For the study of Liberal, SDP and Issue 47 / Summer 2005 / £7.50 Liberal Democrat history

Journal of LiberalHI ST O R Y

Liberals of the Right? Tony Little Left and Right in Victorian Liberalism Ian Packer From Left to Right? The career of John Morley Jaime Reynolds ‘The Last of the Liberals’ Biography of Francis Wrigley Hirst Martin Farr Left, Right December 1916: The forward march of Liberals halted Robert Ingham Battle of ideas or absence of leadership? Liberals in the 1940s and 1950s Liberal Democrat History Group HISTORY GROUP NEWS Contribute to it be  words or , will also contribute valuable or policy-making, or party words long. material. organisation). Liberal Democrat We also, however, need to Guidance will be given history interview a number of key with questions and interview Be honest party figures – and for that techniques. he Liberal Democrat This is the most important we need help! If you are able to help, History Group is trying thing about any story on this please write to Robert Ing- Tto establish an archive site. We want it to be a accu- ham, the Journal’s Biographies of personal recollections of rate and authentic. Interviewers needed Editor, who is coordinating party history. We would like to hear from the project, at: We’d like as many read- anyone willing to volunteer • biographies@liberalhisto ers of the Journal as possible What will happen to your some time to interview a ry.org.uk; or to send us your Liberal, SDP story? small number of key Liberal •  Beltinge Road, Herne and Liberal Democrat anec- Our main aim is to ensure (or SDP or Liberal Demo- Bay, Kent CT DB dotes and recollections: every that the party’s ‘folk crat) activists about their story is vital. memory’ is preserved. period in the party, and their Cover illustration: Cover of Your contributions will be experience in particular areas Liberal Magazine, January archived and we will aim (campaigning, for example, 1947 What sort of information to make them accessible are we looking for? for researchers through our We’re looking for personal website, the Journal of Liberal recollections and information History and other publica- from people who have been tions. The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism active (or whose forebears Edited by Paul Marshall and David Laws were active) in the Liberal, The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism is an important Social Democrat or Liberal Send contributions to: collection of essays about the future policy direction of Democrat parties. Liberal Democrat His- the Liberal Democrats, written by some of the Party’s tory Group Liberal Archive brightest and youngest MPs and MEPs. project, at: What are our main areas • biographies@liberalhisto At a time when the Liberal Democrats are incresaingly of interest? ry.org.uk; or moving from being a party of protest to a party of Our interest ranges across the •  Beltinge Road, power, leading Liberal Democrats set out a clear liberal whole history of the Liberal Herne Bay, Kent CT agenda for 21st century politics. The authors seek to Democrats and its predeces- DB re-establish the links between traditional liberalism sors from the nineteenth cen- – personal, political , economic and social – and tury to the present day. current policy solutions. We would like to hear Authors include memories of party personali- Oral history Paul Marshall, ties, elections, local constitu- nother related History David Laws, ency history, triumphs and Group project is a new Edward Davey, disappointments. publication: an Oral Nick Clegg, Whatever your experi- A History of twentieth century Christopher ence, you are welcome to Liberalism – a thematic study Huhne, Vince contribute. If you have or of the Liberal Party and lib- Cable, Susan know of party records or eralism, drawing upon inter- Kramer, Mark other documentary material views with Liberal activists Oaten, Steve that might be of historical and politicians, as well as Webb and Jo interest please give us details. autobiographical sources. Holland. Many of the necessary Published in 2004 interviews have already been Large or small by Profile Books, conducted, for other pur- Maybe your story is a brief £8.99 – available poses (such as PhD theses), anecdote, or maybe it’s a at all good and we hope that the new lifetime memoir. Feel free bookshops. Liberal Archive (see left) to write your story whether

2 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 Journal of Liberal History Issue 47: Summer 2005 The Journal of Liberal History is published quarterly by the Liberal Democrat History Group. ISSN 1479-9642 Liberals of the Right? 4 Editor: Duncan Brack Jaime Reynolds introduces this special issue of the Journal Deputy Editor: Sarah Taft Assistant Editor: Siobhan Vitelli Biographies Editor: Robert Ingham Left and right in Victorian Liberalism 8 Reviews Editor: Dr Eugenio Biagini Tony Little examines the meaning of terms in the political spectrum of the Deputy Reviews Editor: Tom Kiehl Victorian era. Patrons From left to right? The career of John Morley 16 Dr Eugenio Biagini; Professor Michael Freeden; Biography of John Morley (1838–1923), the leading Victorian and Edwardian Professor John Vincent Liberal who could be seen as both of the ‘left’ and the ‘right; by Ian Packer. Editorial Board ‘The last of the Liberals’ 22 Dr Malcolm Baines; Dr Roy Douglas; Dr Barry Doyle; Dr David Dutton; Professor David Gowland; Dr Richard Jaime Reynolds examines the career and political thought of Francis Wrigley Grayson; Dr Michael Hart; Peter Hellyer; Ian Hunter; Hirst (1873–1953). Dr J. Graham Jones; Tony Little; Professor Ian Machin; Dr Mark Pack; Dr Ian Packer; Dr John Powell; Jaime Left, right: December 1916 – The forward 30 Reynolds; Iain Sharpe march of Liberals halted Editorial/Correspondence Was the disastrous Liberal split of 1916 a matter of personalities or Contributions to the Journal – letters, articles, and ideologies? Martin Farr considers the evidence. book reviews – are invited. The Journal is a refereed publication; all articles submitted will be reviewed. Battle of ideas or absence of leadership? 36 Contributions should be sent to: Robert Ingham analyses the ideological struggle in the Liberal Party in the Duncan Brack (Editor) 1940s and 1950s. 38 Salford Road, London SW2 4BQ email: [email protected] Liberals and the New Right 45 All articles copyright © Journal of Liberal History. Biography of Arthur Seldon (1916– ), erstwhile Liberal and founder of the Institute for Economic Affairs; by John Meadowcroft and Jaime Reynolds. Advertisements Full page £100; half page £60; quarter page £35. David Owen and the social market economy 52 Discounts available for repeat ads or offers to readers (e.g. discounted book prices). To place ads, please Duncan Brack looks at the Owenite concept of the ‘social market, and how it contact the Editor. was used as a political weapon.

Subscriptions/Membership Reviews 60 An annual subscription to the Journal of Liberal Paul Marshall and David Laws (eds.): The Orange Book: Reclaiming History costs £15.00 (£7.50 unwaged rate). This Liberalism, reviewed by Eugenio Biagini and Duncan Brack; David McKie: includes membership of the History Group unless you Jabez – The Rise and Fall of a Victorian Rogue, reviewed by Graham Lippiatt. inform us otherwise. The institutional rate is £25.00.

Overseas (non-UK) subscribers should add £5.00; or, a special three-year rate is available for £55.00 (individuals) or £85.00 (institutions).

Online subscriptions cost £35.00. In addition to printed copies, online subscribers will be able to access online copies of current and past Journals. Overseas online subscriptions are available for £40.00 per year, or £100 for three years.

Cheques (payable to ‘Liberal Democrat History Group’) should be sent to:

Patrick Mitchell 6 Palfrey Place, London SW8 1PA; email: [email protected] Liberal Democrat History Group The Liberal Democrat History Group promotes the discussion and research of historical topics relating to the histories of the Liberal Democrats, Liberal Party, and SDP, and of Cover design concept: Lynne Featherstone Liberalism. The Group organises discussion meetings and produces the Journal and other Published by the Liberal Democrat History Group, c/o occasional publications. 38 Salford Road, London SW2 4BQ For more information, including details of publications, back issues of the Journal, tape Printed by Kall-Kwik, records of meetings and archive and other research sources, see our website at: 426 Chiswick High Road, London W4 5TF www.liberalhistory.org.uk. July 2005 Chair: Tony Little Honorary President: Lord Wallace of Saltaire

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 3 ‘I am a nineteenth-century Liberal. So is Mrs Thatcher. That is what this government is all about.’ Sir John Nott, Conservative Minister in the s

‘The picture generally given of the relative position of the three parties does more to obscure than to elucidate their true relations. They are usually represented as different positions on a line, with the socialists on the left, the conservatives on the right, and the liberals somewhere in the middle. Nothing could be more misleading.’ F. A. Hayek, Why I Am Not a Conservative ()

‘Liberalism has always been about enterprise, competition and markets …’ Charles Kennedy ()

Jaime Reynolds asks whether it is meaningful to apply the terms left and right to the British Liberal Democrat tradition. And what do we mean by the ‘Liberal Right’ in this special edition of the Journal of Liberal History – LIBERALS OF

4THE Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005RIGHT? LIBERALS OF THE RIGHT?

or much of the past (Left): Liberal The articles in this special issue to shape its own environment; century, the question election slogan, look at various aspects of this the Right makes terms with the of where Liberals stand 1929 ‘right-wing’, predominantly eco- environment that surrounds it. – on the right, centre nomic liberal, tradition in Liberal The Left tries to impose a pattern or left – has come up Democrat history. upon nature: the Right accepts it Fagain and again, posed by pundits, All the authors have as it is.’ the media, the voters, and not least approached this task with some But these meanings do not by many Liberals themselves. trepidation, aware of the various help much in characterising the For some the answer is definitional pitfalls and politi- economic liberals in the Liberal straightforward: the Liberals are cal sensitivities involved. Read- Party. For much of the nine- on the left and always have been, ers should take special note of teenth century, advocacy of lais- even if over their long history the the question mark after ‘Liberals sez-faire and small government meanings attached to the term of the Right?’ in the title of this was a cause of the left rather than have altered. As Elliott Dodds put issue: we are not saying that these the right. The left was the stand- it: ‘by any strict use of language currents are necessarily ‘right- ard bearer of libertarian ideas and Liberals are the true Left, the real wing’, just that they are some- economic individualism. As Tony progressives’. According to this times regarded as such. We hope Little brings out in his article on view, the dominant ideology of that the articles shed some light Victorian Liberalism, parties were the party has evolved over time in ‘They run on this issue, with its complexi- concerned more with the distri- response to changing conditions ties and inconsistencies, even if bution of power than of income, but, viewed in a historical con- to the right not every reader agrees with the of privilege rather than class. The text, Liberalism has always stood labelling of particular personali- left – the Liberals and Radicals on the left. The so-called ‘right’ of Labour ties or ideas. – fought aristocratic privilege, in the party are simply those in Tory Each author has had an entirely religious inequality and eco- who got left behind as the domi- free hand to look at the question nomic discrimination by curbing nant Liberal ideology adapted to constitu- and there has been no attempt to the power and expenditure of the changing conditions. They were lay down any common defini- (aristocratic) state. They sought sidelined and mostly absorbed encies, to tions of left and right to be fol- to liberate markets distorted in into the Conservative camp. lowed, or to come to any shared favour of powerful traditional Others would reject the whole the left overall conclusion. interests through free trade. The idea of applying the concept of of Labour ‘right’ of the party was the Whigs, left and right to the Liberal Party but they differed from the Radi- and its history. They argue that in Labour Liberals of the right? cals over the pace of change and Liberalism is a distinct political How far is it justified to describe the preservation of aristocratic philosophy that cannot be located constituen- the classical economic liberal tra- property rights, not on economic meaningfully on a linear left– dition as being on the right? philosophy or the role of the state right spectrum. The terms are too cies and It is notoriously difficult to vis-à-vis the individual. simplistic and one-dimensional in this define precisely what ‘left’ and Victorian laissez-faire Lib- to explain the Liberal outlook. ‘right’ mean. The terms originally eralism was anything but a con- The Liberals’ mission has always Parliament arose some two hundred years ago servative force, and similarly in been rejection of the left–right to describe the seating of factions the twenty-first century market straitjacket and the class-based we are in the French national assembly liberalism is a dynamic ideology notions that underlie it. It follows with the upholders of the status challenging the status quo across that to speak of the ‘Liberal right’ going to quo and authority on the right the globe. is meaningless. make them and more radical and libertarian It was in the half-century A third view is that there is elements on the left. Thus the after  that economic liberal- indeed a Liberal ‘right’ in the choose.’ quintessential laissez-faire lib- ism came to seem outdated and sense of those who adhered to eral Bastiat sat together with the reactionary, as class-based politics economic liberal ideas and can Tony Blair, socialist/anarchist Proudhon on and collectivism became domi- be seen as representing a tradition the extreme left of the Assembly. nant. Figures who would previ- from nineteenth-century classical speaking of Later the left became asso- ously have been regarded as being and Cobdenite Liberalism down the Liberal ciated with a belief in political on the radical left of the party, to the Orange Book today. This action to tackle poverty and social such as John Morley, were, as Ian wing of the party emphasised the Democrats disadvantage and to enhance eco- Packer describes, increasingly importance of open markets, free nomic prosperity and security, seen as ‘right-wing’ in clinging competition, sound money, con- (House of generally through collective and to unfashionable individualism. trol of public expenditure, and state intervention. As one Liberal Francis Hirst typified those Lib- economic efficiency. Whether it Commons, put it, a key ‘difference between erals who would have liked noth- is accurately described as being 17 May Left and Right, Liberal and Tory, ing better than to turn the clock on the right is a question that we Radical and Conservative … is back to Victorian times. However, will come to in a moment. 2005) this: the Left tries consciously they saw themselves as upholding

