DOCSLIB.ORG

A “Lingering Diminuendo”?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A “Lingering Diminuendo”? A “Lingering Diminuendo”? The Conference on Devolution 1919-1920 Adam B. Evans School of Law and Politics Thesis submitted to Cardiff University in partial fulfilment for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015 DECLARATION This work has not been submitted in substance for any other degree or award at this or any other university or place of learning, nor is being submitted concurrently in candidature for any degree or other award. Signed ………………………………………… (candidate) Date ………………………… STATEMENT 1 This thesis is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of …………………………(insert MCh, MD, MPhil, PhD etc, as appropriate) Signed ………………………………………… (candidate) Date ………………………… STATEMENT 2 This thesis is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by explicit references. The views expressed are my own. Signed ………………………………………… (candidate) Date ………………………… STATEMENT 3 I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available online in the University’s Open Access repository and for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. Signed ………………………………………… (candidate) Date ………………………… STATEMENT 4: PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BAR ON ACCESS I hereby give consent for my thesis, if accepted, to be available online in the University’s Open Access repository and for inter-library loans after expiry of a bar on access previously approved by the Academic Standards & Quality Committee. Signed ………………………………………… (candidate) Date ………………………… 3 Summary This thesis offers the first detailed assessment of an event that has hitherto been consigned to the margins of the literature on devolution and territorial reform in the United Kingdom, the Conference on Devolution, 1919-1920. Sitting between October 1919 and April 1920, the Conference on Devolution was arguably one of the two moments in the UK’s constitutional history when the territorial constitution was approached in a holistic fashion by policy makers and political elites (the other occasion being the Royal Commission on the Constitution, 1969-1973). The primary aim of this thesis is to provide the first detailed analysis of the Conference on Devolution, to develop a fuller understanding of why it was established, what it debated and why it failed. Secondary to that objective, this thesis will also assess what relevance the Conference has for students of territorial governance in the UK today, at a time when the UK’s constitution is in flux. In pursuit of these objectives, the thesis utilises the ideas and insights on territorial governance of James Bulpitt and James Mitchell, alongside an extensive catalogue of archival evidence, including the previously unstudied (in the context of the Conference on Devolution) personal papers of the Conference’s Secretary, Gilbert Campion. Using this methodology and archival sources, the thesis offers a considerable revision to previous understandings of the Conference on Devolution. It demonstrates that the Conference’s fatal disagreement on how the devolved legislatures should be composed, was not, as has been previously portrayed, just a disagreement at the latter stages of the Conference’s work, but was instead a cleavage that undercut the entirety of the Conference on Devolution. Finally, the thesis highlights the clear resonance between the issues deliberated by the Conference and many of today’s territorial governance debates. 4 Acknowledgements There are many debts that an individual can accrue in the course of their PhD studies and that has certainly been the case in this instance. Firstly, I would like to pay tribute to the assistance and patience displayed by members of staff at the various archives I’ve visited in the course of my research. Many thanks have to go to Colin Harris and his team at the Bodleian Library, Oxford University and the staff at the Parliamentary Archives, the National Library of Wales, the National Archives and the British Library. In addition, I would like to express my gratitude to the fifth Baron Gorell for his kind permission to the use the personal papers of Ronald Barnes, the third Baron Gorell. I have been incredibly fortunate to have had a close network of friends, their support and humour have helped in good days and bad. While this is not an exhaustive list, particular thanks have to go to Steffan Evans, Matt Francis, Rob Jones, Jac Larner, Ed Poole and Lleu Williams. In a similar vein I would like to thank the patience and emotional (and financial) support of my family, in particular my parents and grandparents. During the darker days of this thesis, their love and wisdom proved crucial. I am left with three particularly important people to thank. Firstly, my supervisors, Richard Wyn Jones and Roger Scully. I am incredibly indebted to their perseverance, good sense and commitment. That they have stuck around after some of the earlier chapters they had to read is a testament to their