DOCSLIB.ORG

20Th July 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
20Th July 2021 Newsletter Charity July 20th Number DUMFRIES 2021 SC021683 This time: (1) Covid; (2) religion discussion group; (3) important note for group leaders; (4) Third Age Trust July Newsletter; (5) George Lansbury. [email protected] (1) Covid With Clive: Clive Brown Covid-38 Update 17 July 2021 The First Minister announced on the 13th July that the whole of Scotland would go down to Level 0 as from the 19th July. This means that for us in Dumfries & Galloway we can now meet socially in groups and go on holiday, with caveats (of course). The main changes are as follows: 1. Up to eight people from up to four households can meet indoors at home. 2. Up to 10 people from up to four households can meet in a public indoor space (a pub or restaurant for example). 3. Up to 15 people from up to 15 households can meet outdoors - whether in a private garden or public place. 4. Up to 200 people can attend weddings and funerals. 5. The requirement to book two-hour slots to go to a pub or restaurant will end, but customers will have to provide contact details, and to wear face coverings when not seated. 6. The limit on the size of events and stadium attendances will rise to 2,000 seated outdoors, 1,000 standing and 400 indoors 7. The guidance against non-essential (holiday) travel to amber list countries will remain, but people who have been fully vaccinated will no longer have to quarantine on return from an amber-list country Despite these freedoms some restrictions will remain in place, for example you must still sanitise hands and wear a face covering when going into any retail premises including any indoor area of a shopping centre. Hospitality venues will close at midnight or follow local licensing rules. In indoor public places, the physical distance requirement will drop from 2m to 1m and apply between people from different household groups. Additionally, while outdoor group gatherings will be limited to 15 people from up to 15 households and no social distancing will be required within the group, until the next announcement from Holyrood, there will be a requirement for 1m distancing between different groups of 15. Sports Groups, e.g., walking, tennis, kayaking etc will need to refer to guidance produced by their relevant Scottish Sport Governing Body and ensure they operate in line with the guidance. The Group leader must reflect that in the risk analyses that are submitted before each group meeting. These rules are different from those in England, and care must be taken if you have to travel to anywhere South of the border. Unfortunately, the Scottish Track and Trace system does not work in England, and we cannot use the English system as it requires you to register using an English home address/postcode. Full details of Level 0 can be found on the Government webpage Stay safe! Clive. [email protected] (2) Religion Discussion group Our group met last week, for a lively discussion of scientology (and the consumption of tea and raspberry muffins!). While we are normally an ‘inside’ group, this was our second successful meeting that took place outside. Our next meeting – also planned for outside – will be on ‘Spiritualism’. If anyone would like to join us, we still have space – as can be seen from the spare seats in the garden! If, like us, you are an ‘inside’ group planning an ‘outside’ meeting, don’t forget that your group leader needs to get a risk assessment form to Clive Brown in advance of the meeting. Also, if you are going to send us a photo along with a report, do note that because of data control regulations, you need to get permission from those in the photo for it to be included in the Newsletter and on the Web Site. (3) Important Note to Group Leaders Due to the significant numbers of nonrenewals of membership for 2021 we urgently need a list of the current members in each activity group in order to update our records. Please make sure that you update Eric Moffat, our Membership Secretary [email protected], with a list of your current members, ASAP (4) Third Age Trust July Newsletter The Third Age Trust have just sent out their July Newsletter. Here is the link to it:https://mailchi.mp/u3a/your-u3a-national-newsletter-july (5) ‘George Lansbury’, David Dutton, History Group This week’s piece is prompted by a discovery I made the other day – news to me anyway and, if of no great historical importance, interesting nonetheless – that the veteran American (though British-born) actress Angela Lansbury (b. 1925) is the grand-daughter of a man who led the British Labour Party in the early 1930s. I’m not competent to say much about Angela Lansbury, though it is impossible not to be impressed by a career which began with an appearance in the film ‘Gaslight’ in 1944 and has continued via Hollywood and Broadway to ‘Murder She Wrote’, still being shown on television today. George Lansbury, however, merits a few words. Angela Lansbury Born in 1859, Lansbury, a committed Christian, came to be regarded with uncritical admiration by many of the rank and file of the Labour Party, a beloved figure whom one criticised at one’s peril. There was something of Michael Foot about him, though others might see parallels with Jeremy Corbyn. According to the historian, AJP Taylor, he was ‘the most lovable figure in modern politics’. But for all the affection he enjoyed, there was also a strong feeling (as with Foot) that he could never become Prime Minister. George Lansbury 1859-1940 Like many other early pioneers of the Labour movement, Lansbury’s first political loyalties