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 5 LIBERALS OF THE RIGHT? the achievements of progress ‘We must ‘right-wing’ on the grounds of supplanted by the new social and enlightenment against the association with the Conserva- Liberalism from the late nine- regressive forces of autocracy and continue tive Party. There is no correlation teenth century, rapidly withered mercantilism. As Robert Ingham between economic philosophy and died before , but was comments on the debates in the to reclaim and the secessions of Liberals to reborn in Conservative ideology s and s, ‘it seems simple to the Conservatives. Joseph Cham- under Mrs Thatcher – is hardly brand the individualists as right- economic berlain was the most prominent adequate. wing and the radicals as left-wing; liberalism; radical interventionist in Victo- The transition from nine- but this would have been bit- rian Liberalism, and after siding teenth to twentieth-century Lib- terly contested by the s free and marry with the Tories became the lead- eralism may well have been not traders who regarded themselves ing protagonist of protectionism so much a shift as a synthesis of as radicals and the other side as economic and Empire. Similarly in the  economic and social liberal con- essentially conservative’. Liberal split described by Martin cerns, which continued to influ- Nor is it straightforward to liberal- Farr, it was certainly not the tradi- ence the mainstream of Liberal categorise economic liberalism as ism to tional economic right that ended thought up to the present, though ‘right-wing’ on the grounds that up in coalition with the Con- at times one or the other has been it favours a negative (removing our social servatives. In , the Liberal dominant. Eugenio Biagini notes impediments to freedom) rather Nationals abandoned free trade the ‘remarkable degree of consist- than positive (actively creating liberalism, and acquiesced in Tory protec- ency and continuity’ in Liberal the conditions to achieve poten- tionism and corporatism, while thinking on these issues, and the tiality) view of liberty. Many on in order in the s, as Robert Ingham considerable extent to which the economic right of the Lib- to deliver shows, for many Liberals free ‘new Liberal’ ideas were rooted in eral Party have accepted much of trade remained central in assert- the older free trade economics of the positive view of liberty and more ing their distinctiveness from global interdependence. In other specifically rejected laissez-faire. the Conservatives. Finally, in the words Liberals have continued to The debate has been about means opportu- s, David Owen’s ‘social mar- be preoccupied with all aspects rather than ends – how to achieve ket’, analysed by Duncan Brack, of what Keynes called ‘the politi- the conditions for liberty: through nity and was an attempt to harness market cal problem of mankind … to state control and management, freedom to economics to social justice as a combine three things; Economic redistributive taxation and pub- centre-left (at least to begin with) Efficiency, Social Justice, and lic provision; or through market all our citi- alternative to Thatcherism. Individual Liberty …’ As John instruments, diffusion of owner- Meadowcroft and I describe, even ship, and mutual and voluntary zens …’ economic liberals such as Arthur means? Certainly economic lib- Reclaiming economic Seldon, who were later closely erals tend to be more sceptical David liberalism associated with the Thatcher ‘rev- about state and collective action Laws MP When The Orange Book declared olution’, continued to look to the and more confident in market that Liberals should reclaim Liberal and not the Conservative solutions than social liberals, but (Orange their economic liberal heritage, Party as their natural home down in Liberal thinking the divide many Liberals were uncomfort- to the s. between the two has been less Book, able with what they saw as an Liberals have tended to see fundamental than is sometimes attempt to shift the party to the economics in this way: as inte- suggested. Recent scholarship has p.40) right, back on to ground that had grated with wider Liberal objec- questioned the sharp distinction long ago been relinquished to the tives. Thus free trade meant not conventionally made between Conservatives. only open markets and competi- early Victorian ‘negative’ con- It also raised a variety of tion, but was linked to concepts cepts of liberty and late Victorian questions. What was the herit- of international order and peace, ‘positive’ liberty, and in particular age? When and how was it lost? human rights, and removing the association of state interven- Was it right-wing? Had it been social privilege. It is a very differ- tion with the latter. Laissez-faire taken over by the Tories intact, ent focus from the free-enterprise liberalism incorporated the idea or distorted by them into some- economics of the Conservative of ethical development through thing else? tradition, which historically has ‘character’. Positive libertarianism The articles in this special had an anti-socialist and corpora- did not necessarily imply support issue suggest some answers to tist (pro-business) thrust, or more for extensive state intervention. these questions, but they can recently under Thatcherism, was Economic liberal concerns also only scratch the surface of what propelled by an agenda of raising permeated the thinking of many remains a fundamental and still national competitiveness and roll- on the Liberal ‘left’ from the New largely unexplored area of Liberal ing back trade union power. With Liberals through Keynes and Bev- history. its authoritarian and national- eridge to Grimond. The customary view of what istic overtones, it has been aptly It would also be inaccurate to happened – that hardnosed Man- summed up as ‘the free economy classify the economic liberals as chester-school laissez-faire was and the strong state’, a far cry

6 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LIBERALS OF THE RIGHT? from the traditional Liberal per- Dr Jaime Reynolds is guest-editor of ‘The [Liberal] Party cannot be spective. this special issue. He studied at LSE entirely identified with liberalism What does seem clear is that and has written extensively on British in the sense of personal freedom. reading back into Liberal history and East European political history. The Liberals have paid a little too the preconceptions, position- much regard to the left-right cat- ing and labels of current politi-  Guardian,  September . egorisation of the commentator. cal debates is likely to confuse  An Agenda for a Liberal Society for the In the economic field this has st Century, July . rather than clarify understand-  M. Bonham Carter, Radical Alternative at times made them excessively ing of the issues. (London, ), p. . shy of proclaiming a belief in an I hope that this special issue  H. S. Jones, Victorian Political Thought intelligently managed free mar- will contribute to a reassessment (London, ), pp. –. ket lest it damage their claim to a of the party’s rich and distinctive  J. M. Keynes, Essays in Persuasion left-wing label.’ (), London . economic liberal heritage that  A. Gamble, The Free Economy and the Samuel Brittan Left or Right will be uncluttered with concerns Strong State – the Politics of Thatcherism – the Bogus Dilemma (London about whether it sits on the right, (Macmillan, ) ), p. the left or the centre.

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.

Aneurin Williams and Liberal internationalism and pacificism, Political life and times of Josiah Wedgwood MP. Study of the 1900–22. A study of this radical and pacificist MP (Plymouth 1910; political life of this radical MP, hoping to shed light on the question North West Durham/Consett 1914–22) who was actively involved in of why the Labour Party replaced the Liberals as the primary popular League of Nations Movement, Armenian nationalism, international representatives of radicalism in the 1920s. Paul Mulvey, 112 Richmond co-operation, pro-Boer etc. Any information relating to him and Avenue, London N1 0LS; [email protected]. location of any papers/correspondence welcome. Barry Dackombe. 32 Recruitment of Liberals into the Conservative Party, 1906–1935. Ashburnham Road, Ampthill, Beds, MK45 2RH; [email protected]. Aims to suggest reasons for defections of individuals and develop an Cornish Methodism and Cornish political identity, 1918–1960s. understanding of changes in electoral alignment. Sources include Researching the relationship through oral history. Kayleigh Milden, personal papers and newspapers; suggestions about how to get hold of Institute of Cornish Studies, Hayne Corfe Centre, Sunningdale, Truro TR1 the papers of more obscure Liberal defectors welcome. Cllr Nick Cott, 1a 3ND; [email protected]. Henry Street, Gosforth, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE3 1DQ; N.M.Cott@ncl. ac.uk. Letters of Richard Cobden (1804–65). Knowledge of the whereabouts of any letters written by Cobden in private hands, SDP in Central Essex. Contact with anyone who had dealings with autograph collections, and obscure locations in the UK and abroad for a the area, and in particular as many former SDP members of the complete edition of his letters. Dr A. Howe, Department of International area as possible, with a view to asking them to take part in a short History, London School of Economics, Houghton Street, London WC2A questionnaire. Official documents from merger onwards regarding the 2AE; [email protected]. (For further details of the Cobden Letters demise of the local SDP branches and integration with the Liberals Project, see www.lse.ac.uk/collections/cobdenLetters/). would also be appreciated. Elizabeth Wood, The Seasons, Park Wood, Doddinghurst, Brentwood, Essex CM15 0SN; [email protected]. Liberal foreign policy in the 1930s. Focussing particularly on Liberal anti-appeasers. Michael Kelly, 12 Collinbridge Road, Whitewell, Student radicalism at Warwick University. Particulary the files affair Newtownabbey, Co. Antrim BT36 7SN; [email protected]. in 1970. Interested in talking to anybody who has information about Liberal Students at Warwick in the period 1965-70 and their role in Liberal Party and the wartime coalition 1940–45. Sources, campus politics. Ian Bradshaw, History Department, University of particularly on Sinclair as Air Minister, and on Harcourt Johnstone, Warwick, CV4 7AL; [email protected] Dingle Foot, Lord Sherwood and Sir Geoffrey Maunder (Sinclair’s PPS) particularly welcome. Ian Hunter, 9 Defoe Avenue, Kew, Richmond TW9 Welsh Liberal Tradition – A History of the Liberal Party in Wales 4DL; [email protected]. 1868–2003. Research spans thirteen decades of Liberal history in Wales but concentrates on the post-1966 formation of the Welsh Liberal policy towards Austria-Hungary, 1905–16. Andrew Gardner, Federal Party. Any memories and information concerning the post- 17 Upper Ramsey Walk, Canonbury, London N1 2RP; agardner@ssees. 1966 era or even before welcomed. The research is to be published ac.uk. in book form by Welsh Academic Press. Dr Russell Deacon, Centre for Liberals and the local government of London 1919–39. Chris Humanities, University of Wales Institute Cardiff, Cyncoed Campus, Fox, 173 Worplesdon Road, Guildford GU2 6XD; christopher. Cardiff CF23 6XD; [email protected]. [email protected].

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 7 Tony Little examines the meaining of terms in the political spectrum in the Victorian era. VICTORIAN LIBERALISM By today’s standards, Victorian politics were extraordinarily fluid. Lord Derby, the leader who led the Tories back from their Corn Law wilderness, began ministerial life as a Whig. Lord Palmerston, the first Liberal premier, served for more than two decades in Tory governments and the dominant Victorian Liberal, William Gladstone, was initially hailed as ‘the rising hope of those stern unbending Tories’. To complete the circle, the leaders of two clashing schools of Liberalism, Joe Chamberlain and the Duke of Devonshire, were serving in Salisbury’s Conservative Cabinet when Victoria died.

8 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LEFT AND RIGHT IN VICTORIAN LIBERALISM et, despite the frayed Tories and Whigs, leavened by and at the acute risk of oversim- edges and personal groups of Radicals and inde- plification, Radical and Whig journeys, participants pendents. As a further complica- will be used in this broader in the political process tion, there were around  Irish sense. could place themselves MPs in Westminster sometimes Ysecurely within it and clearly labelled Whig, Tory and Radical. recognise friend and foe. As W. S. But while the Irish Tories con- From right to left Gilbert put it: sorted easily with mainland Con- Examining the perceptions of servatives, the other Irish groups extreme left and right at the … every boy and every gal, were likely to put tenant, nation- beginning of the Victorian period That’s born into the world alist or religious beliefs before lifts some of the fog from the alive, party allegiance. battles which the parties fought Is either a little Liberal Under Peel, the Tories and also helps an understanding Or else a little assumed the name Conserva- of how the Liberal factions were Conservative! tive and the parties represent- perceived. ing the respectable left gradually The extreme right – ultra- Central party organisation might adopted the Liberal label, even Tories – defended an aristocratic, have operated out of the back before the famous  meeting Protestant state. The established, room of a Pall Mall club but, in in Willis’s Rooms which for- national – Anglican – Church the constituencies, election cam- mally brought together Whigs, was the anchor of national unity paigns were fought with more Radicals and Peelites. However, linking the four kingdoms, pro- expense, more vigour and more the terms Whig and Radical did viding a moral basis for law and antagonism than is commonly not fall out of use. order and lending a ‘patina of found today. In a narrow sense, ‘Whig’ sanctity’ to institutions such as Division was not limited to the describes the descendants of the universities, the monarchy two parties. Factions competed the aristocratic families who and the electoral system, which for the spirit of Liberalism giv- backed the Glorious Revolution justified resistance to change. ing identifiable, if fluid, left and of  and their adherents. To Secondly, ‘Land was a source of right wings. The origins of this those in the more ‘advanced’ or nationhood, stability, hierarchy, article lie in an editorial sugges- ‘independent’ sections of Liber- order and traditional values.’ This tion that Richard Cobden should His Favourite Part: alism, Whig described a Liberal justified the power and participa- be included as an exemplar of the ‘Mr Gladstone to their political right. Similarly, tion in politics of the aristocracy, right within the Liberal Party. is ever happy to the term ‘Radical’ could be con- whose wealth derived from land, Since the Victorian establishment appear in the fined to those who professed and warranted a protected posi- regarded Cobden as a dangerous character of Benthamite Utilitarian beliefs. tion for agriculture. But these a Scotsman.’ Radical and since The Orange – Letter from However, any advanced Liberal privileges also obliged the ruling  Book has created a debate on the the Premier’s could adopt Radical as a badge group to care for the deserving ideological roots of the Liberal Secretary. (Punch, of honour, while more timid poor and to use the power of gov- Democrats, the spectrum of nine- 2 December Liberals used Radical as a term ernment to intervene against the teenth-century Liberal opinion is 1871) – the of notoriety for those to their abuses flowing from the industrial two claymores  worth further exploration. are inscribed left. Since the terms left and revolution. Before the  Reform Act, ‘Radicalism’ and right were not generally used by The extreme left, represented the dominant parties were the ‘Toryism’ nineteenth-century politicians, by the Chartists, acknowledged