indefatigability. Finally, and most importantly, I want to thank my girlfriend, Shaan. If Richard and Roger have had to endure some mixed days as supervisors, Shaan has had to put up with an even more mixed bag as a partner. Her love, support and patience helped steer me from throwing in the towel during some difficult days and she has been at my side throughout this incredibly intense process. I couldn’t have done this without her. 5 Contents Summary 3 Acknowledgements 4 1 Introduction 7 Part One: Methods and Context Studying the Conference on Devolution 2 26 3 A system in crisis? The background to the Conference on 73 Devolution Part Two: The Conference on Devolution 4 Consensus: the powers to be devolved to the subordinate 149 legislatures 5 A little local difficulty: national or regional devolution and the 174 English Question 6 Wales: a nation, or region? The Conference on Devolution’s 193 Judiciary Sub-Committee 7 Keeping it in the family? The composition of devolution and 231 the relationship between subordinate legislatures and Whitehall. 263 Postscript to Part Two: “That body was not fruitful of useful results”. Responses to the Conference and why it failed. Conclusion: ‘a lingering diminuendo’? The Conference on 8 279 Devolution, 1919-1920 Bibliography 312 Appendices Appendix 1: Members of the Conference on Devolution 336 Appendix 2: Allocation of Powers 349 6 1.1. Introduction: The Conference on Devolution, the case for a re-appraisal. On 3rd February 1920, a draft of the coalition government’s King’s speech concluded with the following words, The Report of the Devolution Committee is anxiously awaited and should it prove favourable to the idea [of devolution to English, Scottish and Welsh subordinate legislatures] immediate steps will be taken to prepare the legislation necessary to give effect to its recommendations (CAB 24/97/48). Britain appeared a week away from a fundamental shift in her constitutional order. A polity that has traditionally been seen as an archetypal unitary state seemed to be on the verge of Home Rule All Round (the North and South of Ireland being dealt with separately with the Government of Ireland Bill that was then completing its final stages in Parliament). Seven days later, however, this commitment had disappeared from the final speech delivered by the Monarch when he re-opened Parliament (HC Deb (5th Series) 10th February 1920 Vol.125 c.5-9); it was never to resurface in any serious way. The “Devolution Committee” referenced in the draft speech was the ‘Conference on Devolution’ which met 32 times between October 1919 and April 1920 (Lowther 1920: 3). Established by the UK Government following a successful resolution calling for the creation of a body to draw up proposals for subordinate legislatures (HC Deb (5th Series) 4th June 1919 Vol.116 c.2126), the Conference debated three key questions (Lowther 1920: 3-6). Firstly, the question of unit size: would devolution be based on regional or national lines, a debate which proved particularly problematic when it came to England. Secondly, it discussed the powers that would be devolved to these legislatures. Thirdly, the Conference grappled with the dilemma of the composition of 7 the subordinate legislatures and their relationship with the Imperial Parliament. While the Conference resolved internal differences to agree that devolution would be on national lines, and to agree the powers to be devolved to these subordinate national legislatures, the Conference ended its work evenly divided on the question of how the subordinate legislatures should be constituted (Lowther 1920: 6-7). In the one camp were advocates of the ‘Grand Council’ plan proposed by the Speaker of the House of Commons, James Lowther. This was an intra-Parliamentary approach to devolution, with the proposed bicameral Grand Councils (each Grand Council would consist of a Council of the Commons and a Council of Peers) for England, Scotland and Wales constituted from existing Parliamentarians (Conference on Devolution 1920: 9). In the case of the lower chambers, the Councils of the Commons, its membership would consist of the MPs from each of those respective nations (Conference on Devolution 1920: 9). As for the upper chambers, the Councils of Peers, they would be composed of Peers, the number in each case being equal to half the number of MPs from their respective nation, selected by the Committee of Selection in the House of Lords (Conference on Devolution 1920: 9). These subordinate legislatures would sit for an initial five year period in a transitory state, with each Grand Council expected by the end of this period to decide whether to move to a system of direct election and become separate institutions from Parliament, to remain as presently constituted or to abolish themselves and return to former Parliamentary arrangements (Conference on Devolution 1920: 11). Unlike Lowther’s intra-Parliamentary approach to devolution, the alternative, proposed by the Liberal MP Murray Macdonald, was far more radical in nature.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Understanding Handwriting, Abbreviations, Dates and More Dan Poffenberger, AG® British Research Specialist ~ Family History Library [email protected]