were with Gladstonian Liberalism. He, his wife and their young family emigrated to Australia in 1884, but he returned disillusioned a year later and began a career in British politics. He left the Liberals in the early 1890s to form the Bow and Bromley branch of the Marxist Social Democratic Federation, one of the disparate groups that eventually coalesced to form the Labour Party. In 1895 he became the SDF’s national organiser, touring Britain as a propagandist for socialism. Getting into parliament, however, was no easy matter and only after four unsuccessful contests did he finally become the Labour MP for Bow and Bromley in December 1910. In this position he campaigned for social justice for working people and the unemployed, women’s suffrage, world disarmament and the end of imperialism. Disenchanted, however, by Ramsay MacDonald’s parliamentary leadership, he resigned his seat to force a by-election over ‘votes for women’, which he lost. He did not return to the Commons until 1922. Out of parliament, he became editor of the newly founded ‘Daily Herald’ and in 1919 became the first Labour mayor of Poplar, one of the poorest parts of London. For his leading role in the Poplar Rates Revolt of 1921, he was imprisoned and, to this day, ‘Poplarism’ remains for many on the left a symbol of the power of direct action. Ramsay MacDonald 1866-1937 When Labour formed its first-ever government in 1924, there was no place for the popular Lansbury, partly it seems because of opposition from the King. But he entered the cabinet in the second Labour administration of 1929 as First Commissioner of Works. This government ended in disarray when Ramsay MacDonald, to cries of ‘betrayal’, accepted the King’s invitation in 1931 to head an all-party National Government in partnership with Conservatives and Liberals, to deal with the country’s economic crisis. The resulting general election proved to be a massive setback for Labour. While the National Government won a total of 554 seats in parliament, Labour’s representation was reduced from 267 to just 46 seats. Hardly any senior Labour figures survived this rout apart from Lansbury and in November 1931 he was unanimously selected as chairman of the parliamentary party and became party leader less than a year later. At one level Lansbury was an effective leader of the opposition, holding the residual party together after so many senior figures had either ‘defected’ to the National Government or lost their seats. ‘If George Lansbury had left us’, declared Jack Lawson, a former Miners’ leader and junior minister, ‘I should have doubted Christ himself.’ But some thought him too idealistic and detached from the practical world of day-to-day politics. ‘His bleeding heart has run away with his bloody head’ was a common complaint. Certainly, it was Lansbury’s misfortune to be leader at a time when international affairs and, in particular, the rise of fascism were becoming ever more prominent. He himself recognised that it would be difficult for a committed pacifist to lead the Labour Party into a general election (shades, perhaps, of the problems later experienced by the unilateralist Foot in 1983). In the event, matters were taken out of his hands. At the 1935 party conference, Ernest Bevin, leader of the huge Transport and General Workers’ Union, launched a stinging attack: ‘It is placing the executive and the movement in an absolutely wrong position to be hawking your conscience round from body to body asking to be told what you ought to do with it.’ A week later, Lansbury resigned, despite the efforts of the majority of Labour MPs to persuade him to stay on. An unrepentant Bevin declared: ‘Lansbury’s been dressed in saint’s clothes for years, waiting for martyrdom. All I did was set fire to the faggots.’ Lansbury remained a backbench MP until his death in 1940.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Labour Party Is More Than the Shadow Cabinet, and Corbyn Must Learn to Engage with It
    The Labour Party is more than the shadow cabinet, and Corbyn must learn to engage with it blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-labour-party-is-more-than-the-shadow-cabinet/ 1/11/2016 The three-day reshuffle of the shadow cabinet might have helped Jeremy Corbyn stamp his mark on the party but he needs to do more to ensure his leadership lasts, writes Eunice Goes. She explains the Labour leader must engage with all groups that have historically made up the party, while his rhetoric should focus more on policies that resonate with the public. Doing so will require a stronger vision of what he means by ‘new politics’ and, crucially, a better communications strategy. By Westminster standards Labour’s shadow cabinet reshuffle was ‘shambolic’ and had the key ingredients of a ‘pantomime’. At least, it was in those terms that it was described by a large number of Labour politicians and Westminster watchers. It certainly wasn’t slick, or edifying. Taking the best of a week to complete a modest shadow cabinet reshuffle was revealing of the limited authority the leader Jeremy Corbyn has over the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP). Against the wishes of the Labour leader, the Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn and the Shadow Chief Whip Rosie Winterton kept their posts. However, Corbyn was able to assert his authority in other ways. He moved the pro-Trident Maria Eagle from Defence and appointed the anti-Trident Emily Thornberry to the post. He also imposed some ground rules on Hillary Benn and got rid of Michael Dugher and Pat McFadden on the grounds of disloyalty.
