William Digby and the Indian question

William Digby, the first secretary of the , was also a radical political organiser and agitator for India. One of his many exposures of Indian poverty was referred to as ‘one of the most terrible indictments ever probably written of a governing race’. He assisted , and acted as election agent for Dadabhai Naoroji, the first Asian elected to Parliament. Dr Mira Matikkala examines his life and interests.

12 Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 William Digby and the Indian question

illiam Digby the Indian government began to names.’1 According to Digby, was born in organise public works and food five months later the figure was W i s b e c h , shipments to Southern India, nearly 3,900.2 Cambridge- and a substantial relief fund was However, it seems that Digby shire in 1849. launched in London. The Indian was somewhat too dynamic for HeW began his journalistic career famine was the turning-point the secretaryship. The Club was early, becoming an apprentice in Digby’s life, leading him to not meant to be anything other on a small local newspaper in devote himself to Indian reform ‘than a social meeting-place 1864. In 1871, he left England until his death. for progressive politicians’,3 but for Ceylon, to become the sub- His wife having died in India, Digby was far from satisfied editor on the Ceylon Observer in Digby returned to England in with this. In June 1883 he wrote Colombo. In Ceylon he soon 1879. For the next few years to Herbert Gladstone: became involved in a major tem- he edited first the Liverpool and perance campaign, and another Southport Daily News and then I thank you very much for your campaign for the abolition of the Western Daily Mercury at detailed criticisms of the sug- food taxes brought him honor- Plymouth. Then, in November gestions I put on paper respect- ary membership of the Cobden 1882, he was elected as the first ing the political work of the Club in 1876. secretary of the newly-estab- Club. Those criticisms are, in The following year Digby set- lished National Liberal Club. the main, adverse to my sug- tled in India, where he became After months of preparatory gestions. … If the National the editor of the influential daily work, the Club was established Liberal Club is to be a social Madras Times. The years of severe at a meeting on 16 November club merely … I, for one, famine which followed soon led 1882. According to an active Digby’s portrait should be grievously disap- him to question the rationale of member, the meeting ‘was at the National pointed, and should regret hav- British rule in India. He wrote largely attended by leading Lib- Liberal Club, ing given up journalism (where his first major pamphlet, the erals from all parts of the coun- by J. C. Forbes, now and then I could be of two-volume Famine Campaign in try … On 29 November, Mr. presented to some service) for the secretary- the Club in 1905 Southern India, in 1878, and used William Digby was appointed ship. … I could add page upon (courtesy of the Madras Times extensively, as secretary. Success immediately page of conversations I have Simon J. Roberts, well as The Times in London, to followed. By 31 December 1882, secretary of the had with leading Liberals from stir up both the government and the list of original members was National Liberal all parts of the country. They the British public. As a result, closed with more than 2,500 Club) (the leading Liberals) look,

Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 13 william digby and the indian question

with eager expectancy, to the ‘If the in times of famine than the Brit- meeting in October 1881 recom- Club to become a central party ish one. This was, he argued, mended extensive circulation for organisation, and are prepared National Lib- because native states availed Digby’s pamphlet among Liberal to support it accordingly. If it eral Club is themselves of local Indian expe- Associations, and stated that the is merely ‘social’, then, I am rience, whereas the British did Federation could be of great convinced, there will be a great to be a social not.8 service in the cause of Indian falling off in numbers and in Furthermore, Digby chal- reform along the lines Digby influence.4 club merely lenged the widely-held view indicated. Digby was appointed ‘that India had no cause of com- a member of the General Com- Nevertheless, Digby did not ... I, for one, plaint against Great Britain, as mittee of the Federation ‘with a have his way. When he informed should be she was not made to contribute view to his re-opening the sub- Herbert Gladstone of his resig- anything to this country’. While ject at a convenient time’.11 nation four years later he bitterly grievously acknowledging that no direct However, after the occupa- acknowledged ‘that what the contribution had been paid, tion of Egypt in 1882, the Liberal Club wants is a thoroughly capa- disap- Digby stressed that indirectly Party became less supportive of ble hotel manager’.5 England was ‘draining India, its critics of empire. Once again, pointed’. not simply of its surplus, but India was to pay for the Brit- actually of its very life-blood’. ish expedition, and this caused ‘Indian Problems for English As an example of this unequal a conflict between the Viceroy, Consideration’ partnership, Digby stated that on Lord Ripon, and the home gov- Digby’s criticism of British rule seven occasions India had been ernment. The Secretary of State in India sprang from humani- made to pay for English wars: for India and Gladstone argued tarian grounds, having its twice for China and New Zea- that the Suez Canal was much roots in the famine, but in the land, and once each for Crimea, more important to India than to 1880s he extended it to broader Persia, and Abyssinia. In all these England; thus, the charges had themes: first demanding full imperial undertakings, Britain to be met by the Indian govern- economic and racial equality, had borrowed Indian troops and ment. Ripon strongly disagreed, soon also calling for representa- India had paid. On the other but succeeded only in having the tive government for India, and, hand, when reinforcements had sum reduced.12 finally, advocating full self- been sent from Britain to India government. in the 1840s and 1857, India had He began his Indian agitation been made to pay ‘every fraction ‘India for the Indians – and in Britain with a pamphlet enti- of the pay of the troops from the for England’ tled Indian Problems for English moment they left England’.9 Digby greatly admired Lord Consideration, published by the Most importantly, Digby was Ripon, who, as Viceroy of India National Liberal Federation in a strong advocate of John Bright’s from 1880 to 1884, re-established 1881. Digby argued that Indian scheme for decentralised gov- the freedom of the press after reform was ‘a Liberal duty’, and ernment in India as the answer Lord Lytton’s Vernacular Press defined India as ‘a larger Ire- to India’s difficulties. Bright Act of 1878, furthered education, land’. He predicted serious trou- had insisted since 1858 that it and extended local self-govern- bles in India, unless Englishmen was impossible for one man, the ment. During the ‘Ilbert Bill’ and Indians would ‘be brought Governor-General or Viceroy, controversy in 1883–84, which to know one another better, and to rule India. Thus, the country resulted from Ripon’s attempt to understand each other’s posi- should be divided into five or six to extend the right of qualified tion to a fuller extent than they presidencies, equal in rank and Indian magistrates to try Euro- now do’.6 He testified that ‘our each under a separate governor peans in criminal cases, a short- fellow-subjects in the east are who would be in direct com- lived British India Committee like-minded with ourselves in munication with the Secretary worked assiduously in support of all that constitutes good citizen- of State for India in London. In Ripon, and Digby was actively ship and law-abidingness’.7 Digby’s view, Bright’s idea was involved in this work.13 After He also insisted, bluntly, that ‘practicable and necessary’, and Ripon’s arrival in Britain, Digby the British had failed to govern he even predicted it would result organised a dinner in his hon- India properly. He argued that in competition for good works our on 25 February 1885, in his there were ‘forty million starv- between the presidencies.10 capacity as the secretary of the ing’ and nine million had ‘died With the help of a Liberal National Liberal Club. from want of food’ under the friend, Richard Tangye, Digby Digby was furious about the ‘crushing weight of administra- managed to get 10,000 copies of criticism of Lord Ripon and tion’. Moreover, Digby asserted Indian Problems for English Con- responded to it with a book, that the native Indian adminis- sideration printed and circulated. India for the Indians – and for Eng- tration functioned much better The Liberal Federation’s annual land, published in February 1885.