    Understanding Handwriting, Abbreviations, Dates and More Dan Poffenberger, AG® British Research Specialist ~ Family History Library [email protected] Introduction Searching English records can be daunting enough when you are simply worrying about the time period, content and availability of records. A dive into a variety of records may leave you perplexed when you consider the handwriting styles, Latin, numbering systems, calendar changes, and variety of jurisdictions, record formats and abbreviations that may be found in the records. Objectives The objective of this course is to help you better understand: • Handwriting and Abbreviations • Latin • Numbers and Money • Calendars, Dates, Days, Years • Church of England Church Records Organization and Jurisdictions • Relationships Handwriting and Abbreviations Understanding the handwriting is the most important aspect to understanding older English records. If you can’t read it, you’re going to have a very hard time understanding it. While the term ‘modern English’ applies to any writing style after medieval times (late 1400’s), it won’t seem like it when you try reading some of it. More than 90% of your research will involve one of two primary English writing scripts or ‘hands’. These are ‘Secretary hand’ which was primarily in use from about 1525 to the mid-1600’s. Another handwriting style in use during that time was ‘Humanistic hand’ which more resembles our more modern English script. As secretary and humanistic hand came together in the mid-1600’s, English ‘round hand’ or ‘mixed hand’ became the common style and is very similar to handwriting styles in the 1900’s. But of course, who writes anymore? Round or Mixed Hand Starting with the more recent handwriting styles, a few of the notable differences in our modern hand are noted here: ‘d’ – “Eden” ‘f’ - “of” ‘p’ - “Baptized’ ss’ – “Edward Hussey” ‘u’ and ‘v’ – become like the ‘u’ and ‘v’ we know today.
    [Show full text]
  • Unity in Diversity, Volume 2
    Unity in Diversity, Volume 2 Unity in Diversity, Volume 2: Cultural and Linguistic Markers of the Concept Edited by Sabine Asmus and Barbara Braid Unity in Diversity, Volume 2: Cultural and Linguistic Markers of the Concept Edited by Sabine Asmus and Barbara Braid This book first published 2014 Cambridge Scholars Publishing 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2014 by Sabine Asmus, Barbara Braid and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-5700-9, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-5700-0 CONTENTS Introduction .............................................................................................. vii Cultural and Linguistic Markers of the Concept of Unity in Diversity Sabine Asmus Part I: Cultural Markers Chapter One ................................................................................................ 3 Questions of Identity in Contemporary Ireland and Spain Cormac Anderson Chapter Two ............................................................................................. 27 Scottish Whisky Revisited Uwe Zagratzki Chapter Three ........................................................................................... 39 Welsh
    [Show full text]
  • Law and Constitution
    Commission on Justice in Wales: Supplementary evidence of the Welsh Government to the Commission on Justice in Wales Contents Law and the Constitution 1 History and evolution 1 Problems operating Part 4 of the Government of Wales Act from 2011 onwards 4 Draft Wales Bill (2015) 7 Wales Act 2017 9 Accessibility of the law in Wales (and England) 10 Government and Laws in Wales Bill 12 Implications of creating a Welsh legal jurisdiction 15 Conclusion 18 Mae’r ddogfen yma hefyd ar gael yn Gymraeg. This document is also available in Welsh. © Crown copyright 2018 2 | Supplementary evidence of the WelshWG35635 Government Digital to ISBN the 978-1-78937-837-5 Commission on Justice in Wales Law and the Constitution 1. This paper is supplementary to the Welsh on designing a system of government that is the Government’s submission of 4 June 2018. most effective and produces the best outcomes for It focusses specifically on the law and the legal the people of Wales. Instead we have constitutional jurisdiction and its impact on government in Wales. arrangements which are often complex, confusing It also considers the potential impact of creating and incoherent. a Welsh legal jurisdiction and devolving the justice 5. One of the key junctures came in 2005 with system on the legal professions in Wales. the proposal to create what was to become a fully 2. The paper explores the incremental and fledged legislature for Wales. The advent of full piecemeal way in which Wales’ current system law making powers was a seminal moment and of devolved government has developed.