    [Show full text]
  • Radical Nostalgia, Progressive Patriotism and Labour's 'English Problem'
    Radical nostalgia, progressive patriotism and Labour©s ©English problem© Article (Accepted Version) Robinson, Emily (2016) Radical nostalgia, progressive patriotism and Labour's 'English problem'. Political Studies Review, 14 (3). pp. 378-387. ISSN 1478-9299 This version is available from Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/61679/ This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies and may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher’s version. Please see the URL above for details on accessing the published version. Copyright and reuse: Sussex Research Online is a digital repository of the research output of the University. Copyright and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable, the material made available in SRO has been checked for eligibility before being made available. Copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way. http://sro.sussex.ac.uk Author’s Post-Print Copy Radical nostalgia, progressive patriotism and Labour's 'English problem' Emily Robinson, University of Sussex ABSTRACT ‘Progressive patriots’ have long argued that Englishness can form the basis of a transformative political project, whether based on an historic tradition of resistance to state power or an open and cosmopolitan identity.
    [Show full text]
  • In a Rather Emotional State?' the Labour Party and British Intervention in Greece, 1944-5
    ORE Open Research Exeter TITLE 'In a rather emotional state?' The Labour party and British intervention in Greece, 1944-5 AUTHORS Thorpe, Andrew JOURNAL The English Historical Review DEPOSITED IN ORE 12 February 2008 This version available at http://hdl.handle.net/10036/18097 COPYRIGHT AND REUSE Open Research Exeter makes this work available in accordance with publisher policies. A NOTE ON VERSIONS The version presented here may differ from the published version. If citing, you are advised to consult the published version for pagination, volume/issue and date of publication 1 ‘IN A RATHER EMOTIONAL STATE’? THE LABOUR PARTY AND BRITISH INTERVENTION IN GREECE, 1944-45* Professor Andrew Thorpe Department of History University of Exeter Exeter EX4 4RJ Tel: 01392-264396 Fax: 01392-263305 Email: [email protected] 2 ‘IN A RATHER EMOTIONAL STATE’? THE LABOUR PARTY AND BRITISH INTERVENTION IN GREECE, 1944-45 As the Second World War drew towards a close, the leader of the Labour party, Clement Attlee, was well aware of the meagre and mediocre nature of his party’s representation in the House of Lords. With the Labour leader in the Lords, Lord Addison, he hatched a plan whereby a number of worthy Labour veterans from the Commons would be elevated to the upper house in the 1945 New Years Honours List. The plan, however, was derailed at the last moment. On 19 December Attlee wrote to tell Addison that ‘it is wiser to wait a bit. We don’t want by-elections at the present time with our people in a rather emotional state on Greece – the Com[munist]s so active’.
