stance in the past. the same direction. Indeed, con- erals had deliberately overlooked The , in 1914, criti- trary to Cooper, it should now Gladstone for fear of courting Liberals cally reviewed all his published be irrefutably stated that the the accusation of nepotism.6 official correspondence as Gov- so-called Hawarden Kite inci- Gladstone had been an unpaid had delib- ernor-General, which showed dent (Hawarden Castle being Junior Lord of the Treasury dur- that he had vigorously restricted the Gladstones’ home), in which ing his father’s second term of erately workers’ right to strike and other the Liberal former premier was office from 1880 to 1885, and in overlooked civil liberties. Charles Masterman, ‘flown’ publicly for the first time the short-lived 1886 administra- initially a protégé of Gladstone’s, as a home ruler, instead of being tion he was made Financial Sec- Gladstone was attacked from both the left a supposedly accidental conver- retary to the War Office, serving and right in by-elections at the sation between his youngest son as deputy to Campbell-Banner- for fear of time because of the way in which and reporters, was a deliberate man as Secretary of State for War. workers, often immigrants from act, at least by Herbert Gladstone, He did slightly better in the 1892 courting the UK, were being treated.8 if not necessarily his father. As Liberal government, serving as the accu- Despite the later disappoint- contemporaries realised, ranging Asquith’s Under-Secretary at the ment of Gladstone’s career, in the from reluctant home rule Whig Home Office. Nonetheless, sheer sation of period when he served as Chief Lord Granville, with his fulmina- administrative hard work was all Whip he exerted a good, mod- tions against ‘the Leeds plotters’, that was expected here too. To his nepotism. ernising effect on his father’s fac- to anti-home rule Joseph Cham- anger, when he tried to use his tion-ridden, old-fashioned party. berlain, this briefing was not in own initiative, in favour of the Trevor Lloyd, in a 1974 survey the least bit accidental.11 new spirit of social, intervention- of Gladstone’s fundraising and The Leeds Liberals had long ist Liberalism, his reputation as a candidate support activities, has been planning a pre-emptive hard worker who toed the party shown that working with very strike against the domination of line did not help him. The party’s little money (he often had to the National Liberal Federation Publications Department, under borrow from, or plead with, his by the Chamberlainite Birming- James Bryce, declined to print an elder brother Henry and the ham radicals. The trouble was that, article of Gladstone’s criticising right-wing northern Liberal until Irish home rule was thrust opposition by the National Lib- Barran family) Gladstone kept into prominence by the new eral Federation to the payment the party in good shape during Parnellite Home Rule League, of salaries to MPs. The article was a period of considerable political both Leeds radicals like Glad- instead published in the far more difficulties.9 stone and moderates like Leeds elite Albemarle magazine.7 The main controversy affect- Mercury editor T. Wemyss-Reid, Politically frustrated, and mar- ing the party at that time was lacked a credible radical issue ried, in 1902, to a socially con- Ireland. Indeed, in a 1927 article with which to discredit Cham- servative, rich, southern English on the Whips’ Office, penned berlain and the new municipal property heiress, it was hardly for the American Political Science socialist radicals, or to gain the surprising that, in his later career Review, Gladstone claimed that allegiance of older laissez-faire in the Home Office and as Gov- this island’s future status was the radicals like Henry Labouchère ernor-General of South Africa, primary political issue of his life- and Charles Bradlaugh. This was Gladstone’s progressive outlook time. He blamed Lord Richard because Gladstone found much was mellowed by the conserva- Grosvenor, the anti-home rule of Chamberlain’s NLF pro- tive outlook of the British politi- Liberal Chief Whip of the 1885– gramme ‘inspiring’.12 He agreed cal establishment. He had been 86 period for sowing the seeds of with its redistributionist focus on taught to obey unimaginatively, partition. While this is more than aristocratic and capitalist wealth. even if this was contrary to his a little unfair to Grosvenor, the As late as 1885 Chamberlain him- progressive principles. Asquith, 1927 article sheds some light on self expressed the view that, were who privately considered him Gladstone’s attitude towards the it not for William Gladstone, he lazy, wanted Gladstone out of the issue with which he is now most would consider Herbert a good Home Office when he replaced closely identified.10 radical influence upon the party. Campbell-Bannerman as Prime When he first stood, unsuc- In old age, Herbert Gladstone Minister in 1908, and was glad to cessfully, for the Commons in sought to play down some of install Churchill in his place. Tory Middlesex in 1880, Glad- the more collectivist and eco- In South Africa his rule was stone had indicated that, ‘while nomically left-wing implications regarded by right-wingers as fair no home ruler’, dealing with of his support for home rule. In and resolute in his manner of deal- injustice in Ireland was his pas- his memoirs he implies that he ing with recalcitrant, anti-British, sion. By the summer of 1885 shared his father’s private hope Dutch residents, and with strikers (August, if his memoirs are to that the Tories, under the future on the railways. This view was not be believed) he was a convinced Liberal defector Lord Carnarvon, shared by those on the left, who home ruler and was categorical might have offered home rule recalled Gladstone’s pro-labour that he was pushing his father in themselves.