    [Show full text]
  • JUDGMENT AXA General Insurance Limited and Others (Appellants)
    Michaelmas Term [2011] UKSC 46 On appeal from: [2011] CSIH 31 JUDGMENT AXA General Insurance Limited and others (Appellants) v The Lord Advocate and others (Respondents) (Scotland) before Lord Hope, Deputy President Lord Brown Lord Mance Lord Kerr Lord Clarke Lord Dyson Lord Reed JUDGMENT GIVEN ON 12 October 2011 Heard on 13, 14 and 15 June 2011 Appellant 1st Respondent Richard Keen QC Alan Dewar QC Jane Munro James Mure QC (Instructed by Brodies (Instructed by Scottish LLP) Government Legal Directorate Litigation Division) 2nd Respondent 3rd-10th Respondents Ruth Crawford QC Aidan O’Neill QC John MacGregor Chris Pirie (Instructed by Office of (Instructed by Thompsons the Solicitor to the Solicitors Glasgow Advocate General for Scotland) Scotland Intervener (First Minister Intervener (Attorney of Wales) General for Northern Ireland) Theodore Huckle QC John F Larkin QC Clive Lewis QC Donal Sayers BL (Instructed by Welsh (Instructed by Solicitors Assembly Government for the Attorney General Legal Services for Northern Ireland) Department, Cardiff) Intervener (Friends of the Intervener (Department of Earth Scotland Ltd) Finance and Personnel (Northern Ireland)) Simon Collins Paul Maguire QC Paul McLaughlin BL (Instructed by Patrick (Instructed by Campbell & Co Solicitors) Departmental Solicitor’s Office) LORD HOPE 1. The appellants are insurance companies, whose business includes the writing of employers’ liability insurance policies. They undertake to indemnify the employer in respect of any liability incurred by it for harm or injury arising out of the employer’s negligence. They have brought these proceedings to challenge the lawfulness of an Act of the Scottish Parliament which was passed on 11 March 2009, received the Royal Assent on 17 April 2009 and came into force on 17 June 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • What Happens After an Indecisive Election Result?
    BRIEFING PAPER Number 07163, 9 June 2017 What happens after an By Lucinda Maer indecisive election result? Gail Bartlett Inside: 1. Forming a government after a hung parliament 2. “Caretaker” administrations 3. The meeting of a new Parliament 4. The Queen’s Speech 5. An investiture vote? www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary Number 07163, 9 June 2017 2 Contents Summary 3 1. Forming a government after a hung parliament 5 1.1 What kind of government can form? 5 1.2 Historical precedents 6 1.3 When should an incumbent Prime Minister resign? 7 1.4 How long does government formation take? 9 1.5 Internal party consultation 9 1.6 Role of the House of Commons 10 1.7 Effects of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 10 2. “Caretaker” administrations 12 2.1 What is a “caretaker” administration? 12 2.2 The nature of the restrictions on government action 12 2.3 When do the restrictions end? 13 3. The meeting of a new Parliament 15 3.1 When does a Parliament return? 15 4. The Queen’s Speech 17 4.1 When does the Queen’s Speech take place? 17 4.2 The debate on the Address 17 5. An investiture vote? 19 Cover page image copyright UK Parliament 3 What happens after an indecisive election result? Summary Following the 2017 general election, held on 8 June 2017, the Conservative Party was returned as the largest party, but did not have an overall majority in the House of Commons.
