J. A. Blyth ' ' I i J GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI: .. IMAGES" IN VICTORIAN POLITICS I THP. ELECTORATE OF OUR AGE is naturally inclined to judge the worth of a political party from the image projected by the leader. This might be attributed largely to television, but this type of political appeal is far from being a recent phenomenon. There were, in nineteenth-century Britain, two politicians whose ability as image builders has rarely been surpassed-William Gladstone and Benjamin Disraeli. It is revealing to note at the outset that recent British prime ministers have paid tribute to these two Victorian giants. Harold Macmillan carried the idea of Tory Democracy into the 1960s and regarded Disraeli as his hero. Harold Wilson, on the other hand, has looked upon Gladstone as his political model. Partisanship towards Disraeli can be detected when Macmillan is described as the last of the great Victorians, but the political dexterity of the Labour chief merely earns him the description of "Slippery Wilson". The duel between Gladstone and Disraeli began when they emerged as the leaders of the Liberal and of the Conservative party, at the time when the Second Reform Bill was being passed, between 1866 and 1867. Democracy was slowly gaining upon a still well-entrenched aristocracy as a result of the partial enfranchisement of the working class. Both party Leaders mapped out their tactics accordingly, while having to carefully consider the characteristics of their own party. For the careers of Disraeli and Gladstone had been closely linked to the development of their parties in the previous twenty years. Since Disraeli had led the attack upon Sir Robert Peel in 1846, the Conservatives had been consistently in a minority position. Eventually, however, the fortunes of the Conservative party began to revive in 1866, principally because of Dis­ raeli's brilliant tactical manoeuvring in parliament. Largely because Disraeli ex­ ploited a split in the Liberal party concerning the Reform Bill of 1867, the measure was carried in the name of the Conservative party. The new party platforms, following 1867, are broadly summarized by the terms Gladstonian Liberalism and Tory Paternalism. While there were differences between these "IMAGES" IN VICTORIAN POLITICS 389 two party creeds, both parties in practice continued to adopt a Peelite stance­ if by the term Peelite we mean a policy that has a tender regard for the pocket books of the middle class. It was an earnest age when public figures professed to be influenced by moral issues. The character of a leader was held to be of paramount im­ portance. To his followers, a leader symbolized all the positive virtues of respectability, integrity, and progress. Political passion was aroused by inci­ dents which indicated the possession, or absence, of these personal virtues. So, while a leader presented himself to his supporters as a model of virtue he might, on the other hand, be seen by his opponents as a villainous master of deception. Thus, depending upon one's party colouring, Gladstone was either morally upright or full of humbug. Disraeli had either educated his party, or was a shameless Jewish adventurer seeking in his own words to climb "to the top of the greasy pole." The contrasting personalities of the rivals accen­ tuated the apparent cleavage in their philosophies. Gladstone was like a white-haired patriarch leading the faithful into the promised land while thundering anathemas at the heretics he discovered on the way. Gladstone started as a Tory representing a rotten borough and moved steadily to the left, until he was tt confirmed radical. In this journey he passed Disraeli moving in the opposite direction and identified him as the major heretic. It is possible to equate these political journeys to the actual physical movements of the rivals when they changed their place of residence, or their constituency. Disraeli progressed to Hughenden Manor, which is essentially on the road from Westminster to Oxford: yet more significantly Hughenden is closer to the royal residence at Windsor Castle. Undoubtedly Disraeli found it easier to approach political influence and social prestige by way of royal favour than by approaching the Tory bastion of Oxford University. Gladstone on the other hand started out from Oxford and began a political retreat that took him through Lancashire, until he arrived in the safe Liberal stronghold of Scotland. Disraeli's progress from radical to conservative was illustrated by the remarkable change in his style of dress. ln his early career, he had dressed in green velvet trousers and a canary-coloured waistcoat; by 1847 he had adopted sombre black. When Disraeli made his brilliant attack upon Sir Robert Peel, he acquired a lifelong hostility from Peel's protege, the youthful Gladstone, who observed that while Disraeli's doctrine was false, the man was more false than his