26 Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 organiser par excellence

This was not what Glad- ­personally raised £1,000 to ena- Gladstone went against the stone or his Leeds Liberal allies ble Henry Labouchère to hold a grain of Yorkshire Liberals at this intended to achieve at the time. similar such rally in 1886, when time. As early as the 1890s he was For one thing, Joe Biggar and the national party refused to fund asking his agent, John Mathers, other Parnellites had done their it. Gladstone also promised that, to put aside his aversion to inter- work so well in swinging the if Ireland’s woes could be fixed, ventionist legislation and survey votes of what E. D. Steele has justly, then the Liberals would be whether his constituents favoured shown to be a huge Irish elector- the providers of economic justice new shop legislation to enforce a ate in Leeds over to Carnarvon- for all British working people. work relief half-day, as the Leeds type imagined Tory allies that Later, in 1900 and 1906, Glad- Co-op stores already did on three out of five Leeds seats went stone was to agree with the Lib- Wednesdays.17 Legislation to this Tory in 1885. Indeed, only with eral right that home rule was effect was placed on the statute great difficulty did the wealthy not necessarily a Liberal priority book in 1912. As Home Secretary, West Leeds iron and steel mag- compared with the preservation Gladstone was responsible for nate, James Kitson, the future of free trade. But he always made the legislation that introduced an first Lord Airedale, manage to clear, as a stalwart for home rule, eight-hour day for miners, which dissuade the pro-Irish Gladstone that some day he expected its was unpopular with coal-own- from opting to fight East Leeds, delivery as, without it, a great deal ers such as the Pease family in then, as now, the poorest of the of Liberal social reform would Yorkshire. And, earlier, as Under- workers’ constituencies. A good never be secure. Indeed, for all of Secretary at the Home Office thing too, as that constituency the scoffing from The Times that he presided over the first major did indeed temporarily go Tory there was no link between Ireland increase in the safety inspectorate in 1886, only later to be rescued and economic issues in the rest of for small workshops. when Gladstone helped a long the country, the right were well All of this interventionist Lib- time home-ruler, L. Gane, win aware of the linkage between the eralism was intentional on Glad- the seat back.13 two issues.14 stone’s part, and long preceded Ideologically, Gladstone The second big controversy of New Liberal theoretical mani- revealed his intentions in a Gladstone’s political career con- festos such as those from Rich- remarkable series of nationwide cerned the extent to which the ard Haldane, Ernest Jones or the speeches in 1886, which The 1906 government was to pursue writings in journals such as the Times found socially threatening, the social reforms advocated by Contemporary Review and Nine- but which were to become staples the New Liberals even though, teenth Century. In one of his very of his arguments as Chief Whip, as Masterman was to admit, first speeches as Liberal candidate and show his modernising intent Campbell-Bannerman was not for Middlesex, Gladstone had for Lib-Labbery. In a speech to much of a social reformer him- He argued criticised Disraeli’s social legisla- 3,000 Liberals in Leeds, he gave self. Cooper, in his DNB sketch, tion as being merely ‘permissive’ two principal reasons why British dismissed many of Gladstone’s that Ire- and a pale reflection of municipal Liberalism had to support Irish social reforms as Home Secretary, land’s liberalism. Later, in his sustained home rule. Firstly, he said that all such as children’s courts, as being efforts to support a specific Lib- human history had largely shown tinged by too much bureau- grievances eral-Labour class group of MPs that ‘wealth, intelligence and edu- cratic collectivism. Yet features of within the Liberals’ orbit, Glad- cation’, let alone ‘property’ in today’s legal system, from the pro- were of stone strongly defended the man- its own right, had been