14 Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 william digby and the indian question

In the preceding December he in addition, in British prov- to considerations such as I have had written optimistically to inces traditional village and described, and may He help me Herbert Gladstone: communal life had been largely to be more true to the cause destroyed. He even argued that of ill-governed India in the In that work I produce (almost famines were more frequent in future.20 entirely from official docu- British provinces than in Indian ments) evidence of the most states, due to severe failures in remarkable character, evidence administration.17 The election of 1885: ‘India’s which if true (as I believe it ‘I never wrote a book or an Interest in the British Ballot to be to the very smallest sen- article for a newspaper into Box’ tence) ought to lead to a re- which I put so much of myself as The matter was left at that and consideration of our position I have put into this book’, Digby Digby was made a Liberal parlia- in India; wrote to Herbert Gladstone at mentary candidate for the forth- the time of publication.18 Glad- coming election. When he was but nonetheless stressing that, stone, however, as Digby him- ‘no longer in hostility towards self put it, was not willing to ‘go the wishes of the Committee’, he My suggestions (I believe) are into the merits of the case’ and approached Herbert Gladstone in no degree wild. I recognise opposed Digby’s actions. The to get some ‘pecuniary help’ all the good England has done main problem from Herbert towards his expenses from the in India and is doing at the same Gladstone’s point of view was, as Liberal Central Association.21 time that I show the marked Digby put it, Previously he had approached superiority of native rule under his Indian friends in a similar English over-lordship. The title … the propriety, or otherwise, way, asking them to guarantee, of my little book, viz. India for of the secretary of the National in case of election, his election the Indians – and for England, Liberal Club, in his private expenses, all office expenses, shows I am no revolutionist in capacity and from his private and an honorarium of £1,000 my ideas.14 address, calling attention … to per year.22 The requests were as a state of things unparalleled unsuccessful as his attempt to get In the book, Digby reproached by anything the government into the Commons. the Anglo-Indians’ ‘ecstatic has had to deal with in either In British politics Digby admiration of themselves and South Africa or North Africa was an advanced radical and a their doings’ which led Brit- – at home or abroad. You staunch supporter of Gladstone. ish statesmen to adopt the same declare, inferentially rather He was determined to make attitude of admiration towards than directly, my conduct to be Indian reforms part of the Lib- them and to underestimate the incompatible with the position eral programme, but ended up Indian character and capabili- I hold.19 disappointed. Indian national- ties. Thus, Digby produced a ists were not eager to interfere powerful testimony in favour of Hence, Digby was to give up his in British party politics, believ- Indians and their administrative criticism of the Raj or resign his ing that reform would be best capability.15 In his opinion, Brit- connection with the Club. His accomplished by appealing to ish rule in India ought to have answer was: ‘In that work both Liberals and Conserva- adopted a merely supervisory I produce evi- tives alike. In 1885, even Dada- role, so ‘that the British, as they Should an occasion again arise bhai Naoroji, who was later alone can in India, should keep in which I shall be situated as I dence of the to become both Digby’s close the peace. That done they should was situated when I wrote and friend and a Liberal MP, held this stand aside, allowing the people issued the letter you condemn, most remark- opinion.23 Furthermore, neither to rule themselves according to I shall act as I acted then. With Digby nor anyone else managed their own ideas and experience this difference, however, a dif- able charac- to get William Gladstone – who 16 of what is best.’ ference caused by your letter to ter, evidence was wholly preoccupied with He also repeated his economic me: I shall inform the Commit- the Irish question – significantly statements from 1881, arguing tee what I am about to do and if which ought interested in India. that the British legal and scien- they consider my conduct to be Before the election, Digby’s tific approach was too rigid, and incompatible with the official to lead to a book was briefly reviewed inThe that India required adaptability position which I feel it an hon- Times. The reviewer averred that and sympathy. Native-governed our to hold, then as a man of re-consider- it contained many points which villages were financially secure, honour and conscience I shall ation of our were ‘worthy of serious con- due to flexible administration, have no course before me but sideration’.24 Soon afterwards, whereas in British India the to resign the secretaryship. … position in Digby published yet another collection of land revenue was God forgive me for having, in book, India’s Interest in the Brit- harsh even when crops failed; the past, been too indifferent India.’ ish Ballot Box. 20,000 copies – a

Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 15 william digby and the indian question

Indeed, the book was to a the fore. In addition to Digby’s great extent a major apologia efforts, this was accomplished for Ripon’s Indian policy. After through the candidacy of Lal- discussing Ripon’s Viceroyalty mohan Ghose in east London in detail, Digby further empha- and the visit of a three-man del- sised the vital need for local egation from India. In the end, self-government which Ripon both Ghose and Digby were had sought to advance. He also defeated.30 criticised the fact that the prom- ises made to employ Indians in the government of their own The Indian Political Agency country had not been kept. The At the end of 1885, the Indian first step forward, Digby argued, National Congress formulated would be a ‘Royal Commis- its programme and from then on sion of Enquiry into the whole Digby was a staunch advocate of administration of India’.27 its demands: the ‘Indianisation’ Digby was convinced that the of the Indian civil service, con- Indian issue could be warmly and siderable reductions in military successfully espoused by support- expenditure, a parliamentary ers of Liberal politics. He wrote inquiry into Indian affairs, abo- confidently in the preface: lition of the India Council, and Indian representation in the leg- I remember how keenly my islative councils of India. countr ymen resisted the stamp- It was at this time that Digby ing out of Polish nationality by befriended the leading Con- the despotic empires of Europe gressman, Dadabhai Naoroji, quarter of which went to mem- Dadabhai and how warmly they sympa- who settled in London in 1886, bers of the National Liberal Club Naoroji, Liberal thised with the aspirations and hoping to become a Liberal par- – were printed and all circulated MP for Finsbury the efforts of the Italians to free liamentary candidate. When by the end of September.25 Central, 1892–95, themselves from the hateful Naoroji first visited Digby in ‘I do not know of a more com- the first non- yoke of the Austrians at Ven- April 1886, he found the latter white to sit in plete task of the kind ever having ice and of the French at Rome. ‘depressed’ because ‘he had not the House of been attempted or carried out’, Consequently, I am sure that suitable and proper representa- Commons Digby wrote to Lord Ripon, the affairs of their fellow-sub- tives of India’. Then ‘he over and who paid the expenses. ‘From jects in India and in the Crown over again repeated that now the purely business point of view Colonies will not be pushed that I had come, be the result only there is more than value for aside as of little concern. … about my object what it may, he the money. I have never before The system of administration will be able to work for India, known so much work done for now existing in India is as cer- with more heart and zeal. He so small an amount’, he assured tainly doomed to early over- was extremely desirous to do all Ripon when sending the bill. throw as was Negro slavery in that lay in his power to promote The readers of the book had ‘the the United States.28 my object.’ When they met opportunity of seeing what your again ten days later, the work lordship’s policy in India really In contrast to Indian nationalists, was well under way. To begin was’; and furthermore, ‘in case Digby stressed that Indian reform with, Digby strongly recom- of future depreciation of your had to be made a party question: mended that Naoroji change his work, the facts received will be ‘None but Liberals are prepared Parsi headdress to an English top useful, and will be availed of, for the annoyance, vexation, hat: ‘better to appear altogether for reference’. ‘There has not yet misrepresentation, misunder- like an Englishman’. He also been time for people to read the standing, which always accom- intended to get Naoroji a ticket pamphlet, but such remarks as I pany the initiation of reform to a Liberal meeting in favour of have heard from those who have – whether for one’s own coun- the Irish Bill, and advised him read portions are full of admira- try or for another’, he explained, to prepare to speak in favour tion at what they regard as the predicting that sooner or later of Irish Home Rule at some moral grandeur and material ‘special broadly-defined Indian point.31 beneficence of your administra- reforms will take a regular place Disappointed by the non- tion,’ Digby asserted; ‘your lord- in the programmes discussed on political, leisurely social atmos- ship will see how your policy is Liberal platforms’.29 phere at the National Liberal accepted as the guiding star for The election of 1885 was the Club, Digby resigned his secre- the reformation of India’.26 first to bring the Indian issue to taryship in 1887. The following

16 Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 william digby and the indian question