doctrine. As Gladstone is usually acknowledged to have been a great Christian moralist, this assessment indicates the intensity of his dislike for his rival. ·when in turn the Conservative leader made his appraisal of his op- I I 390 THE DALHOUSIE REVIEW ponent, he did not mince words. Disraeli wrote: "Posterity will do justice to that unprincipled maniac (Gladstone) ... with one commanding characteristic whether praying, speechifying, or scribbling ... never a gentleman!"1 Both politicians were obviously willing to cry foul when confronted by the pro­ fessed creed and manoeuvres of the other, and such an attitude could hardly fail to rub off on their supporters. In such a political climate the term "party warfare" became an appropriate description: for while that generation did not have television, the parliamentary debates were read verbatim. Everything that Gladstone and Disraeli said was carefully scrutinized, while Punch, the music hall, and discussion in the public bars were generally able to add a little fuel to any political conflagration. Much of the fervour that was generated in the party ranks stemmed from nationalistic feelings. Gladstonian Liberalism was basically concerned about liberating someone. This concept had particular force when applied to the Celtic fringe, and the Irish were the main beneficiaries of this liberating process, which started by the reduction of the power of an alien church, and finished with attempts to secure Home Rule. Scotland backed Gladstone in his assault upon the institutions of the Sassenach, for he was the only political leader who could be considered Scottish.~ In Wales, also, Celtic nationalism­ which was equated with "chapel" religion-made a wide appeal. One may speculate on what might have happened if Disraeli had adopted the tactic of "Home Rule all round". A proposal of separate parliaments at Dublin, Edin­ burgh, and Cardiff would have stirred Conservative support in the Celtic fringe. Yet vanquishing the Liberals in this fashion might have split again a Conservative party that had only just gained power after twenty-eight years in the political wilderness. At the moment, Prime Minister Wilson looks as if he is going to try to tread the liberating path by proposing home rule for Scot­ land and Wales, but, in view of recent municipal returns, this move seems to be more of a salvage operation. Disraeli espoused the cause of English interests, and this helps to explain his electoral appeal in the south of England. These interests naturally included defending the established church against the assaults of the Liberation Society, which was linked to the nonconformist wing of the Liberal party. The re­ ligious tolerance of Gladstone put him in a peculiar position, because it almost seemed as though he was the leader of an assault on the Anglican establish­ ment, which was being gallantly defended by a Jew. Most of the new work­ ing-class electorate evinced little interest in the niceties of religious scuffling, "IMAGES" IN VICTORIAN POLITICS 391 and religion was generally the preoccupation of the middle class.3 What seem,s significant about the religious apathy of the masses is that it helps to account for the popularity of jingoism as an emotional outlet. After Disraeli displaced Gladstone as Prime Minister the imperial pro­ gramme began to add new aspects. One reason for some of the more fantastic dements was that Disraeli liked romantic, aristocratic notions. So, surprisingly, did Queen Victoria; who welcomed a remarkable conversion from a virtual recluse to the elevated position of a faerie Empress of India. As Victoria emerged as a sort of Asian mystery, the secularly minded working class had a symbol with which they could identify. Disraeli's real achievement was in realizing that some upper-class Eng­ lishmen wanted to be recognized as the moral leaders of the world. One has only to take a trip through the cathedrals and churches of England to see evi­ dence of this desire for leadership. On the church walls are the innumerable plaques of remembrance to the nineteenth-century figures who answered a call to serve overseas. Their deeds, proudly inscribed for posterity, provide a record of imperialism. The overwhelming proliferation of Victorian memorials in the cathedrals makes it seem at times as if they are the main element sustain­ ing the walls. In one sense this may be quite appropriate, as they usually re­ flect the muscular form of Christianity preached by such men as Thomas Arnold of Rugby. Winston Churchill was moulded at Harrow into a view of Empire that he carried all his life. When it was launched in 1872, imperial­ ism was seen by Disraeli merely as a form of assertive nationalism. He had no intention of becoming involved in costly wars; but, unfortunately, the same could not be said of prancing proconsuls in Africa and Asia, and Mr. Gladstone did not fail to point out errors in the policy of his rival.