    [Show full text]
  • Law, Counsel, and Commonwealth: Languages of Power in the Early English Reformation
    Law, Counsel, and Commonwealth: Languages of Power in the Early English Reformation Christine M. Knaack Doctor of Philosophy University of York History April 2015 2 Abstract This thesis examines how power was re-articulated in light of the royal supremacy during the early stages of the English Reformation. It argues that key words and concepts, particularly those involving law, counsel, and commonwealth, formed the basis of political participation during this period. These concepts were invoked with the aim of influencing the king or his ministers, of drawing attention to problems the kingdom faced, or of expressing a political ideal. This thesis demonstrates that these languages of power were present in a wide variety of contexts, appearing not only in official documents such as laws and royal proclamations, but also in manuscript texts, printed books, sermons, complaints, and other texts directed at king and counsellors alike. The prose dialogue and the medium of translation were employed in order to express political concerns. This thesis shows that political languages were available to a much wider range of participants than has been previously acknowledged. Part One focuses on the period c. 1528-36, investigating the role of languages of power during the period encompassing the Reformation Parliament. The legislation passed during this Parliament re-articulated notions of the realm’s social order, creating a body politic that encompassed temporal and spiritual members of the realm alike and positioning the king as the head of that body. Writers and theorists examined legal changes by invoking the commonwealth, describing the social hierarchy as an organic body politic, and using the theme of counsel to acknowledge the king’s imperial authority.
    [Show full text]
  • W.I.S.E. Words 1983 2018
    W.I.S.E. words The Newsletter of W.I.S.E. Family History Society Wales – Ireland – Scotland - england Volume 19, Number 4 Denver, Colorado October, November, December 2018 Celebrating 35 Years W.I.S.E. is 35—What Will the Next 35 Years Bring? Volume 19 began with a 35th Anniversary article, and it’s fitting to close with one as well. For the past year I’ve had the opportunity to assemble and peruse 1,090 pages of W.I.S.E. Words and have gleaned these nuggets from our history. Because of the breadth of information contained in over a thousand pages, I concentrated on reading through the Presidents’ messages through the years. One common theme was a smorgasbord of excellent programs through the years, which has allowed our society to fulfill its mission of fostering interest in the Genealogy and Family History of the British Isles, increasing the educational opportunities and knowledge of the society members and the general public, publishing W.I.S.E. Words, and supporting the Denver Public Library with the donation of at least 155 books. Commenting on the quality of the programs, then President James Jeffrey posed the question in 2006, “How many other North American British Isles groups can lay claim to having hosted the President of the Guild of One-Name Studies, first Vice President of the Federation of Family History Societies, Pres- ident of the Federation, and the founder of the Ulster-Scots History and Heritage Soci- ety?” (W.I.S.E. Words, Volume 7, Number 2, April May June 2006, page 16).
    [Show full text]
  • University Gazette
    Vof. VJJJ. JVO. 2. McGILL UNIVERSITY GAZETTE Monday, December \st, 1884. CONTENTS : PAGE. PAGE. EDITORIALS • 3-5 COLLEGE WORLD 9-12 FEDERATION OF THE EMPIRE 5-6 BETWEEN THE LECTURES 12-14 MCGILL NEWS - 7 CORRESPONDENCE 14 SOCIETIES - 8 PERSONALS 14 MONTREAL: PRINTED BY THE BURLAND LITHOGRAPHIC COMPANY. 1884. McGILL UNIVEESITY GAZETTE. MUCMSSTER, HUTCHINSON & WEIR, HEADQUARTERS FOR BARRISTERS, SOLICITORS, &C, 1©2 St. James Street, rt% MOKTREAL. A? DONALD MACMASTER, Q.C. M, HUTCHINSON, B.C.L. R.S. WEIR, B.C.L. F. S. McLENNAN. DRYSDALE'S \k 232 ST. vT-AJVCIES ST. MElm.II. WORKS, BOOKS USED MY ART COURSE, SCMEJYCE TEXT BOOKS, ADVOCATES, THE VARIOUS TIIEOI.OIJIC.1IJ TEXT BOOKS. 151 ST. J-A.MES STEEET, Fnll assortment in stock & snupliecL at Rock Bottom Prices. STUDENTS' NOTE BOOKS, Scribbling Books, See, Sec, <> BEST VALUE IN TOTVJKT.—£>- ft W. ^TW^TE^, Stylographic Pens, Anti-Stylo Pens and Students' Supplies a Specialty. ^.flvocate, Barrister (Jjommi^ioner, ftc,W. DRYSDALE & CO., 131 ST. JAMIS ST111T, 232 St. Terries Street, -A-IJSO MONTREAL. BRANCH STORE: 1423 ST. CATHERINE ST. GREENSHIELDS, McCORKILL & GUERIN, IE. A.: GERTH. ADVOCATES, IMPORTER OF |tarmisr$, jUiurnsip, jlalroto, S^,t m <*^§> w ®s® &>& cg^s w <?fe ws? $&& Chambers : Exchange Bank Building, Briar and Meerschaum Pipes, SULTANS, KHEDIVES AND BEYS EGYPTIAN^CIGARETTES IN BOXES OF 25. 102 ST. FRANCOIS XAVIER ST., Try St-u-3.exi.ts 2v£i2ctTire- MONTREAL, Paces and other Cut Plugs from $1.00 upwards. J. N. GRHENSHIELDS. J. C. MCCORKILL. EDMOND GUERIN 1323 ST. CATHERINE ST., QUEEN'S BLOCK. .A. PERIAED, Law Bookseller, Publisher, ImporterWyVl .