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 9 LEFT AND RIGHT IN VICTORIAN LIBERALISM that power was exercised by a pale of the constitution.’ Thomas argued, ‘Reform that you may landed elite: Babington Macaulay laid great preserve’ and ‘we know of no stress on this element of Whig- great revolution which might not The aristocratical govern- Liberal philosophy: have been prevented by compro- ment under which this mise early and graciously made.’ country groans can only A great statesman might, Radicals embraced the Utili- be subdued and changed by judicious and timely tarian aphorism that ‘the great- by constant and vigorous reformations, by reconcil- est happiness of the greatest efforts on the part of the ing the two great branches number is the foundation of people. Unless the control- of the natural aristoc- morals and legislation’. From ling power of the State shall racy, the capitalists and this they concluded that ‘if we be speedily rendered decid- the landowners, and by so desire the people to be well gov- edly popular, there is lit- widening the base of the erned, we must allow them to tle hope that property can government as to interest govern themselves’, which led be made secure, industry in its defence the whole of inevitably towards democracy. A free, and labour protected the middle class, that brave, narrowly based government reg- against the aggressions of honest, and sound-hearted ulated the economy primarily the powerful. class, which is as anxious for the benefit of the elite and for the maintenance of government expenditure was The Six Points demanded by order and the security of undertaken for the same pur- the Chartists were the vote for property, as it is hostile to pose, John Bright claimed when all adult males, a secret ballot, corruption and oppression, he described foreign policy as annual parliaments, payment for succeed in averting a strug- ‘a gigantic system of out-door MPs, elimination of property gle to which no rational relief for the aristocracy’. By qualifications for candidates and friend of liberty or of law attacking on the three fronts of equal-sized electoral districts can look forward without electoral reform, de-regulation – constitutional rather than eco- Liberals great apprehensions. of the economy and retrench- nomic objectives. ment of spending, Britain would were In time, this process was applied see ‘a people building up the edi- united by as successfully to the labouring fices of their liberties’. A common Liberal ideology classes as to capitalists. Whigs and Radicals shared Liberals too accepted aristocratic a belief in Liberals were united by a overlapping views of what repre- participation in government belief in progress, reform to limit sented progress sufficient to form – where else would be found progress, the power of arbitrary govern- an alliance, but the difference of men with the education and ment and the landed oligar- purpose, which showed in tactics, wealth to undertake government reform to chy, religious toleration and the priorities and the details of leg- when schooling was not univer- limit the growth of popular self-govern- islation, was crucial. Attempts to sal and MPs received no salary? ment. By this reasoning, Liberals take the party too far in a Radical The Lords exercised considerable power of promoted free trade against sec- direction were always vulnerable authority over the Commons tional economic interests, sought to a Whig revolt. Too much timid- through patronage of candidates arbitrary reform and efficiency in the ity left the leadership vulnerable at elections, the funding of cam- administration of government to Radical rebellions and mass paigns and the presence of fam- govern- or church and saw retrenchment demonstrations. Both of Rus- ily members as MPs. In ,  ment and of government expenditure as sell’s governments were brought per cent of the Liberal Party’s reducing corruption, freeing down by party revolts, three of MPs were connected to the aris- the landed individuals for self-improvement Gladstone’s administrations were tocratic and landed classes; barely and preventing military adven- destroyed by Liberal disagree- more than  per cent had been oligarchy, tures overseas. ments and Palmerston failed to involved in business. construct a stable Liberal coali- However, Liberals differed religious tion for most of the s. Riding from Tories in promoting class toleration A different purpose the Whig and Radical horses in harmony by incorporating those Whigs divided from Radicals on tandem was no easy task. raised up by the Industrial Rev- and the the question of intent rather than The following sections exam- olution. As Gladstone put it in a economic egalitarianism. The ine electoral reform and religion, debate on Reform, ‘I venture to growth of Whig ‘was willing to improve but both critical areas of friction say that every man who is not anxious to avoid reconstructing. where the Radical agenda was presumably incapacitated by some popular For him political change involved clearest; economic policy, where consideration of personal unfit- self-gov- patching-up and improvising, and agreement prevailed; and Irish ness or of political danger, is mor- this was achieved by being prag- policy, which split the party apart ally entitled to come within the ernment. matic and flexible.’ As Macaulay in the s.

10 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LEFT AND RIGHT IN VICTORIAN LIBERALISM Democracy, that bare and he was born, the very soil which The right- never succeeded. Democ- level plain he has enriched with his labour racy you may have at any The Whigs intended the  and with the sweat of his brow, wing Whigs time. Night and day the Reform Act to be a lasting settle- that he is denied this right.’ gate is open that leads to ment which would enfranchise When Russell took office, feared that bare and level plain, the middle class and provide rep- after Palmerston’s death at the where every ants’ nest is a resentation for the newly industr- end of , he proposed a mod- being mountain and every thistle ialised cities but preserve the small erate extension of the vote only swamped a forest tree. borough seats which gave them to suffer a defeat at the hands of a their hold on the Commons. Whig clique, dubbed the Cave of by an The discontented Whigs reaped a For a while, Russell was known Adullam by Bright. Led by Lords poor reward from their rebellion, as ‘Finality Jack’ for refusing to Lansdowne, Grey and Grosvenor, unedu- as Russell resigned and Derby’s consider further reform. In the its spokesmen were Horsman and minority government allowed s, when he needed Radi- Robert Lowe. cated Disraeli to ‘dish the Whigs’ by cal support, Russell regained The right-wing Whigs feared work- carrying, in , a bill more his enthusiasm, but his bills for being swamped by an unedu- radical than anything Russell extending the franchise met cated working class unable to ing class planned. The case against democ- with a poor response in  and distinguish their partisan inter- racy was lost. In  Lord Hart- , while an  Tory bill was ests from the interests of the unable to ington, a Whig, introduced the defeated on a motion proposed nation, and the loss of Whig secret ballot, to protect the new by Russell, paving the way to the seats that might follow a redis- distinguish voters from bribery and intimida- first Liberal ministry. Despite a tribution to reflect an enlarged their parti- tion and, in , the anomalies Liberal majority, for the next six electorate. They were willing to in Disraeli’s Act were eliminated years, Palmerston avoided bring- contemplate an extension of the san inter- in another large-scale increase in ing the issue to the test. As Cob- franchise only provided that it the electorate. Chastened by their den explained in : was accompanied by ‘cumulative ests from experience of Tory duplicity in voting schemes, life memberships , the  reform act passed I rather think there is quite of the House of Lords, indirect the inter- without further revolt by right- as much agitation about election procedures, and other ests of the wing Liberals. parliamentary reform in mechanical devices designed to the House of Commons preserve the ascendancy of the nation. as in the country. It has got minority’. As Lowe maintained The greatest blessing into the House of Com- in a Times editorial: In Victorian Britain, the estab- mons, and they don’t know lished Church enjoyed privileges what to do with it. It is We had a dream of an Eng- for which members of other bandied from side to side, land made up of a society denominations paid, through and all parties are professing rising by distinct and well- tithes, while some professional to be reformers; everybody marked gradations from posts required adherence to the is in favour of an extension its base to its summit, each Anglican Church. Before , of the suffrage; and, upon part discharging its destined Catholics were unable to vote; my honour, I think in my functions without envy and it was  before Jews could sit heart no one likes it much, without discontent, with in the House of Commons and a and they don’t care much absolute personal freedom, non-believer, Charles Bradlaugh, about it. under an equal law, divided fought for more than five years to between thinkers and work- take the seat he won as a Radical Frustrated by this lack of progress, ers, between owners and in . Bright, Cobden’s closest parlia- producers of wealth, with Whigs broadly supported mentary ally, organised a cam- all that inequality between the established Church, though paign to demonstrate the popular man and man which is the assigning it a more subordinate demand for the vote, ‘the question result of unrestricted free- position than the Tories, and the that will not sleep’. Speaking at dom. great Whig families enjoyed the Birmingham in , he claimed patronage of Anglican church liv- that ‘England is the mother of Later, in the Commons, he wound ings at a time when its vicars were parliaments’, before arguing that up a speech against Russell’s bill an important part of the local ‘An Englishman, if he goes to the by declaiming: power and educational structures. Cape, can vote; if he goes fur- Palmerston helped to reconcile ther, to Australia, to the nascent We are about to barter nonconformists to his govern- empires of the New World, he maxims and traditions that ment by appointing evangelical can vote … It is only in his own have never failed, for theo- bishops and was also concerned country, on his own soil, where ries and doctrines that have to conciliate Irish Catholics. As

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 11 LEFT AND RIGHT IN VICTORIAN LIBERALISM he wrote to Russell, ‘To raise manifesto of . In , pri- The politi- a neutral umbrella university to and improve the condition of mary education was largely in the which both Catholic and Prot- the Catholic clergy is an object hands of the Anglican Church cally active estant colleges could affiliate which all rational men must con- but, even with some government though controversial subjects, cur in thinking desirable.’ funding, only . million out of noncon- including theology, philosophy The politically active noncon- . million children attended and modern history, were not to formists tended to be associated adequate schools. W. E. Forster formists be taught. with the Radicals, campaigning introduced a bill to create elected tended to To Lord Hartington, a leading for a ‘free trade’ in religion by boards to fund schools from local Whig and Chief Secretary for Ire- removing all the special privi- taxation but preserving ‘anything be asso- land, the proposals appeared tanta- leges enjoyed by the Anglican of the existing system which was mount to robbery of Trinity and its Church. It was the Radicals good’. Nonconformists and ciated Fellows of their funds. Horsman, who pressed for the abolition of Radicals pushed hard for such one of the Adullamites, thought tithes, disestablishment and the state schools to be secular, or at with the that the University Bill would abolition of religious tests for least undenominational. Radical Radicals, hand education to the Catholic university posts. The noncon- and Unitarian, Joe Chamberlain priests and ‘aimed a deadly blow’ formist Radicals wanted to end led a deputation to Downing campaign- at ‘the greatest blessing that the state funding for church schools Street comprising forty-six MPs British Legislature ever conferred and backed the tighter control of and  members of the National ing for a upon Ireland’. In contrast, non- alcohol licensing. Education League, declaiming conformists thought it acceptable, After the splits and failures of that: ‘free trade’ with Osborne Morgan stating the  Reform Bill, Gladstone in religion it combined ‘concession to the reunited the party and won the The Dissenters object to Roman Catholics with the strict-  general election with calls this measure, which they by remov- est maintenance of the secular for the disestablishment of the conceive will hand over the principle in State education’. Church of Ireland (which repre- education of this country ing all the This view was backed by nei- sented no more than  per cent to the Church of England ther the Conservatives nor the of the Irish population). Disestab- – entirely in many parts of special Catholic hierarchy. Ten ‘English lishment righted an injustice to the Kingdom, especially in privileges and Scotch’ and thirty-five Irish Irish Catholics ( per cent of agricultural districts … Any Liberals voted against the bill, the population) in a manner that Conscience Clause will be enjoyed with a further twenty-two Irish reunited the Liberal Party – the absolutely unsatisfactory. Liberals abstaining. The Univer- nonconformists welcomed the by the sity Bill was lost by three votes. weakening of Anglicanism and Ultimately the bill, one of the the Whigs averted the provision great achievements of Glad- Anglican of state funding for Catholi- stone’s government, was pushed Church. The monster monopoly cism. Optimistically, Gladstone through with Conservative sup- The key economic achievement believed disestablishment would port despite  Liberal MPs vot- of the left in the Victorian period renew the Church of Ireland’s ing against the leadership in one was free trade. The Anti-Corn missionary vocation. The accom- division and  abstaining. The Law League did not repeat the panying disendowment of church dual system of voluntary aided Chartists’ mistakes of using mass funds provided for the relief of church schools and state schools demonstrations to intimidate Irish poverty. with non-denominational reli- Parliament and threatening pub- The comparative ease with gious education still survives but lic order. Cobden and Bright, its which the Irish Church was the disappointment of the Radi- Radical leaders, worked through disestablished gave a misleading cal nonconformists contributed Parliament to persuade the gov- sense of Liberal religious accord. to the  Liberal defeat and ernment to remove the duties on Gladstone never contemplated undermined Forster’s chance of imported grain. In , Russell disestablishment of the English becoming leader in . announced that the Whigs had Church and campaigns for the Chastened but undeterred accepted Cobden’s argument. disestablishment of the Welsh by the Radical mutiny over The Radical case for free trade, and Scottish Churches became elementary schools, Gladstone supported by the Whigs and increasingly significant as Lib- upset the other wing of the more liberal Conservatives, was eralism relied more heavily on party, in , by tackling the that indirect taxes on the neces- Welsh and Scottish MPs after the even more complex problem of sities of life, such as bread, tea and split of . Irish university education. Trin- sugar, weighed most heavily on The religious disharmony was ity College, Dublin, was well the poorest, for whom the cost more publicly exposed in squab- funded but Protestant, while the of food consumed the highest bles over education, the other Catholic equivalent was poorly proportion of income. Free trade issue hinted at in Gladstone’s endowed. Gladstone proposed was redistributive, particularly

