RULERS OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE

The following atudy8i8 of th~ me-n wllO rule the Bri,tish Empi'r~ ull~overs the bad'ground and interrelationship of ~ ez-pone·nt8 ai' the Chamberlai11s, Baldwin, Eden, and Churchill and provides valuable information Ot~ the mmmer in which British leadership i~ formed and maintained. The material for this article wall laken from Brittlll' §ourcell and edited by K. H. AbBhagen, a 8pUiali.8t 1m British affairs.-K.M.

N December 10,1900, the Hon. Mem­ family held shares to a total value of £121,000 ber for Carnarvon Borough, a young in this company, which had received a large O hot-blooded lawyer with a shock of number of orders to equip the docks of black hair, rose to his feet in order to dis­ Her Majesty's Navy. close to the House some facta which were to shake the British social structure to its PROFITABLE PRISON CAMPS foundations. This young M.P. from Wales, whose name was , was Excitement in the House rose to a high at that time almost unknown in the political pitch after these disclosures, for Joseph world. What he had to say was the follow. Chamberlain and his whole family were in ing. those days the central figures in Britain's political life. His biographer writes that As fa.r as he had been able to ascertain, the Secretary of State for the Colonies lis­ the Right Hon. gentleman, Mr. Joseph tened to this attack with a stoical mien. But Chamberlain, Secretary of State for the Lloyd George was not to be disconcerted. Colonies, as well as the Hon. Member for He proceeded to speak of a third company East Worcestershire, his son Mr. Austen in which the Chamberlain family was in­ Chamberlain, Financial Secretary to the terested and which was receiving Govern. . Treasury, were shareholders in three com· ment orders, curiollS orders, indeed, as it panies which in the course of the Boer War transpired later. He was referring to the had amassed huge profits from Government Colombo Commercial Company, a speculative contracts for armaments by cutting out all concern dealing in miscellaneous merchandise ot.her competitors. The first of these com­ in Ceylon. In the BoerWar, Lord Roberts had panies was known 'as Hoskins & Sons, Ltd. taken many thousands of prisoners in 1899 Lloyd George was in a position to inform and 1900. They had at first been deported the House that this firm, which handled to St. Helena and subsequently to Ceylon Admirn.lty contracts exclusively, was owned on instructions from the Secretary of State alm08t entirely by the Chamberlain family. for the Colonies, the most pressing problem The second firm was the Birmingham Trust, being to accommodate these prisoners in which the family of the Secretary of in Ceylon by building barracks for them. State for the Colonies had invested £67,000. In August 1900, the Ceylon Ob8c'rver stated The Birllliugham Trust was a holding com· that HI iron barracks for soldiers and 30 pany incorporating two other armament for Boer prisoners had already been Pllt lip fnctories, namely, Tubes Limited and Elliot's by the Colombo Commercial Company, and 'Metal Company. Tubes LU1. was owned that more would follow. by ]\{r, Arthur Chamberlain, brother of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, who It was an awkward fact, Lloyd George held 74,800 shares in this concern. Mr. said in his speech, but a fact which could , second son of the not be concealed, that the Chamberlain Secreta.ry of St.ate for the Colonies, was the family were among the leading shareholders managing director of Elliot's l\letal Company. of this company. "r eaJlJlot conceive a Theso two armament factories had, as Lloyd more unfortunate investment at the present George showed, made substantial profits in moment than an investment in making past years by very favorable contract,s with prisons for the Boers. .. ." the Admiralty. As far as Elliot's Metal Lloyd George concluded by saying that Company was concerned, Lloyd George was the Chamberlain family was, moreover, in· able to point out that t,he Chamberlain terested to the extent of £250,000 in the RULERS OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE 7.