    [Show full text]
  • Northamptonshire Past and Present, No 61
    JOURNAL OF THE NORTHAMPTONSHIRE RECORD SOCIETY WOOTTON HALL PARK, NORTHAMPTON NN4 8BQ ORTHAMPTONSHIRE CONTENTS Page NPAST AND PRESENT Notes and News . 5 Number 61 (2008) Fact and/or Folklore? The Case for St Pega of Peakirk Avril Lumley Prior . 7 The Peterborough Chronicles Nicholas Karn and Edmund King . 17 Fermour vs Stokes of Warmington: A Case Before Lady Margaret Beaufort’s Council, c. 1490-1500 Alan Rogers . 30 Daventry’s Craft Companies 1574-1675 Colin Davenport . 42 George London at Castle Ashby Peter McKay . 56 Rushton Hall and its Parklands: A Multi-Layered Landscape Jenny Burt . 64 Politics in Late Victorian and Edwardian Northamptonshire John Adams . 78 The Wakerley Calciner Furnaces Jack Rodney Laundon . 86 Joan Wake and the Northamptonshire Record Society Sir Hereward Wake . 88 The Northamptonshire Reference Database Barry and Liz Taylor . 94 Book Reviews . 95 Obituary Notices . 102 Index . 103 Cover illustration: Courteenhall House built in 1791 by Sir William Wake, 9th Baronet. Samuel Saxon, architect, and Humphry Repton, landscape designer. Number 61 2008 £3.50 NORTHAMPTONSHIRE PAST AND PRESENT PAST NORTHAMPTONSHIRE Northamptonshire Record Society NORTHAMPTONSHIRE PAST AND PRESENT 2008 Number 61 CONTENTS Page Notes and News . 5 Fact and/or Folklore? The Case for St Pega of Peakirk . 7 Avril Lumley Prior The Peterborough Chronicles . 17 Nicholas Karn and Edmund King Fermour vs Stokes of Warmington: A Case Before Lady Margaret Beaufort’s Council, c.1490-1500 . 30 Alan Rogers Daventry’s Craft Companies 1574-1675 . 42 Colin Davenport George London at Castle Ashby . 56 Peter McKay Rushton Hall and its Parklands: A Multi-Layered Landscape .