April he formed an Indian such instances, entirely unrep- and, coincidentally, brought the and Political General Agency, resented and without a voice or crucial roles of Digby and, espe- which was to provide services direct influence’,37 but soon after cially, Bradlaugh forward.40 The for Indian political associations, the Agency was founded, Bra- first collection, India in England, native states, and individuals dlaugh was ‘chosen’ instead.38 also included Digby’s interview alike.32 Digby’s main intention From 1888 until Bradlaugh’s with William Gladstone on was to serve the Indian National death in 1891, Digby coached Indian matters. Congress, and he thus suggested him on numerous Indian issues ‘I have always had good will that all Indian political associa- for questions in the Commons towards the Indian people and tions should jointly appoint him and energetically assisted him in have done for them, from time as their agent on a yearly fee of promoting two successive Indian to time, all that has seemed to me £250 plus expenses.33 Reform Bills. A few samples of possible’, was the ‘assurance of Naoroji’s friend W. C. Bon- Bradlaugh’s frequent messages sympathy’ from the Grand Old nerjee, who was visiting London, to Digby serve best to reveal the Man when inter viewed by Digby personally guaranteed Digby’s nature of their relationship: in April 1889. Digby sought expenses for 1888.34 The cam- to convince Gladstone that ‘if paign got off to a highly prom- Have you a spare copy of the ever there was any organisation ising start, and in the winter of Memorandum which you pre- in the British Empire which 1888–89 Digby visited India to pared officially and circulated deserved the hearty support of attend the fourth Congress and last year when it was thought all English Liberals, it is this of to secure financial support for his my motion would come on the Congress’, emphasising the Agency. There he collaborated for Royal Commission? Give constitutional manner in which closely with A. O. Hume, who me the exact references to the the Congress acted. ‘Indeed, I pressed upon Congress-workers Lansdowne and Trevelyan am speaking sober truth when the vital need for British propa- referred to in it. You prom- I say there is no loyalty in the ganda on an adequate scale: ised me a complete copy of the British dominions more sincere Dufferin Minute. If you have than that of the Indian reform- Our only hope lies in awak- it kindly send it as early as you ers’, Digby insisted. However, ening the British public to a can together with a complete Gladstone was rather suspicious sense of the wrongs of our peo- copy of the Lansdowne Minute of the ‘seditious native press’ ple – to a consciousness of the of February. (16 June 1890). which, he had heard, contained unwisdom and injustice of the ‘writings of a disloyal character’. present administration. The Mr Asquith wants you to give Digby assured Gladstone that he, least we could do would be him particulars so that he may who was an expert on the Indian to provide ample funds … to speak for us on the Indian press, did not know of any such carry on agitation there, on the Councils Bill. I wish you instances; ‘but as a matter of fact lines and scale of that in virtue would do it as early as you can, Digby district officials in India are such of which the Anti-Corn Law for we may be surprised any irresponsible despots that they League triumphed.35 day by having the Bill thrust coached resent all comment on their on us. Our duty is clearly to be actions however mild, and call During his visit Digby became ready for the fight always. (28 Bradlaugh that sedition what probably any the English representative for June 1890). unprejudiced person would say several Indian papers, and Lon- on numerous fair criticism’. Gladstone ‘could don correspondent of the Hindu Reid wants you to pen him a Indian issues well believe that’.41 in Madras and the Amrita Bazar short brief from which he could In July 1889, Digby’s Agency Patrika in Calcutta, both emi- speak in support of my amend- for questions was merged with the newly- nent daily newspapers.36 The ment. (1 July 1890). established British Committee financial question, however, in the Com- of the Indian National Con- remained unsolved. When Bradlaugh’s ‘membership gress, and Digby was made its In his Agency work, Digby for India’ became more famous, mons and first secretary. When the Com- received extensive help from the dozens of letters poured in from energetically mittee began publishing its own Liberal MP Charles Bradlaugh. India to him, and he forwarded paper, India, in 1890, Digby also Having a parliamentary repre- them regularly to Digby to assisted him became its first editor. Funded sentative ‘of its own’ was one of answer on his behalf.39 mainly by Indian nationalists, the most important things for the In order to gain financial sup- in promoting India was distributed free to par- Agency. Prior to the founding port from India, Digby produced liamentarians, political clubs and of the Agency, Digby had asked two considerable collections of two succes- the British press, and in these Herbert Gladstone ‘to do some- articles and interviews which sive Indian important spheres it was fairly thing to safeguard the interests of eloquently presented various successful. However, money was the Indian people who are, in all sides of the British campaign Reform Bills. an issue. Whereas the Anti-Corn

Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 17 william digby and the indian question