against bation service to effective work- ner in which many in that group most political and social reforms ers’ compensation rights, began an ‘anti- had supported the Salisbury gov- for the relief of ordinary people, with Gladstone. Indeed, while landlord’ ernment’s social legislation.18 who were expected, instead, just no socialist, Gladstone simply Gladstone’s views on, and con- to know their place. Secondly, he disagreed with his father’s Peelite nature, and duct of, broader Liberal–Labour argued that Ireland’s grievances aversion to positive government relations can now be put in their were of an ‘anti-landlord’ nature, action.15 accordingly proper context. As with his semi- and accordingly home rule was Remarkably, too, he disagreed collectivist approach to economic in the tradition of the struggle for with many of his wealthy Liberal home rule questions, Gladstone’s Lib-Lab the Magna Carta. In essence, as backers, both at local and national was in the pact of 1903, the secretive nature his fellow Leeds Liberal MP, the level, even though, as Dr Russell of which has long been over- distinguished academic chemist has shown, just twenty of them tradition of stated, was publicly presaged in Sir Lyon Playfair, was to put it, provided two-thirds of the Leeds earlier speeches. In a long speech the cause of British social Lib- Liberals’ revenue in the crucial the strug- to Liberal constituency agents eralism and Irish nationalism 1906 contest. At local govern- at a turn-of-the-century Not- were one. And, sure enough, not ment level, Leeds Liberals were gle for the tingham National Liberal Fed- only did Gladstone campaign on already engaged in pacts against Magna eration AGM, Gladstone berated such lines all over the country in socialists with the local Tories, to the failure of local upper-mid- every election from 1886, but he Gladstone’s annoyance.16 Carta. dle-class Liberal Associations to

Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 27 organiser par excellence

In Yorkshire, however, Glad- semi-Tory humour and ridicule stone was faced with the fact of working-class people.22 that in Leeds’s neighbouring city, In a similar vein, Gladstone Bradford, the ‘Alfred Illingworth’ also sought nationally to control dynasty was firmly in charge. and moderate separatist socialism, These Liberals, all employers, not ‘snuff it out’. The supposedly were opposed to any Labour rep- secret 1903 pact had been explic- resentation altogether. Gladstone itly argued for on these grounds told Campbell-Bannerman, on by Gladstone in more than one seeing the 1906 Yorkshire returns, speech years before. The pact itself that he was not surprised when was largely negotiated between ‘Alfred Illingworth Liberalism’ Gladstone’s secretary, Jesse Her- was dealt a formidable blow, by bert, and Ramsay Macdonald, the election in the city of the ILP’s who had family links with Glad- Fred Jowett, whom Gladstone stone and had once served as pri- considered to be a ‘really good vate secretary to former Liberal man’. Jowett had campaigned on front-bencher Thomas Lough. a municipal programme of free Not only was the pact over- school meals and medical inspec- whelmingly in the Liberals’ favour, tion that the local Illingworth as it tapped into nearly £1,000 Liberals fought against tooth and already given to the Labour Rep- nail.21 resentation Committee (LRC) by None of this should sug- the trade union movement, but it gest that Gladstone was totally concentrated the thirty Labour unconcerned about the growth ‘straight fights’ against the Tories on his own Leeds patch of sepa- heavily in Roman Catholic and ratist socialism, but he took a Anglican working-class Lanca- realistic, even empathetic, view shire. In this area, Liberal Asso- of Labour’s development outside ciations had, too often, become the Liberal Party. His West Leeds ineffectual adjuncts of cotton- constituency president, Alder- mill and laissez-faire elites, and adopt working-class candidates. Herbert Gladstone man Joseph Henry, called by Labour candidates could, more More privately he bemoaned in 1882. Campbell-Bannerman, admir- credibly than nonconformist Lib- their equal failure to fund more