Kynoch Company Ltd. This oompany was The eecond , formed in May what was popularly caned a. munitions 1915, had already included ConservativC8 factory; unfortunately it could not be denied as members of the Coalition Government. that this munitions factory, which was Except for the first MacDonald Cabinet larRely controlled by the Chamberlain family, (January to November 1924) and the second bail made very substantial profits during Labor Cabinet (July 1929 to August 1931) the Boer War, chiefly because it was in the Conservatives, led by Bonar Law, Stanley the favorable position of being able to Baldwin, and finally Neville Chamberlain, realize considerably higher prices for its have thus been in power without a break. products than those concerns unconnected 10 the present Parliament they hold 415 of with governmental circles. some 600 seats As the Opposition ill in a hopeless minority, these 415 men and women A MOTION REJEOTED are the virtual representatives of the Britisb people. Who are they? The main purpose of the sweeping attack on the Cha.mbcrlain family by Lloyd George DmEOTORS IN PARLL\l'tIENT W88 to persuade the House to accept It. Bill • . prohibiting Cabinet Ministers from holding The answer to this question was given ill shares in complLnies which dealt in Govern•. a book by Simon Haxey entitled Tory M.P., ment contracts. The motion was rejected which appeared in in August 1939. by 269 to 127 votes. Its author, or authors-for it is assumed in In defending thelD8Olv08 against the weD· competent quarters that two well.lfflown substantiated accusations brought forward members of the House of Commonsbave by Lloyd George, the two members of the hidden their identity behind the non" do plume of Simon Haxey-havo based:J;heir Chamberlain family were only able to reo statidti~ taliate by weak and unconvincing state· analysis on oarefully collected menU!. And yet an .overwhelming majority material. No serious attempt has ever-boon in the House had immediately rallied round made to dispute the accuracy of the ftwts the cause of the Chamberlain family. The contained in this book. attaok by the Welsh outsider, it was felt, bad According to Haxey, 44 per cent of *hcse been dirc<:ted against tho whole caste, and 415 Conservative Members of Parliament­ had therefore to be countered by the demo· Le., 181-are managing directors or diro~tors cratic men.'Jure of a majority vote. No sueh of large British stock or trading compiinies. direct attack has ever been made again in Together, these 181 members hold no less the House, not even by the Labor Party. than 775 posts as managing direc~s or Today, Lloyd George himself may look back directors in 700 of the leading bank~, in· Upo/l this illcident as one of his youthful dustrial enterprises, shipping companies, and • escapades. But actually it was this debate overseas trading concerns. In other words, in Parliament in 1900 which first exposed the British Parliament, which is ruled by the roots of that system from which Britain's the C-ousorvativ08, proves, on closer examina· ruling classcs derived their power and sus· tion, to be the representative not of the tenance. Politically speaking, Britain is British nation but of thc most powerful Parliament, and Parliament, in its tum, capitalist interest.~ ever concentrated in one elects tbe Cabinet. But what is Parliament? country-except Wall Street. If we include in our calculation all those Mpnl bers of TOltY DOMINION Parliament who are not directors themselves Except for two short periods, the Con· but whoac brothers, sons, or sons-in-law Ilervat,ives have been in power in the House occupy important business posts, we may of Commons since the resignation of Lloyd well estimate that almost 80 per cent of all George's War Cabinet. Tho acccssion to the Conservative Members of Parliament are power of the Labor Party in 1924 and 1929 directly or indirectly linked with Big Busi­ ness. Politicalleadenlhip and financial aris­ meant nothing but 11 brief interregnum. This was termina.ted by Ramsay MacDonald tocracy are thus identical ill Brita·in. having fallen prey to the wiles of the ruling lt must be noted that it was impossible caste; for a few years he remained in Downing to inelude cases in which M.P.'s /l,re share­ Street u.s a puppet of the National Coalition holders in "private oompanies," i.e. enter· Government, whereas in reality the Consen'&­ prises which are not registered as publio tives governed the land and reoccupied thpir companies, although in some