which towns supported Parliament and Liberals, who have been better Boer War were difficult ones for the which the Royalist cause, but there are placed to conform to and adapt to Liberals. From  the party was split a number of particular reasons to distinctive Cornish conditions. on the issue of Home Rule in Ireland explain these questions. Labour have had a history of import- and this in turn complicated the The first is that Cornwall is ing candidates into Cornwall from party’s relationship with the institu- intrinsically different, historically, outside without giving them the tion of Empire. culturally and economically, from time to establish any local credibility According to Professor Judd, there other counties. Secondly, there has and it has concentrated on national were a number of options for the party been a revival of interest in Cornish issues at the expense of Cornish ones. regarding its policy on the Empire. history and linguistic heritage, While national issues, of course, First, they could present themselves as contributing to a new sense of impinge in Cornish elections, the mildly anti-imperialist. The danger in Cornish consciousness, a feeling with local issues remain paramount. There this approach was that Home Rule in which the Liberals have traditionally was therefore a bedrock of Liberal Ireland could become seen as an been associated. There has been a support in Cornwall which was imperial issue and, therefore, as the first delay in the modernisation of the deeper and stronger than elsewhere step towards the disintegration of the Cornish socioeconomic structure. A which had been added to by the Empire. The party was conscious that it distinct style of politics has grown up campaigning, the image and the style had lost votes and seats on Home Rule in Cornwall which is anti-metro- of local Liberalism, particularly built and that the popular press was often politan and jealous to preserve the up in the s and s. pro-imperial. Hence the party offi- territorial integrity of the county. Relating this background to his cially disavowed this line. However, Class consciousness has not been own experience, Malcolm recalled the many Liberals opposed the worst overt either in rural or industrial beginnings of modern campaigning in aspects of imperialism. areas. Nonconformity has continued the s and s. There was a loyal, The second option was to be clearly to be important. There has been a bedrock Liberal support in the con- pro-Empire, but to what extent? A tradition of non-partisanship in local stituencies. On top of this was built group of Liberal MPs did emerge, government and politics. This has further support through a combination calling themselves Liberal Imperialists, resulted in the election of candidates of innovative campaigning tools, such who thought the party should respond in Cornwall who are local, are as community newsletters and sys- to the public interest in the Empire by prepared to act primarily as constitu- tematised electioneering techniques. becoming clearly in favour of it. ency representatives and are willing These factors combined with the very However, in Judd’s view this approach to take a genuine interest in Cornish local personality of Cornish Liberal would have had the danger of antago- affairs and problems. This has hin- candidates enabled the party to make nising the party’s traditional voters. dered Labour and helped the and, so far, sustain its breakthrough. Furthermore, the party faced a grow- ing challenge from the trade union and labour movements. Judd argued finally that there was a middle way for the party between these two positions: to be generally ‘Methods of Barbarism’ – supportive of the Empire but high- lighting concerns and disassociating Liberalism and the Boer War itself from military conquests. Unfor- tunately, Liberals could not agree upon Evening meeting, July 2000 a majority view, leading to difficulties for the party in responding to the Boer with Denis Judd and Jacqueline Beaumont War. A further problem was the Report by David Cloke establishment of another liberal party in the form of the Liberal Unionists. They had membership and organisa- n the evening of  July members Beaumont and the meeting was tion and from , provided members Oof the History Group met at the chaired by the Liberal Democrats’ of Salisbury’s cabinet. How was the National Liberal Club to discuss the Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Menzies Liberal Party to win a future election? response of the Liberal Party and the Campbell MP. It was fundamentally split with its great liberal press to the Boer War – a venue Professor Judd began the meeting rising star, Joseph Chamberlain, having which was no doubt witness to many with a survey of the various responses defected. Another party was calling similar discussions and debates during of the Liberal Party to the Boer War itself liberal and was, under Chamber- the course of the war itself. The and the political difficulties posed for lain’s leadership, making a determined discussions were ably led by Professor the party by the war. Professor Judd effort to represent liberalism and to Denis Judd and Dr Jacqueline noted that the years running up to the win over working class voters.