    [Show full text]
  • Liberals in Coalition
    For the study of Liberal, SDP and Issue 72 / Autumn 2011 / £10.00 Liberal Democrat history Journal of LiberalHI ST O R Y Liberals in coalition Vernon Bogdanor Riding the tiger The Liberal experience of coalition government Ian Cawood A ‘distinction without a difference’? Liberal Unionists and Conservatives Kenneth O. Morgan Liberals in coalition, 1916–1922 David Dutton Liberalism and the National Government, 1931–1940 Matt Cole ‘Be careful what you wish for’ Lessons of the Lib–Lab Pact Liberal Democrat History Group 2 Journal of Liberal History 72 Autumn 2011 new book from tHe History Group for details, see back page Journal of Liberal History issue 72: Autumn 2011 The Journal of Liberal History is published quarterly by the Liberal Democrat History Group. ISSN 1479-9642 Riding the tiger: the Liberal experience of 4 Editor: Duncan Brack coalition government Deputy Editor: Tom Kiehl Assistant Editor: Siobhan Vitelli Vernon Bogdanor introduces this special issue of the Journal Biographies Editor: Robert Ingham Reviews Editor: Dr Eugenio Biagini Coalition before 1886 10 Contributing Editors: Graham Lippiatt, Tony Little, York Membery Whigs, Peelites and Liberals: Angus Hawkins examines coalitions before 1886 Patrons A ‘distinction without a difference’? 14 Dr Eugenio Biagini; Professor Michael Freeden; Ian Cawood analyses how the Liberal Unionists maintained a distinctive Professor John Vincent identity from their Conservative allies, until coalition in 1895 Editorial Board The coalition of 1915–1916 26 Dr Malcolm Baines; Dr Roy Douglas; Dr Barry Doyle; Prelude to disaster: Ian Packer examines the Asquith coalition of 1915–16, Dr David Dutton; Prof. David Gowland; Prof. Richard which brought to an end the last solely Liberal government Grayson; Dr Michael Hart; Peter Hellyer; Dr J.
    [Show full text]
  • Edmund Burke and the Common Law Tradition Reconsidered
    イギリス哲学研究 第 33 号（2010 年） Edmund Burke and the Common Law Tradition Reconsidered Sora Sato Introduction: John Pocock’s ‘Edmund Burke and the Ancient Constitution’ In The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (first published in 1957, reissued in 1987), J.G.A. Pocock argues: Every one of Burke’s cardinal points, as just enumerated, can be found in Hale rebuking Hobbes, in Coke rebuking James I, or in Davies rebuking the partisans of written law;... From what sources Burke derived it, and with what elements of eighteenth-century thought and his own genius he enriched it, are questions for the specialist; but that Burke’s philosophy is in great measure a revitalization of the concept of custom and the common-law tradition may be safely asserted as part of the present study’s contentions.（1） In his essay entitled ‘Burke and the Ancient Constitution’, （2） Pocock repeats his argument that Burke’s traditionalism should be understood in the context of the common law tradition, and also that Burke was aware of this tradition. At the end of this essay he also writes: in order to explain Burke’s traditionalism, there is no need to suppose more than his continued employment and highly developed understanding of certain concepts which came from the common law (as he [Burke] recognized) and were generally in use ＊ This essay is largely based upon the present author’s MSc dissertation submitted to University of Edinburgh in August 2009. I would like to thank Professors Thomas Ahnert, Harry Dickinson, Tamotsu Nishizawa, Kenji Fujii and two anonymous referees for their valuable comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Mr David Cameron MP Mr George
    UKSA UK Shareholders Association Chislehurst Business Centre Mr David Cameron MP 1 Bromley Lane Mr George Osborne MP Chislehurst Mr Nick Clegg MP BR7 6LH Mr Vince Cable MP Phone: 020 8468 1027 Mr Gordon Brown MP Email: [email protected] Web: www.uksa.org.uk Mr Alistair Darling MP 5th May 2010 From the UKSA Northern Rock Shareholders' Action Group Open Letter to Prospective Members of Parliament ‘Fairness’ (the impact on Northern Rock and its small shareholders). There has been much quoting of ‘Fairness’ by Politicians in this election campaign. But just how fairly have Rock small shareholders been treated by the outgoing Government - surely the most ‘spin conscious’, disingenuous and morally bankrupt administration in living history? Gordon Brown apparently now accepts, finally, that he helped cause the Banking Crisis when he relaxed the regulations on the Banks, allowing all the banks to lend excessively from cheap borrowed money, i.e. to do exactly what the Government wanted, and encouraged in fact. The resulting taxes were very welcome, no doubt. Don’t take this letter the wrong way. This is not an attack solely on Mr Brown, his Chancellor or his party; Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg (and your respective Chancellors and parties) are jointly and severally liable to the former shareholders and the UK public at large. Failure of control: Then the new ‘light touch’ handling by a confused and muddled ‘tripartite’ regime let the country down, and so, when funding dried up on wholesale markets we had the infamous ‘don’t panic’ leak and then the catastrophic first bank run for over 100 yrs.
    [Show full text]