Law League, Hume’s model, with the last issue of India of issue of Indian reform, which had spent more than £200,000 1890. This ‘Christmas number’, stated the Congress demands.51 in 1843–46, the Committee’s called ‘The Kashmir Injustice: A In 1891–92 Digby also acted yearly income averaged around British Disgrace’, was, in effect, as election agent for Naoroji, £3,000.42 Indian financial sup- an exhaustive defence of the Liberal candidate for Central port for the British Committee deposed Maharaja of Kashmir.47 Finsbury. During the long elec- remained limited. Digby had continued the com- tion campaign which culmi- mercial practice of his private nated in Naoroji’s winning the Agency alongside his work for seat, Digby was his staunchest Radicalisation and defeat the Committee, and his dual supporter, taking care of many Encouraged by Lord Ripon, roles as secretary to the Com- practical things and guiding Digby organised another British mittee and, simultaneously, as Naoroji in Liberal circles and tour for a Congress delegation in head of his private Agency, were political practices. the spring of 1890. The deputa- anomalous and confusing. His In 1885 in North Padding- tion of eight notable nationalists paid agitation on behalf of the ton, Digby had secured 1,797 arrived in early April and began Maharaja of Kashmir as well votes (42.0 per cent) against his with public meetings in Lon- as those of Nepal and Mysore Conservative competitor’s 2,482 don, which Naoroji and Digby ‘became increasingly a source of votes (58.0 per cent). In 1892 also attended.43 At Bradlaugh’s embarrassment to the Congress in South Islington he achieved request, the nationwide tour in India and its Committee in 2,873 votes (47.4 per cent) against was then started from his con- England’. Furthermore, Digby his Conservative competitor’s stituency, Northampton, where irritated the Indian government 3,194 votes (52.6 per cent).52 the meeting was held with ‘very through his interference with ‘Deeply disappointed’ but ‘not good attendance’.44 the government’s sensitive rela- overcome’, he wrote to a friend: Undoubtedly Digby also tions with the princely states.48 ‘I believe, if elected, I could aimed to further his own cause Matters became even worse have done India and this coun- within the Liberal Party through when Digby unleashed his anti- try some service. I ought to have the delegates. They were sum- imperialism in the following won. And, I should have won moned to a meeting at the issue, called ‘An Open Letter if I had been fighting an hon- National Liberal Club in order to the Members of the House est foe. The 300 votes by which to ‘acquaint them with the pro- of Commons on The Dark Side I lost were, literally, taken from gramme of the campaigners in of British Rule in India: a side me by means which will ill bear Britain and to see in what way so dark as to make it doubtful investigation.’53 they could help’. He also empha- if British rule has been and is a Digby thanked his support- sised to the readers of Hindu blessing to the masses of India’. ers and explained his defeat in that ‘everywhere Liberals have ‘I have He cited an impressive array India, the Hindu, and the Amrita assisted the delegates and formed always had of statistics, exposing the huge Bazar Patrika. In his opinion he the audiences: nowhere have the dimensions of India’s poverty, was beaten ‘because, in the last Conservatives even attended the good will and blaming Britain.49 This ‘sta- four days of the fight, our oppo- meetings to learn what Indian tistical revelation’ continued in nents almost literally snatched grievances are’.45 Moreover, towards the subsequent numbers, and Digby many of those who had prom- Digby organised the tour so also repeated his strong argu- ised us their support, out of our that it finished conveniently Indian peo- ments in an interview in Greater hands’. Among other things he with a meeting with William ple and have Britain, whose editor described complained that his competitor Gladstone. When the delegates Digby’s letter as ‘one of the most had replaced all Digby’s posters affirmed their hopes for the first done for terrible indictments ever prob- – ‘Vote for Digby and for Real steps in representative govern- ably written of a governing Unity and Home Rule for Ire- ment in India by the expansion them, from race’.50 At the same time, Digby’s land’ – with his own.54 and reconstitution of the coun- position in the Committee was The last issue of India which cils, Gladstone responded: ‘Well, time to time, weakened by the death of his Digby edited appeared in Sep- it seems you must be prepared to all that has patron, Charles Bradlaugh, in tember 1892. In January 1893, wait a little longer for the reali- early 1891. India began its new series with sation of your hopes. You will seemed to Nevertheless, Digby’s ener- H. Morse Stephens, Lecturer in have to wait a while.’46 getic efforts carried him ahead Indian history at Cambridge, as At around the same time, me possible’, in radical Liberal ranks, secur- its editor. The Committee con- Digby began to radicalise, ing him a candidacy for South tinued on moderate lines, while which soon led him into disa- Gladstone Islington in 1892. His election Digby sometimes criticised it greements with the Committee, assured programme was similar to the rather severely in his letters to which stressed moderation. The official Gladstonian programme the Amrita Bazar Patrika and the first sign of trouble appeared Digby. apart from the inclusion of the Hindu.55

18 Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 william digby and the indian question