cases they may lucrative posts. enjoy an international reputat,ion; in all 80 THE XXth CENTURY probability these cases amount to several While he was Prime Minister, an exchange of hundreds. shares took place which closely linked up Unfortunately, no statistics are available Baldwin's Limited with the Vickers Arm­ ~trong conce~, to assess the total capital of the companies .the leading armament factory whose managers and directors are at present 1D Great Bfltam. As Earl Baldwin and a Members of Parliament. Such a calculation Member of the House of Lords, he was again e:\ists, however, for the period from 1924 able to act -as a. director of his company. to 1929, when there was a large Conservative The net profit of Baldwin's Limited amounted majority. During that time, 1,160 com­ in 1932 to £530,000, and it increased t() panies (including subsidiary companies) were £1,500,000 in 1938. In 1933 Baldwin, then represented in t,he House of Commons, the Lord President of the Council, received & capital of li82 of whioh could be ascertained. dividend of only 4 per cent, in 1934 he reo ceiv~ It amounted to the colossal sum of 6 per cent, in 1935, when Prime £2,951,000,000. In considering these figures Minister, he received 8 per cent and a bonus the fact must also be taken into account of 50 per cent, in 1936 and 1937 his dividends that the capital of the remaining 478 com­ . ~ounted to 10 per cent, and a correspond. panies in which directorships were held by mg bonus. Apparently the armament busi­ Members of the House could not be as­ ness, which came into full swing under the ~ertained. Moreover, these figures do not Baldwin Government, was quite lucrative. mclude such compa.nies in which M.P.'s have Now let us turn to Neville Chamberlain. shareholdings but are not represented on Wc have already made his acquaintance as the board of directors. a managing director of Elliot's Metal Com­ pany at the time when his father was Sec· ~fUNITIONS AND PREMIERS . retary of State for the Colonies and his half­ - All the tbree Conservative Prime Ministers brother Financial Secretary to the Treasury. f postwar days, Bonar Law, Stanley Bald­ ~eville ~amberlain then became a managing win, and Neville Chamberlain, belonged to director 10 the second -largest British arma­ 11FJliiieS intimately connected with the arma­ ment factory, the Birmingham Small Arms m.cnt- industry; in fact, all three of them Company. He only resigned this post when htt.d,:hefore they entered the political arena, he accepted state office. Up to his death ~n:..managing directors of great armament in 1941 he was a large shareholder in the concerns; and even during their terms of Birmingham Small Arms Company. In office-- they had considerable parcels of 1939, Cbamberlain held 23,250 shares in shan~ in the same companies safely tucked ~lliot's Metal Company. In the meantime, away-::m their banks. After the failure of Just as Baldwin's Limited bad become Lloyd George's attack in 1900, no objection clo~el.r affiliated with Vickers Armstrong, could, of course, be raised on this score. EllIOt s Metal Company became associated All that is required of a British Cabinet with Imperial Chemical Industries, the. Minister is that he resign from t.he post of enormous British chemical trust. Chamber­ managing director or from the board of lain had, evidently in exchange' for Elliot directors of a company. Whether he con­ shares, receivcd 5,414 ordinary shares and tinues to cont,rol these companies in bis 833 preference sbares of this trust. In capacity as a shareholder is nobody's 1939, Neville Chamberlain's holdings of concern. I.C.l. shares were estimated at 11,000. In the meantime, his son, l"rancis Chamberlain Up to the tilDe of his appointment as a had j.oined t~e Kynocb Works, also closely Parliamentary Undersecretary of State, assocIated WIth the I.e.I., the same muni­ Bonar Law-whose Cabinet succeeded the tions factory which figured in 1900 in the postwar Government of Lloyd George (1922/ scanda1. So for some 23)-owned the wholesale metal and arms fifty years on end the Chamberlain family business of William Jacob & Co. in Glasgow. hn.s held shares in the same armament.s and was a big shareholder in munitions factories. the great steelworks known a.s Baldwin's Limited and resigned his directorship in CORRUPTION? that company when he became a Cabinet On July 12, 1926, no less a person than Minister. But during his term of office as , Foreign Minister of the Prime Minister he still held 194 526 one­ two Labor