12 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LEFT AND RIGHT IN VICTORIAN LIBERALISM as government revenue became and protection for their funds in Lord Chancellor, opposed factory more dependent on income tax, the case of strikes, but left Disrae- legislation. paid only by the better off. li’s Conservative government to For the Radicals, Fielden More importantly, the cam- establish the legality of peaceful worked to limit the hours of paign leaders aimed to broaden picketing. women and children to ten a the distribution of power and The early union leaders, such day but Bright countered that, undermine privilege. As Cobden as George Howell, first Parlia- while ten hours a day was ‘quite argued in : mentary Secretary of the TUC, long enough’, he differed ‘on were Liberals. Henry Broad- the point whether a reduction A band of men united hurst, who succeeded Howell, in time ought to be carried by together – the selfish oli- and Thomas Burt, the miners’ the Legislature or by a regula- garchy of the sugar-hogs- leader, were among the first tion between the masters and the head and the flour-sack … working-class members of par- operatives themselves.’ Even forty have got together in the liament, as Liberals. Their views years later, he wrote: ‘I still hold House of Commons, and would not be considered left- the opinion that to limit by law by their own Acts of Parlia- wing today; as Joseph Arch, the time during which adults may ment have appropriated to founder of a successful agricul- work is unwise and in many cases their own classes the very tural workers’ union and him- oppressive.’ This voluntarist case privileges, the self-same self later an MP, proclaimed, ‘I proved misguided but at a time of monopolies, or monopolies do not believe in State Aid and limited wages and no social secu- as injurious in every respect land nationalisation … Self-help rity, when restricted hours risked to the interests of the peo- and liberty, order and progress reducing pay below subsistence ple, as those monopolies – these are what I advocate.’ levels, not inevitably so. were which our forefathers In the s, the socialist Social In the early s, Chamber- abolished two centuries and Democratic Federation gained lain, as Mayor of Birmingham, a half ago … We advocate a foothold in the union move- used municipal ownership of the abolition of the Corn ment but no more than a foot- the gas and water supply to pro- Law, because we believe hold. It was more in frustration vide funding for the redevelop- that to be the foster-parent at the Liberal Party’s refusal to ment and slum clearance of the of all other monopolies; and give them an adequate role than city. Although happy to see this if we destroy that – the par- from ideological differences that described as socialism, Cham- ent, the monster monopoly men like Keir Hardie, Hender- berlain’s schemes reflected more – it will save us the trouble son and MacDonald founded an his skills as a profit-generating of devouring all the rest. independent Labour Party. entrepreneur. Chamberlain’s The regulation of employment break with the Liberal Party The repeal of the Corn Laws divided both Whigs and Radicals. came before he had the oppor- by Peel, in , split the Tories Led initially by Tory evangelical tunity to apply entrepreneurial rather than the Liberals, effec- Lord Shaftesbury, between  skills to national government, tively keeping them out of power and  a series of acts were but even the most radical ideas for nearly three decades. Peel’s passed restricting the minimum in his Unauthorised Programme chief supporters were slowly age at which children could work of  – compulsory purchase absorbed into the Liberal Party. in factories, specifying that chil- powers to create allotments The Peelite William Gladstone, dren should receive an educa- in rural communities and the as Chancellor of the Exchequer tion and limiting the hours that funding of free primary educa- under Aberdeen and Palmerston, women and children could work. tion from graduated income tax completed the free trade reforms, Between  and  legisla- – were only modest forerunners as Cobden foretold. tion began to regulate health and of twentieth-century New Liber- Similarly, union recognition The key safety at work. alism. Similarly, in the Newcastle posed little Liberal division. In Among Whigs, Macaulay Programme of , formulated the s, unions of skilled work- economic argued, as the left would today, after the supposed ‘drag’ of the ers which provided membership ‘that, where the health is con- Whigs had been removed by the benefits in addition to agitation achieve- cerned, and where morality is Home Rule split, the most that for higher wages began sustained concerned, the state is justified in Liberals proposed by way of eco- growth. The Trades Union Con- ment of the interfering with the contracts of nomic intervention was to limit gress held its first meeting in left in the individuals … Can any man who the hours of adult male work- . Gladstone recognised, in the remembers his own sensations ers and to extend the liability of new unions, sound working men Victorian when he was young, doubt that employers for industrial injuries. seeking legitimate self-improve- twelve hours a day of labour in a The theoretical underpinnings ment. His  Trade Union Act period was factory is too much for a lad of of the constructive use of state  gave the unions legal recognition free trade. thirteen?’ Brougham, a former power were in development at

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 13 LEFT AND RIGHT IN VICTORIAN LIBERALISM the end of the century, but their return for co-operation with the any concession, or appear- practical application had to wait Land Act. In addition to property, ance of concession, in this for Gladstone’s departure. Gladstone seemed to be sacrific- direction would be mis- ing law and order. chievous in its effects to These discontents form the the prosperity of Ireland as Mischievous in its effects background to Gladstone’s  well as that of England and The  University Bill defeat Home Rule proposals. The  Scotland, I have consistently magnified Gladstone’s Irish dif- general election produced a hung opposed it in office and in ficulties, as Liberal representation parliament. Ireland had returned opposition and I shall con- in Ireland sank from sixty-five no Liberals but eighty-five Home tinue to oppose it. MPs in  to twelve in , Rule MPs. The minority Con- when an independent Home servative government was ousted Gordon Goodman’s article on Rule grouping of fifty-eight on a demand for ‘three acres and a the Liberal Unionists gives a was elected. After , under cow’ – allotments for agricultural broader explanation. The Whigs the leadership of Parnell, these labourers – and Gladstone began feared that Home Rule was only nationalists perfected parliamen- formulating proposals for ‘the a step towards full independence. tary obstruction and capital- establishment of a legislative body Ireland’s example would be the ised on violent rural discontent in Dublin for the management signal for similar agitation within through the Irish Land League. of affairs specifically and exclu- the Empire, and end in imperial Britain traditionally dealt with sively Irish’. The establishment disintegration. Moderate opinion such Irish problems by a combi- of a religion would be excluded. was shocked by the virulence of nation of ‘coercion’ and compas- ‘Matters of defence, foreign the nationalist movement, which sion. Normal legal procedures policy, and international trade’ included barn burning, attacks on were suspended to allow agri- were reserved to the imperial livestock, and the murder of Fred- cultural protesters to be locked parliament in London. The Irish erick Cavendish, the Chief Secre- up when local juries refused to parliament would include a sec- tary for Ireland and Hartington’s convict. After order was restored, ond chamber to offer protec- brother. Home Rule would be a ameliorative measures were tion to Protestants and a land bill craven surrender to malcontents offered. Coercion, tolerated by would give landowners security. and criminal anarchy. Finally, the the Whigs, some of whom were English progress would no longer spectre of Protestant Ulster sub- Irish landowners, was unwelcome be subject to Irish obstruction. Yet ject to a predominantly Catholic to Radical civil libertarians. The leading Whig Lords Hartington, parliament at Dublin was reason second Gladstone government Selborne, Derby and Northbrook enough to reject Home Rule. initially allowed the special legal could not be enticed to join the The rebels, as Hamar Bass powers to lapse and in  pro- Since ‘Mr ministry. stressed, had an alternative: ‘I was posed a Compensation for Dis- As Hartington’s biographer and still am prepared to support a turbance Bill, overriding property Gladstone conceded, ‘Liberals had for years very liberal measure of Local Self- rights to help small tenants in applied denounced the rule of men of Government for Ireland but I fail financial difficulties. one race or religion over those to see why such a measure should When this was defeated by a Liberal of another in Greece, Poland, not be equally applicable to Eng- Whig revolt in the Lords, Irish Italy, Hungary, Turkey, without land, Scotland, and Wales.’ violence rose and Forster, Chief principles admitting that these principles When the Home Rule Bill Secretary for Ireland, reintro- could be used against the gov- was put to the vote, ninety-three duced coercion, which Gladstone honestly, ernment of Catholic Irish by Liberals, the majority moderates balanced with another round of sincerely, Protestant Anglo-Saxons’. Since and Whigs but including Cham- land reform to satisfy Irish ten- ‘Mr Gladstone applied Liberal berlain and Bright, ensured its ant demands for fixity of tenure, and above principles honestly, sincerely, and defeat. Gladstonian Irish policy freedom of sale and fair rent. The above all, logically, to the case had tested Whig tolerance to bill, passed in , offered a legiti- all, logi- of Ireland’, what were the Whig destruction. In the ensuing elec- mate method of securing rent objections? Hartington had tion, the dissidents fought as Lib- reductions, undermining the Land cally, to made his opposition obvious in eral Unionists in alliance with League. Nevertheless, the Whig the case his manifesto of : the Conservatives and the split Lord Lansdowne resigned over the was never healed. In the Salisbury Compensation Bill and the Duke of Ireland’, No patriotic purpose is, in government, which followed, of Argyll over the Land Act, both my opinion, gained by the county councils were introduced concerned that interference in the what were use of the language of exag- across the UK. rights of landowners might spread geration in describing the to England. Both Irish ministers, the Whig Irish agitation for Home Forster and Lord Carlisle, resigned objec- Rule. I believe the demand Conclusions over an understanding negotiated so described to be imprac- The Victorian parties were fight- for Parnell’s release from prison in tions? ticable, and considering that ing about the distribution of

14 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LEFT AND RIGHT IN VICTORIAN LIBERALISM power rather than income, about success under Asquith’s leader- The Victo- , and his speech to the Commons, inequalities of privilege rather ship. From this new approach and  November . than class. In this context, fig- from the new Labour Party came  Speech at Rochdale,  August , rian par- from John Bright and J. Thorold ures such as Cobden and Bright, a redefinition of what it meant to Rogers (eds.), Speeches on Questions of who were in the vanguard of be on the left. ties were Public Policy by Richard Cobden (). those seeking to break down the  J. Thorold Rogers (ed.), Speeches on monopoly of power and hand it Tony Little is Chair of the Liberal fighting Questions of Public Policy by John Bright over to the whole people, should Democrat Historty Group, and a MP (Kraus Reprint ), Vol. , pp. about the –. be recognised as champions of regular contributor to the Journal  James Winter, Robert Lowe (University the left rather than the right. of Liberal History, particularly on distribution of Toronto Press, ), p. . The Whigs were not opposed nineteenth-century issues.  Ibid., p. . to the direction of change, but of power  Ibid., p. . their resistance to the pace of  Thomas Babington Macaulay, Critical  James Chambers, Palmerston: ‘The Peo- ple’s Darling’ (John Murray, ), p. progress, their fear of Gladstone’s & Historical Essays (Dent,  edn.), rather than Vol. , p. . . power to arouse the masses and  Known as Lord Hartington for most income,  J. L. Garvin, The Life of Joseph Cham- their desire to retain a form of of his career. berlain (Macmillan, ), Vol. , p. paternalism suggests that figures  Sir William Schwenk Gilbert, Iolan- about . such as Lowe, Hartington and the.  Ibid., p. , quoting from T. Wemyss Reid, Life of the Rt Hon W. E. For- Argyll should be seen as figures  Paul Marshall & David Laws (eds.), inequalities The Orange Book (Profile Books, ster, Vol. , p.  (, reprinted by of the right. To the Whigs, the ). of privilege Adams & Dart, ). rights of aristocratic property  Norman Gash suggests that by   Ibid., p. . ranked above the creation of newspapers were classifying MPs as rather than  Ibid., p. . yeoman farmers in Ireland, the Conservatives and Liberals in reports  Bernard Holland, Life of the Duke of Devonshire (Longmans, ), Vol. , p. Anglican influence over educa- of election results; Norman Gash, Aristocracy and People: Britain – class. . tion needed preservation from  (Edward Arnold, ), p. .  Quoted in J. P. Parry, Democracy and secularisation and the unity of  This paragraph and its quotations are Religion: Gladstone and the Liberal the Empire was more important derived from D. G. S. Simes, A Long Party – (Cambridge Univer- and Difficult Association: The Ultra Tories sity Press, ), p. . Parry gives than devolution. Chamberlain a detailed analysis of the religious once described Hartington as a and the ‘Great Apostate’, http://www. archives.lib.soton.ac.uk/wellington/ affiliations and problems which beset ‘drag on the wheel of progress’. pdfsforall/pol_simes_ed.pdf, pp. –. Gladstone’s first government. After Hartington had brought  Geo. Huggett, Address to the Peo-  Ibid., p. . Home Rule to a shuddering halt, ple of Lambeth, , Pro Ho  H. C. G. Matthew, Gladstone – //. , p. . his strain of Whiggism faded. Its  Richard Cobden, speech of  Febru- champions were absorbed into an  T. A. Jenkins, The Liberal Ascendancy (Macmillan, ), p. . ary  , London, in Brack and Lit- alliance with Conservatism that  In the House of Commons,  May tle, Great Liberal Speeches, p. . held power for most of the next .  Joseph Arch, From Ploughtail to Parlia- two decades.  Thomas Babington Macaulay, Hallam ment (The Cresset Library, ), p. The attempt to carry Home (), reprinted in Critical & Histori- .  Thomas Babington Macaulay, Speech Rule marked the high-water cal Essays, (Everyman,  edn.), Vol , pp. –. in the House of Commons,  May mark of Gladstonian Liberalism.  Joseph Hamburger, The Whig Con- , in Speeches on Politics & Litera- The party needed a new direction. science, in Peter Marsh (ed.), The ture by Lord Macaulay (J. M. Dent, no Attempts, by Rosebery and other Conscience of the Victorian State (The date), pp. –. rightward-leaning Liberals in the Harvester Press, ), p. .  R. A. J. Walling (ed.), The Diaries of John Bright (Cassell, ), p. . s, to promote imperialism  Thomas Babington Macaulay, Speech in the House of Commons,  March  John Morley, Life of Gladstone (Mac- and national efficiency enjoyed , in Duncan Brack and Tony Lit- millan, ), Vol. , p. . only limited electoral appeal. The tle (eds.), Great Liberal Speeches (Polit-  K. Theodore Hoppen, The Mid-Vic- alternative, which proposed that ico’s, ), p. . torian Generation, – (Oxford,  Macaulay, Hallam, op. cit., p. . ), p. . Liberalism should ‘concern itself  Bernard Holland, Life of the Duke of with the liberation and utilisa-  Jeremy Bentham, The Commonplace Book (). Devonshire, – (Longmans tion of the faculties and potencies  John Roebuck, quoted in David ), Vol. , pp. –. of a nation and a municipality, as Roberts, The Utilitarian Conscience, in  Address to the electors of North- well as those of individuals and Marsh, The Conscience of the Victorian East Lancashire, The Times,  March  State, p. . . voluntary groups of citizens’,  Gordon L. Goodman, Liberal Union- proved more fruitful. The Lib-  John Bright, Speech at Birmingham,  October , in Brack and Little, ism: The Revolt of the Whigs (Victorian erals returned to government Great Liberal Speeches, p. . Studies, ). in  principally as a result of  Lord John Russell, quoted in  Hamar Bass (MP for Stafford) Elec- Tory quarrels over protectionism Jonathan Parry, The Rise and Fall of tion Address , quoted in Edwin and this New Liberalism, which Liberal Government in Victorian Britain Goadby Dissentient Liberalism (Liberal Publication Department, ), p. . promoted the constructive use (Yale, ), p. .  See Spencer Walpole, Life of Lord John  J. A. Hobson, cited in Robert Eccle- of government intervention to Russell (Longmans, ), Vol , p. shall, British Liberalism (Longman rectify social problems, proved a ), p. .