ingly, the ‘Duke of Wellington’ erals, straddle the divisions over ‘university men ... intellectuals’ of for his command of the city’s education. poor finances as ‘progressive’ can- Liberalism, did at this time think Gladstone was insistent that didates. He was no doubt thinking in terms of a three-party struggle the LRC do its utmost to curtail of the report from Home Coun- in the city. He kept the crucial rogue, independent socialist can- ties Liberal Federation organiser Holbeck ward entirely Liberal didates from undertaking sense- Will Crooks that, in places like until as late as 1908; regularly less three-party fights that would Kent, too many middle-class Lib- berated Gladstone for neglecting only benefit the Tories. Yet, it erals were just ambitious ‘crooks’, the poorest West Leeds wards like took all Ramsay Macdonald’s merely interested in candidacies Wortley where, indeed, Labour personal skills, publicly and pri- and party status to further their did grow; and secured an intel- vately, to stop Labour left-wing- local professional careers.19 lectual, Quaker, left-wing activ- ers in Leeds from promoting a But how far did Gladstone ist Liberal, T. Edmund Harvey, as candidacy of their own against actually want to go in promot- Gladstone’s successor as MP in the Liberal Chief Whip. They ing an 1910. were inspired by the knowledge and the emergence of social- Henry counselled that the that Gladstone had been work- ism separate from the Liberal Liberals should take the fight to ing to mount a Liberal challenge Party? In reality, his attitude was Labour, using real constituency against Labour in East Leeds, not mistakenly over-generous, as surgery work and evidence of the their best prospect. They prob- Dr Douglas and Jeremy Thorpe progressive policies implemented ably would have been more allege in Douglas’s 1971 book. In by the government. Gladstone was intransigent if they had known 1892, during a by-election cam- persuaded to part with a £1,000 that Gladstone’s two closest paign in the Barkston Ash con- debenture to establish a popular, advisers, Henry and Kitson, had stituency, Gladstone made it clear radical Liberal newspaper, the both been pressing him to push that, in his view, the Liberals, for Leeds Daily News, to counteract the East Leeds Liberals into the foreseeable future, remained the Harmsworth-owned Mercury, fighting both the other parties. the primary legitimate vehicle for which had drifted to the Liberal Despite the inevitable oppo- working-class progress.20 imperialist right and, later, to sition of many local Labour and

28 Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 organiser par excellence

Liberal Associations, Gladstone annexation of the Transvaal. This ­presented their ultimatum. Skil- pushed through his strategy: and elicited fierce, but unavailing, fully, he detached Asquith from it worked, far better than histori- protest to Campbell-Bannerman, the others. It was Gladstone’s ans have acknowledged, especially against this very un-Gladstonian sheer strength of character which considering that it helped the approach, by the ageing ex-Peel- gave the Liberals national coher- Liberals bounce back from the ite Lord Ripon, who professed ence by 1906, although some of general election defeats of 1895 himself to be horrified.23 his own radical ideals were sacri- and 1900. Of course, the Liber- But while this was indeed ficed as a result.24 als were also helped by Joseph contrary to his own radical con- But Gladstone’s ideas could Chamberlain’s protectionist cru- science – he had told Camp- be fostered in other ways, and sade, which not only alienated bell-Bannerman privately that the second prong of his strategy free-trade Unionists like Church- the Tories’ excuse for the war, was to promote young graduates, ill, but destroyed the unity of the that they were protecting British often the new semi-collectivist Tory and Liberal Unionist par- subjects in the two invaded Boer Liberals, into candidacies, so as to ties, except in the West Midlands, republics, was completely bogus develop in the party his own ide- where the Chamberlain family – he refused to allow the party to als. Even after the First