Cabinets and later President of pound ordinary shares and 37,591 ~ne-pound the Disarmament Conference, openly accused preference shares in this armament concern. Neville Chamberlain, then Minister of Health, RliLERS OF THE BRITI. H EMPIRE 81 of corruption. He declared t.hat, after a few years before the present war, from entering the Cabinet. Ke\·ille Chamberlain the job of Governor of Bengal Ilnd was had DOt rE-signed his directorships in Hoskins eleeted into the House of Commons, he Sons and Elliot's Metal Company, although was at abollt the same time made a tit firms were constantly recci\'ing Govern. directgan to improve, In accordance with Parliament.ary practice a.nd it was perhaps more than a mere coill· th motion of the Opposition for an inquiry cidcnce that it wa Lord Hail 'ham who was talked llml 0111 \·ot.cd. 1\c\'ille Cham· wrecked the disarmament prop0!'luls made berlain'tl faco was slIved, nnd the way by Adolf Hitler. paved for him to hecomc Chancellor of the :Ko less than 51 ConscITuti\'e Jlcmbcrs of Exchequer llnd Prime :\Iinister. Parliament ar lurectltry, some of whom claim our inte>re. t. in otlle>r ,inl' the Yiclorian l'fll-lliolide from the rcspects as well. ('hief of these is the personal farlnr, this gene>ntl fCLct is of pM· Chai.rman of the FeJeration' of British In­ ticulllr importance-t he> small t1nanciul olio dustries, Sir Patrick Hannon, whose board garchy on which the> fale> of Britain depends of directors is compo. eulltin at of Conservative M.P.'. Sir Patrick is now the head of Il. Cnbinl't for an.v lpngth of time deputy chairman of the board of dir ctors if his pnst history sho\l'e>J him to havo been of the same Birmingham. Smull Arms ('om· uepti ILl abollt a fllfolion of business with pRJly of which Nc\oille Chamberlain was politics. The only exception was Lloyd fomlerly a managing director. Thus the George during t.he Creal, '\'nr, who was Chairman of the :Fedl>ration of British In­ allowNI to !lhly b('rnllsP it \I'lL'; hoped that dustries and the formcr Prime Minister were he would help to calm the mllsse;; which colleagues in the privato armllments had to beaJ' the burrlons of the war. The rule, howcnr, is that no Primo ?tliJlist r, in industry. flU fact Co binet. Minist.cr or UnderSN:retary EXCELLENT CO:-lNEC'f10:-S of Stntc, IIIlist. regard it IlS ull\lI:lual if politics and busine....'l arc inextricably enta.ngled. Not tha.t there is anything pllrtielilarly ... man who attains thl' position of a Cabinet nOl"el about 8uch conncctions. As earlv 88 lfini... t.er, afwr ha,-ing been llIanAging direc· 1919 lIJlother greRt armaments file i

-- -_.. - ~------~~--~~~- RULERS OF THE BRITISH ElrrPIRE 83

WEALTH IN POLITICS day appell.I' under another name together with a title bestowed upon him by the Simon Haxey has calculated that the King. 33 M.P.'s who died between 1931 and 1938 Ca.ses such lUI those'of Churchill, Uoyd left £7,100,000 between them, so that the George, Baldwin, and Chamberlain. in which average fortUJ1C of enoch of these men was a change of Dame ha.';l not take place in the £218,156. Of these 33 deceased M.P.'s : coutse of thQ political carper, are tho ex· 2 left over 1 million poUllds ception. This is explained by the fact t.hat 12 between £ 100,000 and 1 million poUllds the majority of tho political leaders of 7 between £40,000 and £100,000 are descendants of titled families, 7 between £20,000 and £40,000 the practice being that, after the death of 5 between £10,000 and £20,000 the bearer, the title is assumed by his eldest Thus 42 per cent of these members left son. As a recent eXlunple we may cite the fortUlle8 of over £100,000 while only 0.1 case of Sir Eric Drum.mond, for Dlany years per cent of the whole British population can Secretary-General of the League of Nations lay claim to sllch a fortune. Nearly 90 per and later British Ambassador in Rome • cent of those who have 1m income earn who, at the age of 113, suddenly continued lees than £250 Il year. life as Lord Perth. Anotlwr case WU[ol that of William Ormsby-Uore (then CoQlOJlilll The population of the British Empire is Secretary), who after the death of his father eetimated rougilly at 500 millions. About in May 1938 succeeded to the title of Lord 60 millions of these live in the British Isles Harlech. This systc:m applied, of courRe, and in those of the Dominions where white also to Jews who found entrance into the men predominate; the remaining 440 are British high aristocracy. Behind the nllme governed indirectly_ by the Britiah Parlia­ of Lord Swaythling, for instance, stands a ment, that is to say, by the Cabinet approved descendant of the Jewish bankerl:l, the Mon­ by it. Simon Haxey arrives at the ironical tagus, while the .Jewish family of oil magnates conclusion that the only way in which the that founded tho Shcll Company. the Salo­ British Colonial Empire-which has no mons, now boasts the title of a Lord political rights-is represented in Parliament Bonrsted in its first male line. is by those member::! who have interests in the exploitation companie.