    [Show full text]
  • George Lansbury and the Middlesbrough Election of 1906
    A. W. PURDUE GEORGE LANSBURY AND THE MIDDLESBROUGH ELECTION OF 1906 The different elements which came together to form the Labour Representation Committee1 in February 1900 were, when it came to party organisation, at once its strength and its weakness. Labour was not in the position of a totally new political party having to build up a political machine from scratch, rather the LRC was able to utilise and build upon existing organisations: these were the Independent Labour Party, the Fabian Society, those trade unions which supported the LRC, and trades councils throughout the country (the Social Dem- ocratic Federation disaffiliated from the LRC after little more than a year's membership). At both a local and a national level, however, these organisations were often hostile to each other, jealous of their independence and suspicious of attempts by the LRC Executive2 to control them. The early history of the LRC in the North East of England has many examples of the result- of these divisions within the Labour movement. In 1902 the Labour movement in Jarrow and the NEC had been hopelessly split over the question of whether Alexander Wilkie, Secretary of the Shipwrights' Union, or Peter Curran, General Organiser of the Gasworkers' Union, should be LRC candidate for Jarrow. This was much more than an inter-union squabble as Curran was a socialist and leading ILPer while Wilkie was a moderate trade unionist pre- pared to work closely with local Liberalism; Curran's adoption was therefore a victory for the more militant forces within the Labour movement. Many trade unionists in the North East who supported the LRC were opposed to a complete break with Liberalism and especially wished to work harmoniously with the existing Liberal-Labour MPs.
    [Show full text]
  • 'PM Made Me an MP': the Social, Occupational, and Denominational
    ‘PM made me an MP’: the social, occupational, and denominational background of the MPs. This appendix provides brief biographical details of those MPs named as Primitive Methodists or as close associates in Church publications during 1874-1932. It focuses on their social and occupational background and their relationship to the Church. Although most were members, usually local preachers or officials, a minority were, at most, hearers – sometimes merely former Sunday School pupils or occasional attendees at Primitive chapels. Omitted are those MPs who were first elected after Methodist Union. However, Primitive politicians active after 1932 identified during the course of this research were Edwin Gooch, Bertie Hazell, the ‘Welsh Primitive Methodist Marxist’ Harold Davies, Eric Ogden, John Beavan, John Ellis, and Ted Willis – all Labour MPs or Peers.1 In addition to the footnoted sources, the information has been derived from Hansard, Debrett’s House of Commons, census returns and BMD records. The term ‘miners’ agent’, or similar, describes a multiplicity of roles and essentially means a paid union official or elected representative of any rank: essentially a Labour Movement activist. The letters LC indicate those who served as local councillors; many of these, such as John Johnson, were mayors or, like Ben Spoor, leaders of their councils.2 Joseph Arch (1826-1919) Norfolk North Western: 1885-1886 and 1892-1900 Liberal Joseph’s father was an agricultural labourer, as was Arch himself before becoming a national agent of the Agricultural Labourers’ Union. For many years, Arch was a PM local preacher but may have reconciled himself to the Anglican Church in later life.3 4 1 PML, 28 Sep, 626, 1922 and 22 Oct, 821, 1931; Hansard, Lords, 12 December 1973 vol 347 cc1228, 15 June 1976 vol 913 cc448, 26 November 1980 vol 415 cc167, 17 January 1979 vol 960 cc1840, Deb 09 July 1990 vol 521 cc55; 2 Correspondents helpfully suggested that J.A.
    [Show full text]
  • The Challenge of Britain's Jeremy Corbyn
    JANUARY 2015 THE CHALLENGE OF BRITAIN’S JEREMY CORBYN By Jeremy Black Jeremy Black is a professor of history at the University of Exeter and a senior fellow of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He is author of over 100 books, most recently Other Pasts, Different Presents, Alternative Futures (Indiana University Press, 2015) and A Short History of Britain (Bloomsbury, 2015, 2nd ed.). To be congratulated by Hamas, Russia and Syriza on your election may not be what most of us would want, nor to celebrate by singing the Red Flag and making clear one would not bomb ISIS militants in Syria. It is not surprising, however, if you are pro-Russia, pro-Hamas, pro-Hizbullah and pro-IRA. The election of a new head for the Labour Party in Britain, however, raises major questions about the future not only of that party but also of British politics and foreign policy and thus of Britain’s relations with the remainder of the European Union, with the United States, and more generally. The tone of British politics has also radically changed. The Prime Minister’s comment that Jeremy Corbyn posed a clear threat to Britain’s security reflected the hard-left, indeed Marxisant, character of the new Labour leader. The chairman of the Stop the War Coalition has made a range of comments over the years indicating a degree of hostility to the United States and to Britain’s defense profile that are deeply troubling. They are also totally out of line with the tradition of the Labour Party. Not only did it join a coalition government during World War Two, but Labour governments also negotiated the establishment of NATO and the development of the British atom bomb.