World War, continued to keep a tight rein on debate the Boer War, just cause or when his views had mellowed, their otherwise declining party. not. Instead, he occupied himself it was the loss of many of these Gladstone’s approach to party with trying to restrain the separa- men to Labour that most pained management was more cautious tist activities of Liberals associated him. A by-no-means untypical and tactful than that of Cham- with the former Prime Minister case of Gladstone’s sponsorship berlain, and he sought out the Lord Rosebery, such as Asquith, is that of Charles Masterman. fulcrum on which the various Haldane and Grey. He did this in a A former Cambridge don with elements of the Lib-Lab elector- way which seemed, to Campbell- limited means from journalism ate was balanced. On Irish home Bannerman, to endorse the trio’s and a sometimes intellectually rule and anti-socialist Liberal- extreme imperialism. His attend- over-acerbic temperament, Mas- ism he veered, as we have seen, ance at a dinner for Rosebery in terman was backed by Gladstone to the expedient left. But with Leeds in 1902 brought howls of at crucial times of his sometimes the Boer War, he had a more dif- wrath from Campbell-Banner- hazardous New Liberal career, in ficult problem, and once again man, to which Gladstone replied particular with financial support his DNB biography is simplistic that he had thereby kept an eye on The second when he stood for Dulwich in in the extreme in arguing that Rosebery’s wilder impulses. If he 1904 and when he faced a chal- Gladstone preserved the party had not gone, Rosebery and the prong of lenge from anti-socialist Liberal balance by supreme tact, and that, Liberal imperialists, rather than shopkeepers before being elected although his sympathies were the Leeds Liberals, would have his strat- for West Ham North in 1906.25 with Campbell-Bannerman, taken over the event; and anyway, Lamentably, though, for the Gladstone ‘preserved a complete the Boer War was far too popular egy was to long-term legacy of the Liberal neutrality within the party’. In with the workers, let alone north promote Party, Gladstone can, and must, fact, he avoided dispute by steer- Leeds middle-class imperialist be held culpable for not deal- ing the party more towards its MPs like Barran, for such events young ing effectively with the women’s jingoistic elite right than towards to be ignored. enfranchisement question. Glad- the left. Although he joined the But while Campbell-Banner- graduates, stone, like the twice-married anti-war Liberal League Against man’s latest biographer argues that Asquith, did not take women’s Aggression, this body was never all this proves disloyal weakness often the politics seriously. His wife, and as opposed to all forms of Brit- on Gladstone’s part, in fact it was new semi- other Gladstone women, pre- ish dominion in South Africa as, to save Campbell-Bannerman’s ferred to be politically active in say, either the ILP or the Liberal bacon when he later became collectivist the socially elitist, fund-raising Forwards group. He made two Prime Minister. Not only did Women’s National Liberal Asso- particularly controversial state- Gladstone’s give-and-take tactic Liberals, ciation rather than the more radi- ments during the 1900 general help Campbell-Bannerman retain cal, pro-suffrage Women’s Liberal election campaign. Firstly, dur- control of the Liberal machine in into can- Federation. The correspondence ing the course of the election, he the country, he was also able to didacies, between Joseph Henry and Glad- admitted that his party could not foil the Relugas plot, in which stone shows the fear strong politi- satisfactorily offer, in the national Asquith, Grey and Haldane tried so as to cal women induced in both men, interest, an alternative govern- to push Campbell-Bannerman when the suffragettes started sys- ment. He appealed to the elec- into the Lords on the eve of his develop in tematically to disrupt Gladstone’s torate to vote on domestic issues entering 10 Downing Street. public meetings. that were not, he claimed, ones Through his long friendship with the party As Home Secretary, Gladstone fevered with war emotion. Sec- Asquith, Gladstone was able to his own was responsible for the policy of ondly, Gladstone proclaimed that act as the negotiating interme- force-feeding gaoled women suf- the party would accept temporary diary when the right-wingers ideals. fragettes and publicly defended

Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 29 organiser par excellence it as humane and harmless. To but decisively defeated their rival His most are due to Dr E. D. Steele of Leeds protests from many Labour and Lloyd Georgeite National Lib- University, Neville Masterman of Liberal MPs, Gladstone repeat- erals in terms of the numbers of major con- Swansea University College, Brenda edly denied any ill-treatment of MPs returned. In the 1923 elec- Masterman, Lord Healey and Robert these brave women. By 1909 only tion, the precariously reunited tribution Ingham. local Women’s Liberal Association Liberals secured over 100 MPs, a members were being admitted feat never to be repeated by any was encap- 1 Leeds Mercury, 8 April 1880. into his supposedly open constit- third party during the rest of the 2 Douglas, R., History of the Liberal sulated in Party (London, 1971) especially the uency meetings. century. But Gladstone’s inten- introduction. Gladstone’s skills as a It seems Gladstone did begin tion of fielding a full slate of can- a remark propagandist are, later, justly praised, to realise the damage this issue didates in most constituencies in p. 15. was causing to his party, which the subsequently disastrous 1924 … that 3 The Times, 22 September 1900 led him publicly to suggest to contest was wretchedly, in his (Chaplin); Leeds Mercury, 11 April for the 1882 (Biggar); and Rowland, P., Lloyd his own senior government col- embittered view, frustrated by George (London, 1975), p. 581. leagues that commitment should Lloyd George’s refusal to fund the Liberals 4 Cooper, W., ‘Gladstone, Herbert be offered in support of women’s idea. Since Gladstone had persist- John’, in Weaver, J. (ed.), Dictionary of suffrage. In the face of opposition ently criticised the Lloyd George to remain National Biography 1922–30 (Oxford, from Lewis Harcourt and others, Fund as immoral it is perhaps 1953 – originally 1935) (hereafter DNB), p. 338; the Gladstone and 26 a major however, he meekly retreated. not surprising that Lloyd George Mallet books were both published in It is surely no exaggeration to declined to hand it over to Glad- party, their London; for the Gladstone quote, see say that the treatment meted to stone to spend on a swathe of British Library, H. Gladstone MSS women by Gladstone and many hopeless candidates.27 leaders (hereafter HG MSS), 41,216, letter to of his colleagues played into the With the well now dry for Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, 20 January 1900. hands of the Labour Party once Liberalism, Gladstone returned needed 5 Leeds Mercury, editorial, 7 April 1880; women were given the vote after to his favourite hobby, gardening, HG MSS 46, 036, letter from J. Henry 1918. in his wife’s properties in south- to keep in to H. Gladstone, 14 April 1899; Mas- On returning from the gover- ern England and at Hawarden. terman, N., The Forerunner: Tom Ellis nor-generalship of South Africa, His few remaining political touch with (London, 1976 – originally published 1972), p. 238. Gladstone was persuaded out of interventions concerned the ordinary 6 Ratcliffe, G., Sixty Years of It: Being retirement to help organise and support he and his wife gave to the Story of My Life and Public Career raise funds for the Asquithian the League of Nations. He died people (London, 1935, privately printed), p. Liberal Party. He became their on 6 March 1930 at home in 94 on the 1895 election; Ramm, A. chief national organiser, mak- Hertfordshire. beyond the (ed.), The Political Correspondence of Mr Gladstone and Lord Granville 1876–86, ing public speeches and writ- Herbert Gladstone’s place Westmin- Vol. 1 (London, 1962), p. 368, letter ing ‘first principles’ statements in Liberal politics deserves to from Granville to W. Gladstone, 9 of policy for regional papers be more thoroughly examined, ster hot- May 1882, on nepotism. and the Liberal