Journal of Liberal Democrat History 28 Autumn 2000 25 However, Professor Judd argued, the it was ‘calculated brinkmanship’ – a and the conditions in the concentra- last years of the century saw the conclusion backed up, he argued, by the tion camps that provoked a response by development of a ‘new imperialism’, fact that from July  the government Campbell-Bannerman. After having perhaps flowing from a sense of was moving large numbers of troops to been lobbied by Hobhouse, C-B made insecurity. The triumphalism of the South Africa. At this time Campbell- a speech attacking the war, accusing Diamond Jubilee of  overlaid Bannerman said on several occasions the government of deploying ‘methods concerns at the that the two Boer of barbarism’. Despite the changing prospects for the republics should political landscape, Judd believed that new century and ‘When is a war not a war? be annexed in those who were antagonised by the how Britain some form; speech probably outnumbered those would compete When it is carried on by though he never who welcomed it. with the US and methods of barbarism in made clear what In describing the eventual peace the Russian South Africa.’ that form should treaty with the Boers, Judd stated that Empire. In Judd’s be. he believed it to be generous to them. view, the Empire Henry Campbell- For Judd a key The rebels were let off, the displaced became associ- Bannerman, 14 June point in the were given loans to restart their farms ated with guaran- development of and there was a general amnesty. The teed power and 1901 Liberal policy only issue of major concern to Liberals success in the towards South at this time was the significant weaken- new century. Africa came on ing of the commitment to the ‘native There were other difficulties for  October . On that day the franchise’, which was delayed until the party. During – the Liberal House of Commons was required to responsible governments were restored government undoubtedly connived vote the necessary supplies to enable to the Orange Free State and the with Cecil Rhodes and had discussed the prosecution of the war. The party Transvaal. Judd argued that the main interventions similar to the Jameson could not be seen to obstruct a war aim in the postwar period was coop- Raid of December . It was that had already begun. It could just eration with the Afrikaners and that, as revealing, Professor Judd argued, that hope that it would be over quickly if Milner brutally put it, ‘you only have the Liberal members of the official the British had the necessary supplies. to sacrifice the nigger completely and inquiry into the Jameson Raid rather From the outbreak of war there the game is easy’. pulled their punches. Furthermore, was a substantial opposition from In Judd’s view it was entirely to the although the party was out of power trade unions and church groups. This Liberal Party’s credit that once in from – there were Liberals developed as the crisis progressed, and government it granted responsible in key positions with regard to the a South African Conciliation Com- government to the Orange River development of South African policy. mittee was set up. The Liberal leader- Colony and the Transvaal, with Chamberlain was Colonial Secretary, ship found the Committee difficult to elections being held by . There Selborne Under-Secretary of State contain and a source of embarrass- were a number of reasons behind this: and Milner Governor of the Cape ment. With the news of defeats and the long Liberal tradition of appropri- from . the establishment of concentration ate devolution; part of the process of The left also caused problems. In camps, leading statesmen such as consolidating the peace and guaran- the view of many leftist critics one of Lloyd George joined the ranks of teeing the future; and it was hoped the key reasons underlying the crisis those opposed to the war – enabling that it would create an Anglo- was unfettered capitalism. This view government propaganda to portray Afrikaner middle ground of ‘moder- was tinged with anti-Semitism, as the Liberals as pro-Boers. Not sur- ate white supremacists’. Unfortu- many South African capitalists were prisingly, in such a political climate, nately in the Transvaal, whilst there Jewish. British Jewry was solidly and thinking that the war was won, were a large number of English Liberal at this time and three mem- the Conservatives called a general speakers, enough perhaps to win the bers of the Liberal cabinets from election in April . Judd argued election, they split their vote three – were Jewish. This, in turn, that despite this reopening the ways and the moderate Afrikaners made it difficult for the party to know divisions within the Liberal Party, and won. Whilst they were willing to how to respond to these critics. despite the party suffering vitriolic cooperate, they were not willing to According to Judd all these dilemmas attacks from the Conservatives, the extend the franchise to non-whites. worsened as the South African crisis Liberals’ performance was much The issue of the ‘native franchise’ developed, particularly once war broke better than expected. The Conserva- was again discussed during the passage out. Before the war actually began, tives gained only four seats. of the Union of South Africa Bill. Campbell-Bannerman had been The election result may, therefore, There were passionate calls from arguing that the Chamberlain/Milner have given the Liberal leadership more Liberal and Labour members for the policy of aggressive diplomacy was courage. However, it was Emily extension of the franchise, but the issue bluff. However, in Professor Judd’s view, Hobhouse’s reports of farm burnings was left to the individual governments.