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 15 THE CAREER OF JOHN MORLEY FROM LEFT TO RIGHT?

Ian Packer analyses ohn Morley represents proponent of Irish Home Rule, many of the contradic- a fairly consistent opponent of the political career tions that historians face imperial expansion and, at the of John Morley when using the terms age of seventy-five, he resigned ‘right’ and ‘left’ to describe from the Cabinet over its deci- (–), a leading JLiberal politics in the late nine- sion to declare war on Germany figure for thirty years teenth and early twentieth centu- in August . This doubt over ries. If the terms are given their whether Morley was on the par- in the late Victorian contemporary meanings, then ty’s ‘right’ or ‘left’ was shared by one of the most important meth- his contemporaries. His long and Edwardian Liberal ods of discerning whether a Lib- political career illustrates how Party. eral is to be assigned to the right competing definitions of ‘right’ or left of the party has been their and ‘left’ (or moderate and Radi- attitude to taxation and welfare, cal to use nineteenth-century Morley combined a with those dubious about the role terms) arose, ensuring, to many of the state often being dubbed by people’s confusion, that Mor- deep distrust of most historians as ‘right-wing’, while ley ended his days as a symbol of types of social reform enthusiastic social reformers are both ‘left-wing’ and ‘right-wing’ ‘left-wing’. From this viewpoint Liberalism, depending on which with a distinguished Morley was a Liberal of the ‘right’ definition was used. record as a proponent in the early twentieth century. He In the first half of his life it ended his political career as the seemed unproblematic to most of of Irish Home Rule first and only Viscount Morley his contemporaries that Morley and determined of Blackburn, the septuagenar- was a Liberal of the party’s ‘left’, ian senior statesman of Asquith’s or Radical, wing. He was born opposition to imperial Cabinet, and the butt of some of on  December  in Black- expansion and an his colleagues’ humour for his burn, the son of a surgeon who political timidity and dislike of had abandoned Methodism for aggressive foreign the new agenda of social reform. evangelical Anglicanism. After a However, this is not the only varied education at local Congre- policy. So where modern definition of ‘left’ and gationalist and grammar schools, did he belong on ‘right’ in Liberalism. Attitudes to University College School in Britain’s role in the world can London and Cheltenham Col- the Liberal political also be used to locate Liberals lege, he was sent to Lincoln Col- spectrum? On the ‘left’ on the party’s spectrum, and on lege, Oxford, with the intention this basis Morley remained a ‘left- that he should become a clergy- or on the ‘right’? wing’ Liberal. He was a leading man. But at Oxford he experi-

16 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 THE CAREER OF JOHN MORLEY

enced a crisis of faith and he left the university in  determined to avoid the vocation his father had mapped out for him. As he was without influen- tial connections one of the few careers open to him was journal- ism and he was fortunate that the mid-Victorian era saw the heyday of the highbrow journal. Morley excelled at the kind of learned His long essay on literature, history and politics they regularly required political and, at the age of twenty-eight, he became editor of the new Fort- career nightly Review and in his fifteen illustrates years in charge made it into one of the most important forums for how com- intellectual debate in Victorian Britain. Gradually, he achieved peting defi- a degree of financial comfort, if not of security. On  May  nitions of he married Rose Mary Ayling ‘right’ and (–), probably after they had lived together for some years. ‘left’ (or She already had two children of uncertain paternity, though her moderate marriage with Morley was child- less. He also found time to write and Radi- a steady stream of books, most cal to use of them on eighteenth-century enlightenment figures, includ- nineteenth- ing Burke, Diderot, Rousseau and Voltaire. His most famous century early work was probably his essay, ‘On Compromise’ (), which terms) explored his agnosticism and the arose.

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 17 THE CAREER OF JOHN MORLEY need to speak out against the of violence and reprisals. It was requisition of property. They forces of conformity in society. intolerable for the government split off to form the new Lib- The essay both reflected Morley’s to repress rights of expression and eral Unionist party in alliance own life and the influence of the organisation and to use arbitrary with the Conservatives. When Liberal philosopher, John Stuart powers, and Morley feared that Gladstone’s home rule bill was Mill, who Morley knew well in their use in Ireland would set a defeated in the Commons it his last years. precedent for their use in Britain. proved the crucial dividing issue But at the same time, Morley Similarly, Morley opposed much between the Gladstonians and was actively involved in politics, of the imperial expansion that the new Unionist alliance at the standing as a Liberal at Blackburn took place in Africa in the s subsequent election of . If in  and Westminster in  and s, such as the Zulu War of the Unionists were the party of before being elected for New-  and the Sudan expeditions the ‘right’ and the Liberals that castle in . He also edited the of –, arguing that societies of the ‘left’ then Morley was a Liberal daily paper, the Pall Mall had to be left free to develop in key advocate of the policy which Gazette, in –. In his jour- their own ways and that Britain Unionists insisted made the nalism Morley insisted on the would not benefit from the mas- Liberals most radical, irrespon- importance of the writer as a for- sive expense involved in acquiring sible and ‘left-wing’. He served mulator, through free expression distant outposts. Instead, impe- as Chief Secretary for Ireland and debate, of public opinion, rialism threatened open govern- again in – under Glad- by which he meant the opinion Morley ment by concentrating power in stone and Rosebery and shared of the intellectual elite of which the hands of soldiers and officials. with Gladstone the responsibil- he was a central component. was a Lib- These views were anathema ity for the Irish home rule bill of He believed it was the duty of eral of the to many Conservatives and mod- , which was defeated by the this group to direct government erate Liberals as they seemed House of Lords. By this time he into the paths of disinterested ‘left’, or to contradict Britain’s national was very close to Gladstone, who rule on behalf of all the com- interests and to endorse violence was happy to declare ‘I love John munity and to free society from a definite against property and the forces of Morley’. state interference, which could law and order in Ireland. Morley This association with Ireland only harm its ‘natural’ develop- Radical, seemed a dangerous figure on the and Gladstone made Morley ment and progress. His enemies to use the Liberal Party’s far ‘left’. When he one of the party’s leading figures, were the traditional authorities moved into the party’s leading but he was unable to advance who insisted on their divine or terminol- group it was because Liberalism his position during the troubled hereditary right to determine was perceived to have lurched – governments and lost opinion and policy – primarily ogy of the towards radicalism, rather than his seat at the  general elec- the Church of England and the because he became more mod- tion, though a safer berth was aristocracy. These opinions made time. But erate. In December  it was soon found for him the next year Morley seem a much more radi- this was revealed that Gladstone, the Lib- at Montrose Burghs, which he cal reformer than the party’s lead- eral leader, had been converted to served as MP until he went to the ers, such as Gladstone and his only true a policy of home rule for Ireland. Lords in . Contemporaries Whiggish colleagues. Certainly Although Morley had not pre- commented that while Morley his association with issues like as long viously associated himself with could be a fine speaker and was church disestablishment, secular this idea it was an entirely logi- a competent administrator he was education and reducing the pow- as ‘left- cal outgrowth of his own vehe- exceptionally vain and touchy ers of the House of Lords, and his wing’ poli- ment opposition to coercion, and and was often paralysed by inde- friendship with the Radical fig- on  December  he became cision and self-doubt and these ures Joseph Chamberlain and Sir cies were the first leading Liberal publicly factors helped prevent him forc- Charles Dilke, put him firmly in to support Gladstone. When the ing his way to the top of Liberal Liberalism’s advance guard. defined in latter formed his new Cabinet in politics. In opposition after  But what brought Morley to  he appointed Morley to the he continued to press the case the forefront of politics was his terms of crucial post of Chief Secretary for for home rule (against the wishes attitude to Ireland and to impe- the vigour Ireland. of those Liberals who wanted to rial expansion. He consistently This was the central moment backtrack on this commitment) argued that it was illegitimate for of a per- in Morley’s career. It irrevocably and to express his doubts about the British government to use associated him with the cause imperial expansion, especially in coercion to govern Ireland against son’s com- of Irish home rule and the Lib- the Sudan in . In – the will of its people. He regarded eral–Irish Nationalist alliance. he co-ordinated his withdrawal the Irish ‘land war’ as merely an mitment Many Liberals refused to accept from the Liberal leadership with attempt to redress real griev- to political the new policy, because they saw Sir William Harcourt in protest ances and repression as only likely home rule as leading to imperial against the pro-imperialist stance to lead to an interminable cycle freedoms. disintegration, mob rule and the of some of their colleagues. Per-

18 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 THE CAREER OF JOHN MORLEY haps to Morley’s chagrin, his fel- able in some ways. The Liberalism low ex-Cabinet ministers did Morley had imbibed in the s not plead with him to return and had not included this new col- take up the Liberal leadership and lectivist agenda and he had staked selected Sir Henry Campbell- his career on home rule and anti- Bannerman as their new chief. imperialism. The Webbs were Morley turned much of his ener- particularly scathing about Mor- gies to his official, three-volume ley’s ignorance of the ‘new’ poli- Life of Gladstone, which was pub- tics. This did not mean he had lished, to much acclaim, in . no interest in domestic matters. Thus, up to this time, in terms In the late s he had acted as of what contemporaries per- patron of younger Liberal MPs ceived as being the central issues like Asquith, Haldane and Arthur that divided Liberals from Con- Acland, who were interested in servatives, and Liberals from each the new collectivist thinking. other, Morley was a Liberal of He had become closely associated the ‘left’, or a definite Radical, with both temperance reform to use the terminology of the and a ‘rural programme’ to appeal time. But this was only true as to agricultural labourers. But he long as ‘left-wing’ policies were was sceptical about many of the defined in terms of the vigour new social reform ideas that were of a person’s commitment to being floated. In particular, in the political freedoms, whether this late s many trade unions took meant hostility to authorities that up the idea of a statutory eight- claimed to rule with divine or hour day, both on humanitarian hereditary sanction, opposition grounds and as a way of alleviat- to imperial expansion or advo- ing unemployment by spreading cacy of Irish home rule. In the work around. Morley opposed late nineteenth century another the proposal, leading to acrimo- definition of ‘left’ and ‘right’ was nious disputes with local socialists John Morley in Cobden’s laissez-faire economic coming to the fore, which sought in his Newcastle constituency. He 1900 (drawing by thought and to make connec- F. C. Gould). to replace the older terms. Social- noted that labour organisations tions between these policies ist and labour movements and were divided about the idea and and his ideas on external affairs. collectivists within Liberalism that, for instance, miners in the To Morley, there seemed to be a and Conservatism all began to North East were totally opposed real unity between opposing the press for more state interven- to it. Surely, he suggested, fewer expansion of the state abroad and tion in society. The new Labour hours worked would just mean objecting to extending its opera- Party, founded in , and New lower pay for most people? tions at home. Both were inimical Liberal journalists and politicians These were acute criticisms, to the liberty he held to be cen- inside the Liberal Party, increas- but they were not necessarily wise. tral to his creed. ingly advocated that the state During the – government, This approach was the origin should produce social legislation most Liberal MPs were willing of the ‘right-wing’ Morley of to improve the conditions of the to endorse the regulation of the the early twentieth century. In poorest members of society, even hours of work of groups like the the early s he returned to if this meant interfering with miners and railwaymen who had active politics and in  Camp- the workings of the free-market real electoral significance. Mor- bell-Bannerman made him Sec- economy, and, if necessary, to pay ley’s high-profile rejection of this retary of State for India in the for these measures by taxing the idea made him look isolated and new Liberal Cabinet – a post he wealthy. In their eyes, approval out of touch. But Morley did not exchanged for Lord President of these policies made a person retreat. Indeed, he seemed to find of the Council in . At the ‘left-wing’. To oppose them, or some pride in swimming against India Office Morley was not una- even to have doubts about them, the collectivist tide. Increasingly, ware of the irony of his transla- was to be ‘right-wing’, even if he started to identify himself as tion into an imperial ruler. He the politician in question was an a ‘Cobdenite’. He had written shocked many of his admirers advocate of Irish home rule or an a biography of the mid-Victo- by presiding over deportations, opponent of the House of Lords. rian radical in  and clearly detentions without trial and the Thus, much to Morley’s sur- found his anti-imperialism and suppression of newspapers in the prise, he began to be perceived by opposition to an aggressive for- course of the campaign against some people in politics as a ‘right- eign policy congenial. But Mor- armed opponents of British rule wing’ Liberal. This was unavoid- ley also started to emphasise in Bengal. But he also instigated