In the following decade, and ‘render it easily digestible’. In 1891 Digby organizations and Indian reform’, p. Digby and Naoroji joined forces The campaign did shape public 295. several more times on Indian opinion in Britain, but in the published 14 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 12 matters. As late as 1904, the year eyes of Indian nationalists this ‘An Open December 1884, British Library, Digby died, they addressed the happened far too slowly. Viscount Gladstone Papers, Add. London India Society, an organ- Certainly, being a critic of Letter to the MS 46051, f. 37. isation of Indian students in empire in late-nineteenth-cen- 15 W. Digby, India for the Indians – and Britain, together. Digby began tury Britain was far from easy. Members of for England (London: Talbot broth- by stressing the need for Indian Dissenters and pioneers were ers, 1885), passim. self-government, and Naoroji often ridiculed, and William the House of 16 Ibid., p. 22. followed in similar vein. In the Digby was no exception; as a Commons on 17 Ibid., pp. 46–94. more radical atmosphere of the consequence, he suffered a severe 18 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 17 Feb- early 1900s, their suggestion mental breakdown in 1886, from The Dark Side ruary 1885, British Library, Vis- ‘was at once and almost univer- which it took years to recover count Gladstone Papers, Add. MS sally approved by the national- fully, and when he died in 1904 of British 46051, ff. 53–54. ist press in India’.56 By this time, at the age of 55, it was said to be 19 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 19 April both Digby and Naoroji had of ‘nervous exhaustion’. Rule in India: 1885, British Library, Viscount fully developed their ideas in a side so dark Gladstone Papers, Add. MS 46051, huge volumes, both published Dr Mira Matikkala is a researcher at f. 110. in 1901. In Poverty and Un-British the University of Helsinki and com- as to make it 20 Ibid. Rule in India, Naoroji put the pleted a Cambridge PhD thesis on 21 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 18 finishing touches on his ‘drain ‘Anti-imperialism, Englishness, and doubtful if August 1885, British Library, Vis- theory’ – namely that Britain Empire in late-Victorian Britain’ in count Gladstone Papers, Add. MS was draining wealth out of India 2006. British rule 46051, f. 172. – and Digby’s satirically entitled has been and 22 D. E. Wacha to Dadabhai Naoroji, ‘Prosperous’ British India: A Reve- 1 R. Steven, The National Liberal 13 May 1885, in R. P. Patwardhan lation from Official Records consti- Club: Politics and Persons (London: is a blessing (ed.) D. Naoroji, Correspondence, Vol. tuted a major indictment of the R. Holden & Co., 1925), p. 14. II: Part I. Correspondence with D. E. financial and economic impacts 2 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 2 June to the masses Wacha, 4.11.1884 to 23.3.1895 (Bom- of the Raj. 1883, British Library, Viscount bay: Allied Publishers, 1977), p. 9. Despite their best efforts, Gladstone Papers, Add. MS 46050, of India’. 23 B. Martin, New India, 1885: British Digby and his co-agitators did f. 84b. Official Policy and the Emergence of not succeed in making Indian 3 Steven, The National Liberal Club, p. the Indian National Congress (Berke- reform a major issue in Brit- 23. ley: University of California Press, ish politics. The official British 4 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 2 June 1969), p. 215. response to the campaign was 1883, British Library, Viscount 24 The Times, 22 September 1885. wavering and suspicious, and Gladstone Papers, Add. MS 46050, 25 W. Digby to Lord Ripon, 26 Sep- tended to avoid defining the f. 84b. tember 1885, British Library, Ripon aims of Indian policy in clear 5 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 19 Sep- Papers, Add. MS 43635, ff. 160–62. terms. Since Indian nationalists tember 1887, British Library, Vis- 26 Ibid., ff. 160–63. expected prompt legal reforms, count Gladstone Papers, Add. MS 27 W. Digby, The General Election, they soon became frustrated 46052, f. 260. 1885: India’s Interest in the British Bal- with the constitutional approach 6 W. Digby, Indian Problems for English lot Box (London: Talbot brothers, and this frustration doomed the Consideration, a Letter to the Council 1885), pp. 75–91 passim. reform effort to failure. of the National Liberal Federation (Bir- 28 Ibid., pp. v–vi. Nevertheless, with his work mingham: National Liberal Federa- 29 Ibid., pp. 3, 9. Digby did his best to keep Indian tion, 1881), pp. 3–6. 30 Digby’s election contest has been concerns in the British media, 7 Ibid., p. 7. described in more detail in Martin, and the British people gradu- 8 Ibid., pp. 30–42. New India, 1885. ally became more familiar with 9 Ibid., pp. 46–47. 31 Naoroji’s notes, 19 and 29 April Indian affairs. Previously, the 10 Ibid., pp. 57–61. 1886, quoted in R. P. Masani, Dada- had been a subject 11 W. Digby, ‘English political organi- bhai Naoroji: The Grand Old Man of of interest only to experts and zations and Indian reform: A record India (London: G. Allen & Unwin, Anglo-Indian officials, but dur- of what has been attempted’, India, 1939), pp. 233–34. ing the 1880s it became discussed No. 15 (5 December 1890), pp. 293, 32 India, No. 1 (February 1890), p. 16. among the wider public as well. 295. 33 W. Digby to P. Mehta, 24 April Indeed, Digby succeeded in 12 A. Denholm, Lord Ripon 1827–1909: 1888, quoted in M. D. Morrow, his most important objective – A Political Biography (London: ‘The Origins and Early Years of the namely to familiarise the British Croom Helm, 1982), p. 153. British Committee of the Indian with the Indian administration 13 Digby, ‘English political National Congress, 1885–1907’

Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 19 william digby and the indian question

(unpublished PhD thesis, Univer- Congress, 1829–1912 (Oxford: Oxford II. Mr. Digby’s ‘Record’ (London: A. sity of London, 1977), p. 30. University Press, 2002 [1913]), p. 70. Bonner, 1892), p. 35. 34 India, No. 15 (5 December 1890), p. Hume was the son of Joseph Hume, 37 W. Digby to H. Gladstone, 23 Feb- 296. an Anti-Corn Law League activist. ruary 1886, British Library, Vis- 35 A. O. Hume to the Indian nation- 36 ‘Mr Digby’s “Record”’, in W. count Gladstone Papers, Add. MS alists, 10 February 1889, quoted in Digby, The General Election of 1892, 46052, f. 34. Sir W. Wedderburn, Allan Octavian South Islington: I. Address of the Lib- 38 Digby’s notes of an interview with Hume: Father of the Indian National eral Candidate, Wm Digby, C.I.E. Lord Ripon, 10 November 1888, 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 3) for inclusion here.