26 Journal of Liberal Democrat History 28 Autumn 2000 It was hoped that the franchise would of its editorial staff. He was a close approve of this position as it was be extended in Natal and the Cape and associate of Balfour, had known both affecting turnover. He told that this good practice would spread Lord Curzon and Lord Cranborne at Massingham not to express views on elsewhere. Unfortunately, the reverse Oxford and was an old friend of the war. Massingham consequently happened and repressive practices Milner. The paper had supported resigned and was replaced by J. H. spread south. In Judd’s view, in giving Chamberlain before the war and Fisher; Spender and Nash also left the the greater South Africa its new form defended the camps and the farm paper. Nevinson was unaware of what the rights of black South Africans were burning during it. Emily Hobhouse’s was happening, caught up as he was in sold down the river. The culmination report was ignored. the siege of Ladysmith. of this process was apartheid, which in The divisions in the Liberal Party According to Dr Beaumont the Judd’s view was a rationalisation of had a more serious effect on the Daily fortunes of the Daily News and the what had come before. News, ‘the recognised organ of the Daily Chronicle horrified many Liberals. Following Professor Judd’s illumi- Liberal Party’. However its editor in Educated Liberals came to regarded nating review of the Liberal Party’s , E. T. Cook, was on the imperial the press as emasculated and an attempt response to the South African war and wing of the party, was a close friend to was made to raise funds to establish a its aftermath, Dr Beaumont outlined both Milner and the editor of the Cape new newspaper. Not enough money the response of the liberal press. Times, Edmund Garrett, who reported was raised for this and the change of Liberals had been at the heart of the for the Daily News until the summer of side of the Chronicle meant that there development of cheap newspapers . Not surprisingly, this influenced was little need to continue to do so. In from the s onwards; it was hoped the editorials of the paper: they the meantime the Manchester Guardian that they would educate the electorate. followed Chamberlain’s lead prior to filled the gap, taking on Massingham as It is reckoned that by  there were the war and defended Milner vigor- its London editor along with Spender  newspapers in London alone,  ously during it. and Nash. in the provinces,  in Scotland,  Cook’s appointment had always In Beaumont’s view there were in Wales and  in Ireland. Dr been unwelcome by Radicals and already other alternative papers: the Beaumont decided, probably rather early in  Lloyd George organised Morning Leader and the Star. The wisely, to focus her talk on the Liberal for the paper to be bought by a Morning Leader had been founded in newspapers from amongst the Lon- syndicate with the understanding that  and has been regarded of little don-based national press. it would take a neutral line on the political importance. It did not appeal When the war broke out there were war. This forced Cook’s resignation. to the elite of the party and had no thirteen national morning papers and However, the paper did not stick to its contacts with politicians. Its constitu- five national evening papers. Of the neutral position. With the reports of encies were tradesmen, women and former four were Liberal: the Daily farm burnings at the end of May  nonconformist ministers. Its aim was Chronicle, the Daily News, the Morning the paper took up the issue and gave to educate and it was written and Leader and the Daily Telegraph. Of the more coverage to it than the other presented in a more approachable latter three were Liberal: the Star, the newspapers. It also gave the fullest manner. Its sister paper, the Star, had Echo and the Westminster Gazette. Dr coverage of the Hobhouse Report. been founded in  under the Beaumont considered each of the According to Beaumont, it was editorship of T. P. O’Connor. It was papers in turn. difficult to escape the conclusion that consistently radical and letters in- The Daily Telegraph had been this was more than moral indignation; cluded correspondence from Marxists formed in  and was intended to it was part of a concerted plan to and Fabians. Beaumont declared that have a broader appeal than the estab- bring the party together behind in ‘reading its pages one cannot but be lished newspapers. It had been owned Campbell-Bannerman. struck by its sharp freshness in support by the Lawson family almost from the The Daily Chronicle had, meanwhile, of a frankly “anti-jingo” policy’. start, who, by the end of the century, had a more chequered career. Starting Nonetheless its importance has also were as split as the party. The proprie- in  with little political news, it had been dismissed. Both papers never tor (who was effectively in charge), Sir taken a Unionist line on Ireland in the wavered in their support of the Boers Edward Lawson, was a Liberal Union- s, returned to the Gladstonian fold and according to Beaumont, both ist, whilst his son Harry stood as a in  and from , under Henry never recovered from the conse- Radical in the  general election. Massingham’s editorship, had appeared quences of holding that position. The inconsistency in the family was to support Rosebery. Massingham Radical Liberals were also able to reflected, Beaumont argued, in the veered to the left over time, recruiting look to another evening paper, the newspaper. By , despite being like-minded journalists such as Harold Echo. It was founded in  as the first billed as a Liberal paper, the Telegraph Spender, Vaughan Nash and Henry halfpenny evening paper. It was owned was, in Beaumont’s view, editorially Nevison. In the build-up to the war. by a succession of Liberal MPs, most Conservative. There were informal Beaumont argued that the paper notably Passmore Edwards from – links with the Conservative Party became increasingly critical. However, . The editor from , William through E. B. Iwan Muller, a member the owner. Frank Lloyd. did not Crook, continued in Edwards’ tradition