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 19 THE CAREER OF JOHN MORLEY the ‘Morley-Minto’ reforms of ‘right’. But this was only inter- He could so Liberal MPs, the leaders of the  which made non-officials, mittently true in the Edwardian Independent Labour Party like many of whom were elected, a era. The ‘old’ agenda that Morley justly Keir Hardie, Ramsay MacDon- majority on all provincial councils had advocated in Victorian Brit- ald and Philip Snowden, and, in and increased the powers of these ain stubbornly refused to make claim to the rest of Europe, a smattering councils. Though he remained an itself irrelevant. At the  gen- of radicals and socialists who active participant in the Cabinet eral election the great issue was be remem- found themselves condemned his behaviour often seemed petu- free trade against tariff reform. In bered both and persecuted for opposing the lant to colleagues, particularly in the  elections it was the role ‘national interest’ of their respec- his constant threats to resign over of the House of Lords. In – as a ‘left- tive countries. He had started his both major and minor issues.  it was Irish home rule and the political life as a pariah because Perhaps he genuinely doubted his threat of armed conflict in Ire- wing’ and a his religious views were consid- willingness to continue in politics land. On all of these issues, Mor- ered too unorthodox, only to as his age increased and his health ley was in the advance guard of ‘right-wing’ end his involvement in politics in declined. Possibly, having missed his party. He preferred reducing figure, the company of pacifists, social- the highest prize of the premier- the Lords’ powers to amending ists and revolutionaries. His final ship, he just needed to be reas- its composition and he remained depending years were spent in retirement at sured of his importance by being one of home rule’s firmest friends his home in Wimbledon and in persuaded to remain in the Cabi- in the cabinet. Moreover, it can on whether composing retrospective works net. Both Campbell-Bannerman be argued that within the Liberal like his Recollections (). and his successor, Asquith, went leadership Morley remained one his obitu- The notion of whether Mor- along with this behaviour. After its most ‘left-wing’ members on arist felt ley can be assigned to the ‘right’ all, through his friendship with some crucial topics. or ‘left’ of Liberalism brings into Mill and Gladstone, Morley was In – the great issue that what stark relief the need to be care- a living link with the party’s past for most people in the Liberal ful in placing these terms within a and a guarantee that it remained and Labour Parties was the Boer mattered closely defined historical context. true to its traditions. War launched by the Conserva- On issues connected to social Morley’s scepticism about tive government. Morley, not was his reform and redistributive taxation social reform fitted in with this unexpectedly given his previous opposi- Morley was clearly a ‘right-wing’ view of him as a grumpy old record, was among its foremost Liberal to fellow Liberals in the man, unimpressed by ‘new-fan- opponents, declaring it simply tion to the early s. But before the late gled ways’, and a relic of the to be ‘wrong’ to launch a war for s at the earliest these issues past at the Cabinet table. This imperial conquest. So impressed First World were not significant enough to was the Morley who always had was Keir Hardie that in an open determine a politician’s place on a reason to oppose new meas- letter in the Labour Leader in June War or his the political spectrum. Even in ures: who was ‘frightened’ by the  he offered Morley the lead- doubts the early twentieth century they implications of the  People’s ership of the Labour Party that had to share the political stage Budget; or who declared on had been founded four months about old- with the agendas of political the subject of old-age pensions, previously – a curious offer if freedoms, anti-imperialism and a ‘It will be injurious to us with Morley was consistently per- age pen- moral foreign policy that Morley the lower middle-class, who after ceived as a ‘right-wing’ Liberal. had imbibed in his youth. On all all are no inconsiderable contin- Once the Anglo-French military sions. these issues Morley was a ‘left- gent of our party strength. On conversations became known wing’ Liberal to his contempo- the other hand, we shall hardly to the Cabinet in , Morley raries. When he died at his home be able to produce proposals was one of the most prominent in Wimbledon on  September magnificent enough to make the opponents of any interven-  he could justly claim to be workmen ardently enthusiastic, tion in European war. Finally, in remembered both as a ‘left-wing’ or even decently satisfied.’ August  Morley concluded and a ‘right-wing’ figure, depend- This picture of Morley mut- his political career by resigning ing on whether his obituarist felt tering against the new agenda of from the Liberal Cabinet, along that what mattered was his oppo- social reform in Asquith’s Cabinet with John Burns, rather than sition to the First World War or his makes a neat conclusion to his accept the decision to declare doubts about old-age pensions. political odyssey from the ‘left’ of war on Germany. His pri- the party in the s to the ‘right’ mary motivation seems to have Dr Ian Packer is Senior Lecturer in in the s. But it is also mis- been his long-standing loath- History at the University of Lincoln leading. Morley was only a ‘right- ing of the reactionary regime in and author of a number of works on wing’ Liberal if collectivism was Russia and fear that war would Edwardian Liberalism, including the central political issue and the lead to its spread across Europe. Lloyd George, Liberalism and the determining factor in who was In opposing the war, Morley Land: the Land Issue and Party on the ‘left’ and who was on the aligned himself with twenty or Politics in England, –

20 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 THE CAREER OF JOHN MORLEY

(Woodbridge: RHS/Boydell &  On these developments, see over the timing of a statement he was Brewer, ) and The Letters of M. Freeden, The New Liberalism: to make in the Lords, Asquith referred Arnold Stephenson Rowntree an Ideology of Social Reform (Oxford: to him as a ‘regular old woman’, A Clarendon Press, ); P. Clarke, Lib- Liberal Chronicle: Journals and Papers of to Mary Katherine Rowntree, erals and Social Democrats (Cambridge: J. A. Pease, st Lord Gainford –, – (RHS/CUP, ). Cambridge University Press, ); ed. C. Hazlehurst and C. Woodland S. Collini, Liberalism and Sociology: (Historians Press, ), p. .  For biographical studies of Morley, L.T. Hobhouse and Political Argument  Morley to Lord Crewe,  December see D. A. Hamer, John Morley: Liberal in England, – (Cambridge: , Cambridge University Library, Intellectual in Politics (Oxford: Claren- Cambridge University Press, ). Crewe papers, . don Press, ); F. W. Hirst, Early Life  B. Webb, My Apprenticeship (Long-  Morley to Lord Bryce,  January and Letters of John Morley,  vols (Mac- mans, Green & Co., ), p. . , quoted in Hamer, John Morley, millan, ); J. H. Morgan, John, Vis-  M. Barker, Gladstone and Radicalism: p. . count Morley. An Appreciation and Some the Reconstruction of Liberal Policy in  See, for instance, Hazlehurst and Reminiscences (Murray, ); J. L. Britain, – (Hassocks: Harvester Woodland, Liberal Chronicle, pp. – Morison, John Morley: A Study in Vic- Press, ), pp. –. for Morley’s opposition to support torianism (Kingston, Ontario: Jackson  A. G. Gardiner, The Life of Sir William from the rates for unemployment Press, ); W. Staebler, The Liberal Harcourt,  vols (Constable & Co., relief. Mind of John Morley (Princeton, NJ: ), vol. , p. ; Hamer, John Mor-  B. Murray, The People’s Budget Princeton University Press, ). ley, pp. –. /: Lloyd George and Liberal Poli- Also, J. W. Bicknell and C. L. Cline,  The Life of Richard Cobden,  vols tics (Oxford: Clarendon Press, ), ‘Who was Lady Morley?’, Victorian (Chapman & Hall, ); Recollections, pp. –; P. Jalland, The Liberals and Newsletter (Fall, ), pp. –. vol. , pp. – for Morley’s later Ireland: The Ulster Question and British  Morley dealt with his early life in his thoughts on Cobden. Politics to  (Hassocks: Harvester Recollections,  vols (Macmillan, ),  S. A. Wolpert, Morley and India – Press, ), p. . vol. , pp. –.  (Berkeley, Ca., University of  Recollections, vol. , p. .  See Hamer, John Morley, especially California Press, ) and S. E. Koss,  Labour Leader,  June . pp. –, –. Allegedly, Morley John Morley at the India Office, –  Hamer, John Morley, pp. –. expressed his agnosticism by allowing (Oxford: Clarendon Press, ) for God to be spelled with a small ‘g’ in this period. the pages of the Fortnightly.  After Morley’s threat to resign in   Edmund Burke: A Historical Study (Macmillan, ); Diderot and the Encyclopaedists,  vols (Chapman & Hall, ); Rousseau,  vols (Chap- British Liberal Political Studies Group Winter man & Hall, ); Voltaire (Chap- Conference 2006 man & Hall, ); ‘On Compromise’ appeared in the Fortnightly Review, Call for Papers new series, , – ().  Recollections, vol. , pp. –.  The best guide to Morley’s early The British Political Liberal Studies Group winter conference will be held on the weekend of the 13–15 thought remains Hamer, John Morley, January 2006, at the University of Wales Conference Centre in Gregynog, Powys. This conference is pp. –. held in conjunction with the Liberal Democrat History Group.  Hamer, John Morley, pp. –; Rec- Proposed panels for papers include: ollections, vol. , pp. –.  See Morley’s articles in Pall Mall 1. The Liberal Democrats and the 2005 general election Gazette,  October ,  Febru- 2. The Liberals of 1905: ‘on the road to a landslide’? ary ,  August .  The Times,  December  report- 3. The Liberal Democrats and devolution: papers on the Liberal Democrats and devolution in ing Morley’s speech at Newcastle. Scotland, Wales, GLA and English regions  The Liberal split of – has been much analysed. See in particular A. B. 4. The SDP a quarter of a century on Cooke and J. Vincent, The Governing 5. The Liberal Democrats: campaigning, gender and candidate selection Passion: Cabinet Government and Party Politics in Britain, – (Hassocks: 6. Prime Ministers, leaders and other important Liberal figures Harvester Press, ); T. A. Jenkins, 7. The Liberals and issues of policy, past and present Gladstone, Whiggery and the Liberal Party, – (Oxford: Clarendon Paper-givers are required to submit a 200-word summary of their paper to the Conference Convenor. Press, ); W. C. Lubenow, Parlia- If the paper is deemed of the required standard for the group then a space will be allocated for it on mentary Politics and the Home Rule a relevant panel. Papers should be submitted by 1 September 2005. Please submit ideas to the Crisis: The British House of Commons Conference Convenor, Dr Russell Deacon ([email protected]) . in  (Oxford: Clarendon Press, ). You need not present a paper in order to attend the conference! The attendance fee is £100 for the  Stuart Rendel to Morley,  Septem- weekend or £60 for staying on either the Friday or Saturday night. This rate applies to member of the ber, quoted in Hamer, John Mor- British Liberal Political Studies Group or the Liberal Democrat History Group. Non-members will be ley, p. . charged £125 and £70 respectively. The Saturday night will feature a dinner with a guest speaker.  For the Liberal troubles of the s Please email [email protected] to obtain a booking form. and Morley’s role in the party, see P. Stansky, Ambitions and Strategies: Dr Russell Deacon, British Liberal Political Studies Group the Struggle for the Leadership of the Liberal Party in the s (Oxford: UWIC, Cyncoed, Cardiff CF23 6XR Clarendon Press, ). Tel: 02920 417102