Magazine, against especially given that his papers 7 Gladstone, H., ‘The Liberal Party Lloyd George perfidy in Ireland, are all to be found, catalogued, and Labour Questions’, The Albe- house. marle Magazine, February 1892; later against pacts with the Tories, and, in the British Library. His most that year he gave an interview to the of course, against any violation major contribution was encapsu- Paris newspaper Le Gaulois on his of free trade. lated in a remark in the American ideal Liberal programme in which He helped more lively spirits Political Science Review in 1927, both the payment of MPs and the like Masterman write on a twice- that for the Liberals to remain a limitation of workers’ hours were the main questions to be addressed, weekly basis for the Cadbury and major party, their leaders needed after Ireland. Starmer press against the Lloyd to keep in touch with ordinary 8 Anon, ‘The South African Strike’, George coalition; and he helped people beyond the Westminster New Statesman, 13 June 1914, p. 11. recapture all but the Welsh party hothouse. His modern detrac- The election addresses and speeches machine from the Lloyd Geor- tors should perhaps be asking of Masterman’s opponents at by-elec- tions in 1911 and 1914 include refer- geites, thus encouraging Lloyd themselves whether the Liberals ences to how the Liberal government George and Churchill to consider would have been able to imple- had allowed Gladstone to mistreat the forming their own ‘National Lib- ment a progressive agenda from rights of emigrant white subjects of eral’ organisation. Gladstone, in 1906 if he had never been Chief the Empire in labour disputes. return, was attacked by them for Whip. 9 Lloyd, T., ‘The Whip as Paymaster: Herbert Gladstone and Party Organ- being like an ‘extinct volcano’ in isation’, English Historical Review, Vol. not having any new policy ideas. Lawrence Iles is the Labour Party 89, No. 253, October 1974, pp. 785– However, his last political role Heritage Group’s representative for 811. For further information on Lib- was as the Asquithians’ conscience, US and Canada, and senior per- eral finances at this time see Searle, for which he has not, hitherto, manent staff writer for The Moni- G., ‘The Edwardian Liberal Party and Business’, English Historical Review, been awarded proper credit. In tor, the bi-weekly newspaper of the January 1983. the 1922 general election, the Truman State University, Kirksville, 10 Gladstone, H., ‘The Chief Whip in Asquithian Liberals narrowly Missouri, USA. Acknowledgements the British Parliament’, American

30 Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 organiser par excellence

Political Science Review, August 1927, ­Memoirs (London, 1945), p. 195; Ful- 27 Much of this section is drawn from pp. 519–28. ford, R., Votes for Women (London, the Liberal Magazine and Lloyd George 11 Fitzmaurice, Lord, The Life of George 1958); Wingfield-Stratford, E., The Liberal Magazine for the era; also Leveson Gower, Second Earl Granville Victorian Aftermath 1901–14 (London, useful is Cowling, M., The Impact of (1815–91), Vol. 2 (London, 1905) for 1933), p. 323; Raeburn, A., The Mili- Labour 1920–24 (Cambridge, 1971), Granville to Lord Derby, 27 Decem- tant Suffragettes (London, 1973); and, which is predictably sympathetic to ber 1885; and HG MSS, 46,041, T. for Harcourt’s attitude, see The Times, the more right-wing post-World War Wemyss Reid to H. Gladstone, 9 15 February 1909. One Gladstone. December 1885. 12 The Times, 11 October 1900. 13 Steele, E. D., ‘The Irish presence in the north of England 1850–1914’, Northern History (1976), pp. 229–32; HG MSS, 46, 041, J. Kitson to H. Gladstone, 21 February 1885. 14 The Times, 4 May 1886; Wemyss-Reid, T., Memoirs and Correspondence of Lyon letters Playfair (London, 1899) p. 342; Hind, R., Henry Labouchere and the Empire Election 2005 (Incidentally, in historical terms, 1880–1905 (London, 1972), p. 127. I would like to follow-up Neil have the Liberals ever been a 15 DNB, p. 337. Stockley’s thoughtful report high tax party?) These people 16 Russell, A., Liberal Landslide: The gen- of the History Group meeting hated our higher earners’ tax eral election of 1906 (London, 1973), p. ,‘Election 2005 in historical per- proposal not because they were 39. 