Hubert Beaumont MP. After pursuing candidatures in his native The Liberal Party in the West Midlands from December 1916 to Northumberland southward, Beaumont finally fought and won the 1923 general election. Focusing on the fortunes of the party in Eastbourne in 1906 as a ‘Radical’ (not a Liberal). How many Liberals in the Birmingham, Coventry, Walsall and Wolverhampton. Looking to explore election fought under this label and did they work as a group afterwards? the effects of the party split at local level. Also looking to uncover the Lord Beaumont of Whitley, House of Lords, London SW1A 0PW; beaumontt@ steps towards temporary reunification for the 1923 general election.Neil parliament.uk. Fisher, 42 Bowden Way, Binley, Coventry CV3 2HU ; neil.fisher81@ntlworld. com. Letters of Richard Cobden (1804–65). Knowledge of the whereabouts of any letters written by Cobden in private hands, autograph collections, Recruitment of Liberals into the Conservative Party, 1906–1935. and obscure locations in the UK and abroad for a complete edition of Aims to suggest reasons for defections of individuals and develop an his letters. (For further details of the Cobden Letters Project, please see understanding of changes in electoral alignment. Sources include www.uea.ac.uk/his/research/projects/cobden). Dr Anthony Howe, School personal papers and newspapers; suggestions about how to get hold of of History, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ; [email protected]. the papers of more obscure Liberal defectors welcome. Cllr Nick Cott, 1a Henry Street, Gosforth, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE3 1DQ; [email protected]. Cornish Methodism and Cornish political identity, 1918–1960s. Researching the relationship through oral history. Kayleigh Milden, Life of Wilfrid Roberts (1900–91). Roberts was Liberal MP for Institute of Cornish Studies, Hayne Corfe Centre, Sunningdale, Truro TR1 3ND; Cumberland North (now Penrith and the Border) from 1935 until 1950 [email protected]. and came from a wealthy and prominent local Liberal family; his father had been an MP. Roberts was a passionate internationalist, and was Liberal foreign policy in the 1930s. Focusing particularly on Liberal anti- a powerful advocate for refugee children in the Spanish civil war. His appeasers. Michael Kelly, 12 Collinbridge Road, Whitewell, Newtownabbey, parliamentary career is coterminous with the nadir of the Liberal Party. Co. Antrim BT36 7SN; [email protected]. Roberts joined the Labour Party in 1956, becoming a local councillor The Liberal Party’s political communication, 1945–2002. PhD thesis. in Carlisle and the party’s candidate for the Hexham constituency in Cynthia Messeleka-Boyer, 12 bis chemin Vaysse, 81150 Terssac, France; +33 6 the 1959 general election. I am currently in the process of collating 10 09 72 46; [email protected]. information on the different strands of Roberts’ life and political career. Any assistance at all would be much appreciated. John Reardon; Liberal policy towards Austria-Hungary, 1905–16. Andrew Gardner, 17 [email protected]. Upper Ramsey Walk, Canonbury, London N1 2RP; [email protected]. Student radicalism at Warwick University. Particulary the files affair in The Liberal revival 1959–64. Focusing on both political and social 1970. Interested in talking to anybody who has information about Liberal factors. Any personal views, relevant information or original material Students at Warwick in the period 1965-70 and their role in campus from Liberal voters, councillors or activists of the time would be very politics. Ian Bradshaw, History Department, University of Warwick, CV4 7AL; gratefully received. Holly Towell, 52a Cardigan Road, Headingley, Leeds LS6 [email protected] 3BJ; [email protected]. Welsh Liberal Tradition – A History of the Liberal Party in Wales The rise of the Liberals in Richmond (Surrey) 1964–2002. Interested 1868–2003. Research spans thirteen decades of Liberal history in Wales in hearing from former councillors, activists, supporters, opponents, but concentrates on the post-1966 formation of the Welsh Federal Party. with memories and insights concerning one of the most successful local Any memories and information concerning the post-1966 era or even organisations. What factors helped the Liberal Party rise from having before welcomed. The research is to be published in book form by Welsh no councillors in 1964 to 49 out of 52 seats in 1986? Any literature or Academic Press. Dr Russell Deacon, Centre for Humanities, University of news cuttings from the period welcome. Ian Hunter, 9 Defoe Avenue, Kew, Wales Institute Cardiff, Cyncoed Campus, Cardiff CF23 6XD; rdeacon@uwic. Richmond TW9 4DL; 07771 785 795; [email protected]. ac.uk. Liberals and the local government of London 1919–39. Chris Fox, 173 Aneurin Williams and Liberal internationalism and pacificism, Worplesdon Road, Guildford GU2 6XD; [email protected]. 1900–22. A study of this radical and pacificist MP (Plymouth 1910; Liberal politics in Sussex, Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight 1900–14. North West Durham/Consett 1914–22) who was actively involved in The study of electoral progress and subsequent disappointment. League of Nations Movement, Armenian nationalism, international Research includes comparisons of localised political trends, issues co-operation, pro-Boer etc. Any information relating to him and and preferred interests as aganst national trends. Any information, location of any papers/correspondence welcome. Barry Dackombe. specifically on Liberal candidates in the area in the two general elections 32 Ashburnham Road, Ampthill, Beds, MK45 2RH; [email protected]. of 1910, would be most welcome. Family papers especially appreciated. Ian Ivatt, 84 High Street, Steyning, West Sussex BN44 3JT; ianjivatt@ tinyonline.co.uk.