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 21 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’ FRANCIS WRIGLEY HIRST (1873 – 1953)

or H. J. Laski, Francis time. Moreover those ideas have, Hirst was the ‘last of the to some degree, come back into Liberals’. And Hirst fashion in recent decades among was indeed a rare and neo-liberals and libertarians. unbending exponent Francis Wrigley Hirst was Fand publicist of classical Liberal- born on  June  at Dalton ism in the first half of the twenti- Lodge near Huddersfield. Both eth century, at a time when such his parents came from wealthy ideas were being overwhelmed mill-owning families with deep by war and collectivism. He can nonconformist and Liberal roots. be seen as the last in the line His maternal aunt, Mary Wri- upholding the pure doctrine of gley, married William Willans what he called the ‘great watch- (–), the leading figure words of Liberalism – Peace, Lib- in Huddersfield Liberalism and erty, Free Trade, Public Economy, nonconformity and grandfather and Good Will among Nations’ of Herbert Asquith. Another Wri- in the tradition of Adam Smith, gley started the US chewing gum Cobden, Gladstone and John firm. Hirst’s father Alfred was Morley. Today he is a largely for- forced to retire from the woollen gotten figure, remembered only textile business in  because as an outmoded ‘primitive Liberal’ of failing eyesight and the fam- ‘Liberty above all on the fringes of the party, whose ily moved to Harrogate, where things’ – Francis Hirst laissez-faire creed had been top- he worked in the cause of the pled by the new social Liberalism blind. This does not seem to have () in the years before  and bur- involved much hardship. Hirst ied by Keynes and Beveridge in later recalled that shortly before the s and s. retiring his father had cleared a Jaime Reynolds Nevertheless Hirst’s career is profit of £, (the equivalent of continuing interest. More than of £, today) from just one describes the career of anyone else he continued robustly import deal. the leading ideologue to articulate and propagate tradi- Hirst attended Clifton Col- tional Radicalism from within lege in Bristol from – and of ‘old Liberalism’ in the Liberal Party until the end then won a scholarship to Wad- the interwar Liberal of the s. While his brand of ham College, Oxford, securing a Liberalism was in decline, it was double first in Classical Modera- Party, Francis Wrigley still a significant element in the tions and Greats in . He was Hirst. thinking of many Liberals at the President of the Oxford Union

22 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’ FRANCIS WRIGLEY HIRST (1873 – 1953)

the same year, succeeding John Hirst had forged his close Morley was a leading figure. Hirst Simon, who was to become a friendship and political partner- was a founder of the League of life-long friend. Other friends at ship with Morley in the sum- Liberals Against Aggression and Oxford included Hilaire Belloc, mer of , and again in , Hirst was Militarism, serving on its com- F. E. Smith and Leo Amery. when he worked as Morley’s a rare and mittee. He contributed to a col- Hirst was one of the first researcher on his celebrated lection of essays on Liberalism and at Oxford to study political biography of Gladstone, spend- unbending the Empire (), accusing Cecil economy, naturally of the clas- ing many happy weeks exploring Rhodes’s Chartered Company sical variety. He was strongly Gladstone’s voluminous papers exponent of inciting the conflict with the influenced by Alfred Marshall at Hawarden Castle.  Hirst soon Boers. He also worked with and Professor F. Y. Edgeworth became Morley’s intellectual and and pub- Simon, Belloc, G. K. Chester- (–), a vigorous oppo- political amanuensis. Together licist of ton and J. L. Hammond in the nent of tariff reform. Hirst was with several other young Lib- pro-Boer Speaker, the forerun- already an ardent Liberal, joining erals, including Hilaire Belloc, classical ner of The Nation, which under the radical Russell Club. John Simon and J. L. Hammond, the editorship of H. W. Massing- Having narrowly failed to Hirst published Essays in Liberal- Liberalism ham became a standard-bearer of secure a research scholarship at ism in , contributing an essay advanced Liberal opinion.  Oxford, Hirst earned his living on Liberalism and Wealth. The in the first In  Hirst married Helena coaching students, lecturing on book – which aimed to reassert half of the Cobden, great-niece of Richard local government at the newly the doctrines of classical liberal- Cobden, and eventually they were founded London School of Eco- ism then under increasing attack twentieth to live in Cobden’s old home, nomics, and writing. In  he from Fabians and New Liber- Dunford House near Midhurst was called to the Bar and prac- als – was dedicated to Morley as century, in Sussex, which they turned into tised as a barrister for the next the ‘embodiment of philosophic a shrine to the great free trader few years, without much finan- liberalism … the wellspring of a at a time and his ideas. The marriage was cial reward, giving up in about liberal tradition which united the when such long-lasting and happy, although  to concentrate on journal- doctrines of Mill and Cobden they were at odds over Helena’s ism and writing. He had cut his and represented the still-living ideas were suffragette activity, which led to teeth as a journalist as one of the personality of Gladstone’. Hirst her arrest in . They had no talented young writers that C. P. was suspicious of the New Liber- being over- children. Scott brought into the Manchester als – what he called ‘the new type Already, in his twenties, Guardian. In , largely on the of Liberal politician who offers whelmed through his friendship with Mor- recommendation of John Morley, the public a mixed pottage of by war and ley and his prominence in Lib- Hirst was appointed editor of The socialism and jingoism …’. eral circles and at the Union at Economist, a post he was to hold At this time Hirst was closely collectiv- Oxford, he had built up a wide until . involved in the protest movement acquaintanceship with many of against the Boer War in which ism. the leading politicians of the day,

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 23 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’

helped by the fact that he was excellent company, ‘hospitable and inclusive’, and ‘a fascinating conversationalist’ with a ‘gen- ius for friendship’. He had many interests outside politics: he was a spirited but not particularly good chess player, a keen fly-fisherman and sports enthusiast (cricket, golf, athletics), and a lover of the Clas- sics, especially Latin poetry . His first two solo books appeared at the height of Joseph Chamberlain’s Tariff Reform campaign. Free Trade and other Fundamental Doctrines of the Man- chester School, a collection of extracts from the leading classical liberal pioneers which was pub- lished in , and Adam Smith, which appeared in Morley’s ‘Eng- lish Men of Letters’ series in , set the pattern of clear and ortho- dox exposition of classical liberal thought. Hirst was in the thick of the Liberal defence of free trade, contributing to Fact versus Fiction (), which the Cobden Club published to refute Chamber- lain’s arguments. He also wrote a number of academic and tech- nical studies on local government and legal and commercial issues in these years. As editor, Hirst expanded and modernised The Economist, previously a rather dull journal, turning it into a lively and par- tisan leader of Radical opinion. Working hand-in-hand with the anti-militarist wing of the Liberal Party, he sought to counteract ‘the Armour-plate press’ which loudly demanded a naval arms race with Top:The six writers of Oxford Essays Germany. A good illustration of in Liberalism how Hirst operated behind the (1897) – standing: scenes came in March  when H. Belloc, J. L. Churchill proposed an increase Hammond, F. W in the naval estimates to build Hirst; seated: P. J. Macdonnell, J. new Dreadnoughts, in defiance A. Simon, J. S. of the ‘Radicals and Economists’ Phillimore. and a strongly worded resolu- tion recently adopted by the Left: Hirst’s National Liberal Federation farewell party given by the staff (NLF). Morley leaked to Hirst following his information about the division sacking as editor of opinion in the Cabinet on this of The Economist issue, including the opposition of in 1916 – he is Lloyd George, the Chancellor of seated with Mary Agnes Hamilton, the Exchequer. Hirst helped Sir later a Labour MP. John Brunner, chairman of the

24 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’ NLF, to draft circular letters of Hirst is who opposed the war even after charlatan, so to speak’. None of protest to constituency associa- the German invasion of neutral this prevented Hirst from enjoy- tions and editors, and in July he sometimes Belgium. He immediately began ing a wide circle of friends from suggested that Brunner write to efforts to build a broad alliance of both the Conservative and Asquith to say that he would call described the various anti-war currents. Labour Parties. a special meeting of the NLF to The formation of the Coali- In November  Hirst suc- discuss ‘this fatal and provoca- as an isola- tion government under Asquith cessfully stirred up opposition in tive policy’. In the autumn Hirst tionist, but in May  greatly increased the the House of Lords to a provi- ghosted a manifesto from Brun- pressure to introduce conscrip- sion of the Defence of the Realm ner to every Liberal Association it would tion, which Hirst loudly opposed. Act, then being rushed through chairman before the NLF meet- He wrote to Sir John Brun- Parliament, which would have ing held on  November. By the be more ner that ‘the Liberal Imperialists allowed a secret court martial to time the meeting was held, the and Tory imperialists together sentence non-military personnel Cabinet had found a compromise accurate are quite capable of working up to death. In  Hirst took on formula and the crisis had sub- to say that a panic and rushing the coun- the government in the outstand- sided, although the eventual out- try into military slavery’. The ing civil liberties case of the war, come was a defeat for Hirst and he stood Economist immediately stepped the Zadig case. Arthur Zadig, the Economists. up the campaign against com- though born of German parents, Hirst is sometimes described for active pulsory military service, which had been a naturalised British as an isolationist, but it would be it continued stubbornly in  subject for ten years. In Octo- more accurate to say that he stood efforts to when Asquith brought in con- ber  he was detained by for active efforts to maintain maintain scription. the Home Secretary under the international peace in Gladsto- Hirst’s opposition to the war Defence of the Realm regula- nian style through the ‘Concert of interna- was, to a significant degree, budg- tions on the grounds of his ‘hos- Europe’. He attempted to lower etary. He later wrote of ‘the Great tile origin and associations’. A international tensions by send- tional War, the most tremendous eco- defence fund was established and ing the journalist Dudley Ward nomic catastrophe recorded in the case taken through the courts to Berlin as a correspondent with peace in history’, setting out his case in up to the House of Lords where a wide brief to promote friendly Gladsto- several of his books. He never Hirst appeared for the appellant relations with Germany. He wavered in his orthodox Cob- arguing that the rights of British also upheld the Gladstonian tra- nian style denite critique of war, writing subjects under the Magna Carta dition of concern for oppression in  that two world wars had and the Habeas Corpus Act in Europe. In – Hirst was through left Britain ‘shorn of its liber- could not be overthrown with- a member of the International ties, in a state of bankruptcy and out express legislation. Although Commission established by the the ‘Con- serfdom, oppressed by ruinous the Law Lords found against Carnegie Endowment for Inter- cert of taxation, overwhelming debt, and Zadig (with a powerful dissent- national Peace, which investi- conscription, manacled by more ing opinion from the Radical gated Serbian atrocities against Europe’. and more inflation, entangled in Lord Shaw), Hirst was widely the Macedonian (Bulgarian) new alliances … and with mili- judged to have won the moral population during the Balkan tary commitments in all parts of argument and Zadig was released Wars of –. The report was the world.’ He was secretary of a shortly afterwards. published in . committee of economists critical Hirst’s outspoken opposition Hirst blamed the Liberal gov- of Lloyd George’s finance policy to the war cost him the editorship ernment for the slide to war in formed under the Economic Sec- of The Economist in  when . He later wrote that ‘the tion of the British Association. Walter Wilson Greg, the most death of Campbell-Bannerman Unlike the many anti-war Lib- important trustee, lost patience made way for Mr Asquith and erals who gravitated towards the with having to defend the paper’s so gave the Liberal Imperialists a Labour Party, Hirst, on account of pacifist stance. Hirst’s removal was free hand in foreign policy and at his economic liberalism, utterly handled in ‘a highly civilised fash- the same time opened the door rejected socialism. He told his ion’. For some time before his to a great expansion of arma- good friend, Molly Hamilton, resignation he had been discuss- ments … The real reason behind later a Labour MP, that ‘anyone ing with Sir Hugh Bell, the great these tremendous additions to who has any truck with Socialism ironmaster and fervent libertarian, the Navy lay concealed in the must be intellectually flabby’. and with anti-war Radical MPs secret diplomacy of the Lib- Nor was the Conservative Party such as Gordon Harvey, Percy eral Imperialist Ministers …’ an option, not least because of its Molteno, Richard Holt, D. M. When war broke out in August protectionism which, in Hirst’s Mason and Godfrey Collins, the  Hirst, alongside his friends book, was equally if not more establishment of a new weekly, Morley and John Burns, who detestable. It was said that if a Common Sense, with Hirst as edi- resigned from the Cabinet, was Tory entered the room, Hirst ‘was tor. This ‘fanatically free trade’ in the small group of Radicals able to detect it, “to smell out” the