17 HG MSS, 46,039, J. Mathers to H. spective’ (Journal of Liberal History currently earning £100,000 Gladstone, 26 September 1889 and 13 50). themselves, but because they September 1891. First, I should make my own intended one day that they 18 The Times 20 March 1880 and 11 stance, as the 2005 candidate would, i.e. they felt we were October 1900. for the Windsor constituency, challenging their aspiration to do 19 Bealey, F., ‘A Note: Negotiations between the Liberal Party and the clear. I believe the last general better in life. Labour Representation Committee election was a missed opportu- The second reason we fared before the General Election of 1906’, nity for our party. We had two badly against the Tories was very University of London Institute of Histori- unpopular main parties and this clear on the doorsteps. When cal Research Bulletin (1958); The Times, was a situation where we, as asked, ‘Who will you be voting 30 March 1900 (Nottingham NLF); Poirier, P., The Advent of the British the third political force, should for?’ the answer, invariably, was, Labour Party (New York, 1958), p .260, have come strongly through the ‘Not Tony Blair.’ These voters letter from Gladstone to Crooks, 21 middle. Neil’s summary of the then implemented their strong March 1905. Blackpool fringe meeting gives dislike of the Prime Minister on 20 The Times, 11 July 1892. the game away when he reports the day by following the precept 21 HG MSS, 41,215, H. Gladstone to H. Campbell-Bannerman, 16 January all the speakers as saying, ‘we had of the old Arab proverb – ‘My 1906. made more than steady progress.’ enemy’s enemy is my friend’. 22 Ibid., 46, 036, J. Henry to H. Glad- ‘Steady progress’ in the context By this light they wanted above stone 25 May 1905, 9 April 1907, and of this election, and for a party all to vote for the party that 13 October 1908. purportedly on the up, is not was most opposed to the leader 23 DNB, p. 337; nearly all Gladstone’s speeches and published statements good enough. of New Labour. Since the Lib during the 1900 election moved the As he analyses what happened, Dems were seen as ‘neither left Liberals’ position on the war closer to Neil muses on the intractable nor right’ (or as Neil says, equally that of the government – e.g. see The problem of why the Liberal damningly, ‘either left or right’) Times, 13 October 1900; HG MSS, 43, Democrats made serious inroads many reluctantly felt they had 543, Ripon to Campbell-Bannerman, 16 September 1900 and Wolf, L., The in Labour-held constituencies to vote Tory. However, and this Life of the First Marquis of Ripon, Vol. 2 (up 7.7%) but hardly any impact, is the point, they weren’t really (London, 1921), p. 28. in general, in areas which had Tory – and probably still aren’t! 24 For more on the Relugas plot see a sitting Tory MP (up a mere So the message about 2005 McCready, H., ‘Home Rule and the 0.6%). He seeks answers to an from Tory constituencies in Liberal Party 1899–1906’, Irish His- torical Studies, XIII, September 1963, electoral conundrum and this the South-East (like Windsor, pp. 316–48. letter attempts to help that search which has never had anything 25 See Iles, L., ‘Victories for the Left: The by proposing two possible rea- other than a Conservative MP) British General Election Debates of sons for the disparity. is simple. Our tax policies were 1906 and 1945’, University of Illinois As we went into the general wrong and we were perceived Urbana Microfilms Series, MA History dissertation, August 1982, from p. 100 election many middle-class vot- as too bland in terms of oppos- and Iles, L., A Handlist of the Papers of ers in the ‘blue’ parts of England ing the Prime Minister. By such the Rt Hon. Charles and Lucy Master- (such as Windsor) seemed suspi- mischance are great opportuni- man 1873–1977 (Edgbaston, 1987). cious of our Council Tax policy, ties lost. 26 See Pearson, H., Labby: the Life and whilst others absolutely hated Antony Wood Character of Henry Labouchere (Lon- don, 1945), p. 225; Samuel, H., our approach on income tax.

Journal of Liberal History 51 Summer 2006 31