~ in the Empire. RELATIONS os ALL SIDES It,is to be assumed that at least 150 mem­ MAZE OF NAMES bers of the Lower House are directly or indirectly related to one another, connected It is exceedingly difficult for the average by marriage or through a third person. In Englisbmlln, and. cven more 1$0 for the foreign obt;erver, to penetrate the secrets of other countries, too, statesmen have rel· atives; but (I,lxoept for stray individual tho financial lUI well as the perHonal inter­ cases) this has no influenee upon the per­ relationsllip of the English ruling class, for sonal policy of the sta·te. In Enl!lund, tho ruling class of England has dcveloped a however, the political olltsider, who lIsually system of cllllloullage that necessitates special first made n nalUo for himself by penetrating research if one wants to ascert.a.ill the identity the sphere of high finance, does not become of one and the SlUl1e persoll throughout the a fully recognized political tigure until be duratiou of hi::! political life. or ono of his brothers. sons, dllllght.cr8, or For years, for instance, we have been sisterM hll.'1 succeeded in forming tit·.~ of reading of the eX ploits of the former Foreign kinship with the innermost cor(~ of the Secrotar)' and present British Ambassador English upper duss. ~imon Ha.xey's ligt to Washington, Lord Halifa.x. Even in show8 that, among the prescnt leading . England there are probably many people political personalities in Brit.ain, the follow­ who are unaware 'Of the. fact that.this same ing ure indirectly related to oue a.Doth r: Viscount Halifax, under the name of Lord Winston Churchill, tho l\1.arquess of Zctllll.ld Irwin, was Viceroy of India from 1926 to (Amery's predecessor as Sccretary of State 1931 and that. before his appointment to for Indill), Sir Samuol Hoare (holder of that position, be was a Conservative Member IDAny ministerilll posts and at prcl'lent of Parliament under the lIame of Edward Ambassador to • pain). Oli\'er ~tanley (a Wood. His son, Charles Wood, ha.~ mean­ younger 80n of Lord Derby and a lllem bel' while entered the Lower House uude.r this of tho Churchill Cabin t); Lord Halifax. family uame; but doubtless he, too, will one Alfred Dull Cooper, Wl~lter EUiott (who al.;o 8-1 THE XXtb CENTURY

held many important posts, including that that during the lifetime of the Dominions of ~'[ini~ter of Agriculture and Chairman of Secretary, Lord Edward Stanley, the Derby the Board of Health), Lord C'aldecote (better clan was represented in t.he governing board knowll by his former name Sir Thomas of two of the five great English banks. Inskip, who was Minister for Co-ordination Finally, Arthur Stanley is also on the govern­ of Defense in the Chamberlain Cabinet), the ing board of the great Brit.ish Match Cor­ Earl of Winterton and, last not but least, poration. Leopold Amery. The funds Lord Derby layishes upon his The connection bet ween business and racehorses are estimated at a.bout £50,000 politics in English upper circles gains a new a year. This expellsi,~e hobby of rus is piquancy by this confut:'ing picture of family shared by Lord Londonderry, the father-iD­ tics. To fat,hom this "'yst.em more closely law of Lord Derby's son, Oliver Stanley. it is only necessa.ry to pick out a. few of the Lord Londonderry held high ministerial • most important familie,.: . office for many years and was at one time' the chairman of tho Tory party organization. 'rnE DERBYS :From 1935 to 1938 he acted as Leader of the House of Lords. One of his sons, • If, for instance, we take that, of the Viscount Castlereagh, is a member of the Derbys, which may be' looke'd upon as one House of Commons. of the richest, families in England, we dis­ cover the following >itrange circumstances. OLD AND :SEW LORDS Thc prcsent , the seventeenth bp

this with l\ 8lUile. 1'\either of the two DOW yOIl ha\" a {'ollliidale well quulifiod and edu{'aled for hi la"lI:. And what is mor • he ho~ representatives of Labor W8.