Journal of Liberal Democrat History 28 Autumn 2000 27 of radical liberalism and took a consist- Liberal Party, especially with Campbell- put news first but one that gave equal ently pro-Boer attitude. However, the Bannerman who sent the paper ad- prominence to debate and comment. paper was making a loss and Cook and vance copies of his speeches. Despite its In Beaumont’s opinion this was his unpopular views on South Africa prestige, however, it made consistent disadvantageous to the wide dissemi- were blamed. Cook, therefore, resigned losses. Furthermore, despite this it did nation of Liberal views. Finally, like the as editor. Following his resignation the not give uncritical support to the party it lacked a uniform view or paper was more noncommittal in its Liberal Party’s position on the war. pattern. Liberal divisions were con- coverage of the war. Once war was declared, Beaumont stantly on show in the press. In Beaumont’s view, the most argued that Spender saw no option but Following the two presentations influential of the evening papers was the ‘to bend before the storm’. there was a lively question and answer Westminster Gazette, founded in  In summary, Beaumont argued that session covering a wide range of and whose editor from  was J. A. the traditional Liberal press was under- points. Despite a smaller turn-out than Spender. It was required reading for capitalised and was, therefore, unable to usual, the evening proved to be one of members of the cabinet and opposition compete with the emerging new press the most stimulating and informative alike. It had very good links with the such as the Daily Mail – not a press that of recent meetings.

Research in Progress If you can help any of the individuals listed below with sources, contacts, or any other information — or if you know anyone who can — please pass on details to them. Details of other research projects in progress should be sent to the Editor (see page 2) for inclusion here.

The party agent and English electoral culture, c.1880 – c.1906. The Liberals and the local government of London 1919–39. Chris Fox, development of political agency as a profession, the role of the 173 Worplesdon Road, Guildford GU2 6XD; election agent in managing election campaigns during this period, [email protected]. and the changing nature of elections, as increased use was made of Crouch End or Hornsey Liberal Association or Young Liberals in the the press and the platform. Kathryn Rix, Christ's College, 1920s and 1930s; especially any details of James Gleeson or Patrick Cambridge, CB2 2BU; [email protected]. Moir, who are believed to have been Chairmen. Tony Marriott, Flat Liberal policy towards Austria-Hungary, 1905–16. Andrew A, 13 Coleridge Road, Crouch End, London N8 8EH. Gardner, 22 Birdbrook House, Popham Road, Islington, London N1 The Liberal Party and foreign and defence policy, 1922–88; of 8TA; [email protected]. particular interest is the 1920s and 30s, and the possibility of The Hon H. G. Beaumont (MP for Eastbourne 1906–10). Any interviewing anyone involved in formulating party foreign and information welcome, particularly on his political views (he stood as defence policies. Dr R. S. Grayson, 8 Cheltenham Avenue, a Radical). Tim Beaumont, 40 Elms Road, London SW4 9EX. Twickenham TW1 3HD.

Edmund Lamb (Liberal MP for Leominster 1906–10). Any Liberal foreign policy in the 1930s. Focussing particularly on Liberal information on his election and period as MP; wanted for biography anti-appeasers. Michael Kelly, 12 Collinbridge Road, Whitewell, of his daughter, Winfred Lamb. Dr David Gill, Newtownabbey, Co. Antrim BT36 7SN [email protected]. The Liberal Party and the wartime coalition 1940–45. Sources, Joseph King (Liberal MP for North Somerset during the Great War). particularly on Sinclair as Air Minister, and on Harcourt Johnstone, Any information welcome, particularly on his links with the Union Dingle Foot, Lord Sherwood and Sir Geoffrey Maunder (Sinclair's of Democratic Control and other opponents of the war (including PPS) particularly welcome. Ian Hunter, 9 Defoe Avenue, Kew, his friend George Raffalovich). Colin Houlding; Richmond TW9 4DL; [email protected]. [email protected] The grassroots organisation of the Liberal Party 1945–641945–64; the role The political life and times of Josiah Wedgwood MP. Study of the of local activists in the late 1950s revival of the Liberal Party. Mark political life of this radical MP, hoping to shed light on the question Egan, 42 Richmond Road, Gillingham, Kent ME7 1LN. of why the Labour Party replaced the Liberals as the primary The Unservile State Group, 1953–1970s. Dr Peter Barberis, 24 popular representatives of radicalism in the 1920s. Lime Avenue, Flixton, Manchester M41 5DE. Paul Mulvey, 112 Richmond Avenue, London N1 0LS; [email protected]. The Young Liberal Movement 1959–1985; including in particular relations with the leadership, and between NLYL and ULS. Carrie Recruitment of Liberals into the Conservative Party, 1906–1935. Park, 89 Coombe Lane, Bristol BS9 2AR; Aims to suggest reasons for defections of individuals and develop [email protected]. an understanding of changes in electoral alignment. Sources include personal papers and newspapers; suggestions about how The political and electoral strategy of the Liberal Party 1970–79. to get hold of the papers of more obscure Liberal defectors Individual constituency papers, and contact with members of the welcome. Cllr Nick Cott, 1a Henry Street, Gosforth, Newcastle- Party’s policy committees and/or the Party Council, particularly upon-Tyne, NE3 1DQ; [email protected]. welcome. Ruth Fox, 7 Mulberry Court, Bishop’s Stortford, Herts CM23 3JW.

28 Journal of Liberal Democrat History 28 Autumn 2000