    [Show full text]
  • Clement Attlee Was Born on 3 January 1883 in Putney, the Seventh of Eight Children
    P R O F I L E Clement Attlee was born on 3 January 1883 in Putney, the seventh of eight children. His father, Henry Attlee, was a solicitor and senior partner in the firm of Druces and Attlee, whose offices were in the Middle Temple. After being home-schooled, Attlee was educated at the preparatory school Northaw Place and then Haileybury College, both in Hertfordshire. At Haileybury, which had a strong military ethos, Attlee became an enthusiastic member of the Volunteer Rifle Corps. After leaving Haileybury in 1901 Attlee went on to University College, Oxford, where he studied Modern History. He specialised in Italian and Renaissance history and graduated in 1904 with a second-class degree. After leaving Oxford Attlee followed in his father’s footsteps and entered the legal profession, although without any great enthusiasm for it. He had been admitted to the Inner Temple on 30 January 1904, and in the autumn of that year entered the Lincoln’s Inn chambers of Sir Philip Gregory. His father’s connections meant he had already C L E M E N T dined at the Inner Temple; he was called to the Bar in March 1906. In October 1905, Attlee accompanied his brother Laurence to the A T T L E E Haileybury Club, a club in Stepney, East London for working-class boys, run by former Haileybury College pupils. It was connected to B O R N 1 8 8 3 the Territorial Army, and volunteers were expected to become non- D I E D 1 9 6 7 commissioned officers.
    [Show full text]
  • 67 Summer 2010
    For the study of Liberal, SDP and Issue 67 / Summer 2010 / £10.00 Liberal Democrat history Journal of LiberalHI ST O R Y Liberals and the left Matthew Roberts Out of Chartism, into Liberalism Popular radicals and the Liberal Party Michael Freeden The Liberal Party and the New Liberalism John Shepherd The flight from the Liberal PartyLiberals who joined Labour, 1914–31 Matt Cole ‘An out-of-date word’ Jo Grimond and the left Peter Hellyer The Young Liberals and the left, 1965–70 Liberal Democrat History Group Liberal Leaders The latest publication from the Liberal Democrat History Group is Liberal Leaders: Leaders of the Liberal Party, SDP and Liberal Democrats since 1900. The sixty-page booklet contains concise biographies of every Liberal, Social Democrat and Liberal Democrat leader since 1900. The total of sixteen biographies stretches from Henry Campbell-Bannerman to Nick Clegg, including such figures as H. H. Asquith, David Lloyd George, Jo Grimond, David Steel, David Owen and Paddy Ashdown. Liberal Leaders is available to Journal of Liberal History subscribers for the special price of £5 (normal price £6) with free p&p. To order, please send a cheque for £5.00 (made out to ‘Liberal Democrat History Group’) to LDHG, 38 Salford Road, London SW2 4BQ. 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Filenote Enq 2008/5/2-Pcc
    FILENOTE ENQ 2008/5/2-PCC 13 October 2008 ‘Fetters and Roses’ Dinner This was an informal name for a dinner given at the House of Commons on 9 January 1924 for Members of Parliament who had been imprisoned for political or religious reasons. This note is intended to assist identification of as many individuals as possible in a photograph which was donated to the Library, through the Librarian, by Deputy Speaker Mrs Sylvia Heal MP. The original of the photograph will be retained by Parliamentary Archives, while scanned copies are accessible online. A report in The Times the following day [page 12] lists 49 people who had accepted invitations. Some of these were current MPs, while others had been Members in the past and at least two [Mrs Ayrton Gould and Eleanor Rathbone] were to become Members in the future. I have counted 46 people in the photograph, not including the photographer, whose identity is unknown. Mr James Scott Duckers [who never became an MP, but stood as a Parliamentary candidate, against Churchill, in a by- election only a few weeks after the dinner] is described on the photograph as being ‘in the chair’. The Times report also points out that ‘it was explained in an advance circular that the necessary qualification is held by 19 members of the House of Commons, of whom 16 were expected to be present at the dinner’. This raises the question of who the absentees were. One possibility might be George Lansbury [then MP for Poplar, Bow & Bromley], who had been imprisoned twice, in 1913 [after a speech in the Albert Hall appeared to sanction the suffragettes’ arson campaign] and in 1921 [he was one of the Poplar councillors who had refused to collect the rates].