20 Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 william digby and the indian question

British Library, Ripon Papers, Add. 51 Digby, The General Election of 1892, MS Eur F216/49. MS 43636, f. 149. pp. 11–17. 54 The Hindu, 27 July 1892 and The 39 Letters and telegrams from C. Bra- 52 F. W. S. Craig (ed.), British Parliamen- Amrita Bazar Patrika, 29 July 1892, dlaugh, December 1889 – January tary Election Results 1885–1918 (Lon- quoted in India, No. 33 (26 August 1891, British Library, Oriental and don: Macmillan, 1974), pp. 38, 25. 1892), p. 216; India, No. 33 (26 India Office Collections, Wil- 53 W. Digby to Sir George Birdwood, August 1892), pp. 216–18. liam Digby Collection, MSS Eur 10 July 1892, British Library, Ori- 55 Mehrotra, A History of the Indian D767/7. ental and India Office Collections, National Congress, p. 96. 40 India in England, Volume II: Being Sir George Birdwood Collection, 56 Ibid., p. 120.‚ a collection of speeches delivered and articles written on the Indian National Congress, in England in 1889 (Luc- know: G. P. Varma & Bros, 1889); W. Digby, Indian Politics in England: The Story of an Indian Reform Bill in Parliament Told Week by Week; with Other Matters of Interest to Indian LETTERS Reformers (Lucknow: Ganga Prasad Varma & Bros, 1890). The greatest Liberal? 41 ‘Mr. William Digby’s interview So Liberal historians, seeking Germany. We should be wel- with Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone’, ‘the greatest Liberal’ ( Journal 57), coming Germany as our friend’. 8 April 1889, in India in England, have rejected Gladstone, Asquith In 1936, he sought in the Vol. II, pp. 61, 66. and Lloyd George who actu- Commons to justify Hitler’s 42 M. D. Morrow, ‘The British Com- ally held office, and they have remilitarisation of the Rhine- mittee of the Indian National rejected Keynes and Beveridge land; and, after meeting the Congress as an Issue in and an who, while never in office, sub- Fuehrer later in the year, he Influence upon Nationalist Poli- stantially influenced events. declared that Hitler was ‘indeed tics, 1889–1901’, in K. Ballhatchet They have chosen instead the a great man’, and wrote an and D. Taylor (eds), Changing South theoretician John Stuart Mill article about him in the Daily Asia: Politics and Government (Hong who sat only briefly as a Liberal Express, headed ‘The George Kong: Asian Research Service, MP, and lost his seat in the very Washington of Germany’, in 1984), p. 58. 1868 general election which set which he said that: ‘The idea 43 India, No. 4 (11 April 1890). in office the first government to of a Germany intimidating 44 C. Bradlaugh to W. Digby, 8 Feb- which the name ‘Liberal’ can be Europe with a threat that its ruary 1890, British Library, Ori- applied without any hesitation. irresistible army might march ental and India Office Collections, Is there a moral, perhaps across frontiers forms no part William Digby Collection, MSS an unfortunate one, here? Do in the new vision’, and that ‘the Eur D767/7; India, No. 5 (25 April Liberal historians actually pre- Germans have definitely made 1890), pp. 87–93. fer theorists to people who do up their minds never to quarrel 45 W. Digby to the Hindu, 25 April things? with us again’. Explaining away 1890, in Digby, Indian Politics in Roy Douglas the concentration camps, he England, pp. 133, 135. declared Mein Kampf to be Ger- 46 India, No. 9 (21 June 1890), p. 175. many’s Magna Charta; and even 47 India, No. 15 (19 December 1890). Lloyd George and Hitler after the declaration of war, in 48 S. R. Mehrotra, A History of the I was astonished to read in the November 1939, he had to be Indian National Congress, Vol. I, report of the discussion at the dissuaded from sending Hitler 1885–1918 (New Delhi: Vikas, 1995), History Group meeting on ‘The a letter of congratulation fol- p. 96; Morrow, ‘The Origins and Greatest Liberal’ ( Journal 57) lowing the Fuehrer’s fortuitous Early Years of the British Commit- that Lloyd George ‘was credited escape from an assassination tee’, pp. 37–41. with being one of the first to attempt! 49 India, No. 16 (16 January, 1891). warn of the dangers of Hitler’. I All this is well known to 50 ‘The Man of the Month: Mr. W. hope that no one believed it! most historians. It seems to me Digby, C.I.E.’, Greater Britain, No. Speaking at Barmouth in to disqualify Lloyd George from 4 (February 1891), p. 310; and Dig- September 1933, Lloyd George being regarded as ‘The greatest by’s detailed answers to the editor’s argued that, if Hitler were to Liberal’ or indeed as a liberal of comments in W. Digby, ‘British be overthrown, Communism any sort. It is a pity that none of Rule in India: Has it been, is it now, would come to Germany. In this is mentioned in Kenneth a good rule for the Indian people?’ November 1934, in the Com- Morgan’s account, Greater Britain, No. 5 (March 1891), mons, he said: ‘Do not let us Vernon Bogdanor (Professor of pp. 340–44. be in a hurry to condemn Government, Oxford University)

Journal of Liberal History 58 Spring 2008 21