    [Show full text]
  • Labour's Everyman, –
    ch1-2.008 7/8/02 2:44 PM Page 1 Labour’s Everyman, – On April a group of figures appeared on the Northumberland horizon walk- ing slowly in the brilliant sunlight along Hadrian’s Wall. Included in the party were officials of local antiquarian societies, civil servants, businessmen, and newspaper reporters. In the midst was the Cabinet minister from Whitehall: a large-framed seventy-year-old man, with white hair and ruddy face adorned by mutton-chop whiskers, attired in an old alpaca suit and bowler hat. Instantly recognized wherever he went, he possessed an unmistakable ringing voice, in which he greeted everyone as his friend. At Housesteads, the official retinue stopped to concentrate on the silent stones. Characteristically, the minister conversed warmly with the eighty-one-year-old keeper of the fortification, Thomas Thompson, before pondering the moral and political dilemma revealed by the threat of extensive quarrying to the Roman Wall. As the Cabinet minister in the second Labour government responsible for national monuments and historic sites, George Lansbury was steeped in British his- tory. However, he recognized that , tons of quarried stone provided the pos- sibility of permanent employment in a region blighted by the inter-war Depression, but only at the expense of one of the most striking and beautiful stretches of the ancient monument.1 In Britain today, George Lansbury is probably remembered best, not as the First Commissioner of Works, but as the humanitarian and Christian pacifist leader of the Labour Party, apparently out of touch with the realpolitik of European affairs in the s.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legislative Leadership Role, of the British
    THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERSHIP ROLE, OF THE BRITISH PRIME MINISTER by Chia-chin Hsieh I! Bachelor of Arts Tunghai University Taichung, Formosa 1959 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS May, 1964 OKLAHOMA ITATE UNIVER ~!BRARr JM j l9t>5 THE LEGISLATIVE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF THE BRITISH PRIME MINISTER Thesis Approved: ~/rP-7 /Cd_ Thesis Advisor 569616 ii PREFACE The British parliamentary-cabinet system, which is characterized by the fusion of executive and legislative powers, is one of the two most imitated models in the contemporary world. It has produced a responsible type of legislative leadership in which the concentration of authority has been balanced by obligations of political accountability. The Prime Minister, in assuming the leadership of the Government and the House of Commons, must politically render an account of his public mandate to his party, to the House of Commons, and to the electorate. For the past three hundred years, the Prime Minister has gradually usurped the exercise of almost the totality of the formal constitutional powers still nominally vested in the Sovereign and in Parliament. Commencing from rather humble status as chief advisor to the monarchy and then undergoing transformation into the parliamentary agent and custodian over the Monarch, the Prime Minister has become the kingpin of the Government and Parliament. This transformation of the Prime Minister from the position of servant of the Crown and Parliament into master of both is the consequence of the formation of well-disciplined and highly-centralized political parties in Great Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses The British labour party and the League of Nations 1933-5 Corthorn, Paul Steven How to cite: Corthorn, Paul Steven (1999) The British labour party and the League of Nations 1933-5, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/4497/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk THE BRITISH LABOUR PARTY AND THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS 1933-5 PAUL STEVEN CORTHORN THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published without the written consent of the author and information derived from it should be acknowledged. UNIVERSITY OF DURHAM SEPTEMBER 1999 23 THE BRITISH LABOUR PARTY AND THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS 1933-5 PAUL STEVEN CORTHORN THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UMVERSITY OF DURHAM SEPTEMBER 1999 This thesis examines the divisions over foreign policy that emerged within the Labour movement from 1933, and culminated in a debate between its leaders at the 1935 party conference.
    [Show full text]