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 25 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’ paper appeared in October  He had with both the  general elec- government, urging the case for and survived until early . tion and a by-election in  retrenchment to reverse ‘the vast Consistent with his belief very little that was contested by a new can- sums destroyed and wasted dur- in exploring every avenue that didate.  ing the last ten years, and the might end the war, Hirst rushed enthusiasm In the s and ’s he was results; borrowed credit, less to the support of the former Con- increasingly out of tune with the enterprise in business and manu- servative Foreign Secretary, Lord for Asquith party leadership. He had very lit- factures, reduced home demand Lansdowne, when he called for a and even tle enthusiasm for Asquith and and therefore output to meet it, negotiated peace with Germany even less for Lloyd George; reductions in wages, increase in in November . Hirst was seen less for Campbell Bannerman was the pauperism and unemployment.’ as the leader of ‘a party of sorts’ last Liberal leader who Hirst Eighteen years later, as Ram- that tried to exploit Lansdowne’s Lloyd counted as a sound Cobdenite. say MacDonald formed the first initiative’, forming a ‘Lansdowne Hirst was prominent in a number Labour government, according to League’ to arouse public support. George; of organisations on the fringes gossip Hirst again had the ear of The Common Sense office became Campbell of the party that sought to keep an incoming Prime Minister. The a pacifist headquarters.  the flag of classical liberalism fly- journalist R. T. Sang wrote to Hirst fought a rearguard Bannerman ing. He was an executive mem- Josiah Wedgwood, a Liberal MP action against creeping wartime ber of the Free Trade Union and who had defected to Labour: protectionism. With his usual was the remained very active in the Cob- allies – Bell, Harvey, Molteno, den Club, writing pamphlets and You have all been Holt and Collins, joined by Sir last Lib- serving as its secretary from . wo n d e r i n g w h o [ m ] John Simon, John Burns, Leif eral leader He also chaired the Liberal Free JRM[acDonald] has been Jones and Lords Beauchamp, Trade Committee from . relying on – if anyone – for Bryce, Courtney and Eversley – who Hirst In addition, Hirst was the moving advice on the formation he protested in July  against force behind the ‘Public Econ- of his Government. No the protectionist resolutions put counted omy League’, a group formed in one has hit upon the fact forward by the government for – to press for reductions in which has been carefully the Economic Conference of as a sound public expenditure. The League concealed. But he had gone the Allies held in Paris. Com- Cobdenite. was still active during the Second to the worst possible source mon Sense carried on the fight World War when Hirst lobbied for advice and inspiration – in – against protection- the Chancellor of the Exchequer, F. W. Hirst. Last week JRM, ist measures put forward by the Sir Kingsley Wood, to curb the Hirst and Lloyd George Lloyd George Coalition. Hirst growth of expenditure and tackle breakfasted together and and his collaborators formed an rising inflation. went through the Cabi- ‘Anti-Embargo League’ which Hirst remained an orthodox net proposals. JRM offered forced the government to aban- Cobdenite in international affairs Hirst the Chancellorship don sweeping restrictions placed during the s, favouring the and pressed him to take it. on imports, but had less success solving of problems through Hirst refused in JRM’s own against ‘anti-dumping’ measures international law and arbitra- interest, as he believed the later. tion rather than through collec- Party would not stand the Hirst unsuccessfully stood for tive security and the League of exclusion of [Philip] Snow- parliament in Sudbury in January Nations. Such was his opposi- den, and it was Hirst who , defending a seat captured by tion to war that he joined Her- advised Snowden for it. the Liberals in . He claimed bert Samuel and a handful of Hirst has got [Lord] Par- that he was ‘destroyed [by] … other Liberals in supporting the moor to come in and influ- Beer & Feudalism & sheer bru- Munich agreement in . He enced some other strange tality’, although in fact the swing was not, however, a pacifist and selections. to the Conservatives there (.%) accepted that the defence of free- was closely in line with the aver- dom justified the use of force It is unclear what truth if any there age swing in Suffolk (%). He also both at home and abroad against is in this report. The choice of stood for Shipley, Yorkshire in the its enemies (threatening Com- Hirst and Lloyd George, ideolog-  general election. Shipley was munist and Fascist parties in par- ical opposites within the Liberal a three-way marginal with the ticular). Party, for such soundings seems Liberals in third place with about Hirst’s influence behind the odd, especially as Hirst held no %. Hirst’s vote was disappoint- scenes is difficult to assess. He office in the party. MacDonald’s ing, despite – or perhaps because seems to have had easy access to supposed offer of the Excheq- of – his treating the voters to a leading politicians in all three uer to Hirst seems even more ‘masterly interpretation of the parties throughout his career. improbable, as Philip Snowden, as philosophy of Cobden and Glad- In December  we find him the Labour Party’s acknowledged stone’. Against the national trend, writing to Campbell-Banner- financial expert, had an indisput- his vote dipped by % compared man as he formed his Liberal able claim to this position and

26 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’

Hirst was not even a Member of individual freedom from Classi- ices in the years before . He Parliament. Hirst and MacDonald cal Antiquity through the British sought to distance his ideas from were old comrades from the anti- and American liberal thinkers of ideological laissez-faire of the sort war movement and had known the seventeenth, eighteenth and advocated by Herbert Spencer, or each other since Hirst’s university nineteenth centuries and defends for that matter by some modern days (Hirst was also a close friend its superiority over the then libertarians. He rejected the idea of Mollie Hamilton, who was liv- ascendant ideologies of Nazism, that civilisation could be built on ing with MacDonald at the time). Fascism and Communism, which the basis of narrow individualism, It is also true that MacDonald Hirst inclines to lump together in and called for active participation made some unexpected ministe- many of their collectivist charac- of the citizen in the management rial appointments of Liberal and teristics. Its shorter companion of local and national affairs and Conservative personalities and volume, Economic Freedom and public spiritedness. He wanted there is a good deal of mystery Private Property, sets out the case to return to what he called ‘the about how he made his choice, for economic liberty and is fluent long reign of economic liberty’ but it was Lord Haldane, the most and pithy and much more acces- between  and  when, as prominent of these, who seems to sible to the modern reader. Hirst has he pointed out, both Liberal and have been the key influence. The Hirst has been characterised been char- Conservative governments pro- appointment of Lord Parmoor, by some contemporaries and moted social reforms involving an in-law of the Webbs and one later commentators as a ‘laissez- acterised large expenditure. of Labour’s few supporters in the faire Liberal’, although he hotly Sound money occupied a Lords, did not require prompting rejected the term, at least if it was by some central place in Hirst’s economic by Hirst. In all probability Hirst understood as meaning that ‘gov- thinking; indeed it was something expressed his ideas for appoint- ernment should abstain inertly contempo- of an obsession. He was a fervent ments to MacDonald, but the from constructive work’. He raries and advocate of the Gold Standard influence Sang ascribed to him certainly favoured a limited role and preferred a metallic gold and seems greatly exaggerated. for the public sector and strict later com- silver currency of the sort that Hirst’s influence as a journal- economy in public expenditure, existed in Britain from the early ist and writer was more definite. furiously attacking the growth of mentators nineteenth century until  to He continued to write prolifi- the state especially during war- the fully convertible paper cur- cally in the inter-war period. He time when, he claimed ‘the Brit- as a ‘lais- rency linked to gold that was liked to dictate straight on to the ish nation found out the meaning sez-faire established by Churchill in  typewriter and was usually able to of bureaucracy, and learnt the dif- and survived until . As he send articles to press almost with- ference between being served and Liberal’, never tired of repeating, ‘experi- out correction. In the s his being ruled by a Civil Service.’ ence has proved that sooner or annual analysis of the budget in Hirst considered that the State although later an inconvertible paper cur- Contemporary Review was widely should be responsible for defence rency with no intrinsic value respected. In , A History of and police, provision of public he hotly comes to grief … a moment Free Trade from Adam Smith to goods, and education. He also rejected always comes when the tempta- Philip Snowden, which ran into accepted the need for municipal tion to inflate is irresistible … it several editions, appeared. This services: public health, lighting, the term, [is] madness for any nation which was followed by biographi- roads etc. In general, however, the has the choice to allow its cur- cal studies of great Liberals on state should only take responsi- at least rency to become the plaything both sides of the Atlantic: a Life bility for services ‘plainly ben- of politics … A currency must be of Thomas Jefferson () and The eficial to society which cannot if it was knave-proof and fool-proof.’ Early Life and Letters of John Mor- be left to private enterprise’. As understood Hirst gave his memoirs (which ley (), followed in  by G. P. Gooch wrote of him, Hirst closed before the First World Gladstone as Financier and Econo- ‘remained a “Manchester” man as meaning War) the title ‘In the Golden mist. Several of his works, includ- to the end, much less convinced Days’ and he was in no doubt that ing those on Smith, Morley and than myself of the capacity of leg- that ‘gov- the rot in British politics, soci- Gladstone, have still not been islation to increase our happiness ety and the economy set in with entirely superseded in the litera- and welfare by State action and ernment the abandonment of the Gold ture. His The Consequences of the social reforms to create the Wel- should Standard in . He wrote that War to Great Britain () inter- fare State … he was a Cobden- the old metallic currency ‘was preted recent British history and ite …’ Nevertheless, following abstain as nearly automatic and perfect politics from a Cobdenite Liberal Adam Smith, Hirst claimed that as any country need desire. The point of view. he ‘had no pedantic objection inertly Great War dissolved it. Had we In  Hirst published two to the state managing a business remained neutral … there is no books that summarised his politi- if it can manage it well’. He also from con- reason for supposing that the sys- cal and economic outlook. The wrote positively of the progress in structive tem would have broken down.’ weighty and ambitious Liberty education, public health, old age However he accepted that the and Tyranny traces the history of pensions, and other public serv- work’. decision to abandon the Gold

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 27 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’ Standard again in  was justi- Hirst, ism, mostly written by Thatcher- even more outspoken. He was fied at the time, while hoping for ite Conservatives, tend either to also increasingly doubtful about its restoration and putting for- though an ignore or dismiss the influence of the welfare state in his later years ward ideas for international man- the old Radical Liberal current. and critical of what he called ‘the agement of the price of gold. indiffer- In fact there were important con- Beveridge Hoax’. For their part, The contrast between liber- tinuities, which included Hirst’s some Keynesians were suspicious tarian Conservativism and Hirst’s ent politi- activity. The origins of the revival of Hirst’s continued influence ‘old Liberalism’ was demonstrated cian, was can be traced to ‘Le Colloque on Liberal economic thinking. by his involvement with Ernest Walter Lippmann’, a gathering He dated the opening of the rift Benn’s Individualist Movement. undoubt- of economic liberal academics between ‘the old and the new Benn had founded the move- held in Paris in August  to Liberals’ to , but he remained ment in  while still a Lib- edly the analyse and find ways to reverse an active and popular mem- eral, but had broken finally with the decline of liberal thinking in ber of the party until the final the party in . Hirst seems to leading Europe. The meeting was inspired years of the war, and was regu- have been closely involved from ideologue by The Good Society by the larly elected by the Assembly to the start, as was his old friend American publicist, Walter Lipp- the Party Council. The break Sir Hugh Bell, who was a co- of indi- mann, published in . Hirst seems to have come at the end founder. Hirst helped to write did not attend the meeting, but of  when the Liberal Free The Philosophy of Individualism: A vidualist Lippmann prominently acknowl- Trade Committee was forced out Bibliography, published by Benn’s edged his debt to Hirst’s Liberty of Liberal Headquarters, and car- Individualist Bookshop in . Liberalism and Tyranny in his book. Hirst ried on its campaign against Bev- The movement took on a new in the first propagated classical liberalism eridge’s influence over the party lease of life with the national among the younger generation independently from Dunford mobilisation and planning of the four dec- of economists through his writ- House. Second World War. Hirst pub- ing and lectures, for example at For many years Hirst had also lished a pamphlet on Free Markets ades of the the London School of Econom- spread the word on the other side or Monopoly? in  and helped ics (of which he was a governor) of the Atlantic. He was very well to draft the Manifesto of British twentieth in the late s, where Lionel known in US economic liberal Liberty issued in mid-, of century, a Robbins and Friedrich von circles. His first visit there had which he was a signatory. He was Hayek gathered a group of anti- been in  to advise Senator a leading figure in the Society of viewpoint Keynesian academics and stu- Aldrich’s Monetary Commission, Individualists established by Benn dents who formed the vanguard which preceded the establishment in November , and his pro- that saw of the neo-liberal revival after the of the Federal Reserve Bank. In tégé, Deryck Abel, became sec- war. Hirst and some of the post-  he lectured on economics retary of the Society. Hirst seems economic war neo-liberals certainly must at Stanford University in Cali- to have favoured a broad national liberalism, have known each other through fornia. In , on his last visit membership (– members involvement in such bodies such to the US, he lectured at Wes- in each constituency), while oth- civil liber- as the Free Trade Union. In the leyan University and delivered ers wanted to keep it as an elite late s and ’s he organised the prestigious Princeton Public Establishment lobby. In  a rift ties, peace conferences for undergraduates Lecture on The Value of Liberty. between Hirst and Benn opened at Dunford House to introduce President Herbert Hoover was a up. Hirst wanted the Society to and inter- them to a traditional Liberal per- close friend. lead a civil liberties campaign national- spective on current events. He Despite increasing ill health against the internment of politi- sought to popularise such ideas from about , Hirst continued cal opponents of the war under ism as an through his short book Principles to take a lively interest in politics Regulation b of the Defence of Prosperity (), but with its until shortly before his death, on of the Realm Act, but Benn, an indivisible somewhat antiquated flavour it  February . instinctive ‘patriot’ on such mat- received nothing like the atten- Hirst, though an indifferent ters, refused to get involved. In whole. tion of Hayek’s Road to Serfdom, politician, was undoubtedly the September , Benn agreed published the same year. leading ideologue of individualist to amalgamate the Society with Hirst was, naturally, strongly Liberalism in the first four dec- the National League for Free- opposed to the interventionist ades of the twentieth century, a dom, which claimed some forty economics of Maynard Keynes, viewpoint that saw economic lib- Conservative MPs and a number which were increasingly influ- eralism, civil liberties, peace and of industrialists amongst its mem- ential in the Liberal Party in the internationalism as an indivis- bership. Hirst, with a few Liberal inter-war period and after , ible whole. He was unashamedly followers, resigned, protesting that and this contributed to his disil- backward looking and nostalgic: this ‘signified reaction, protection, lusionment with the party. He for him, Victorian Liberal England mercantilism and monopoly’. frequently attacked Keynes’s ideas truly represented the golden days. Accounts of the post-war in his books and in private his He insistently restated Cobdenite renaissance of economic liberal- denunciations of Keynes were and Gladstonian principles and

28 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 ‘THE LAST OF THE LIBERALS’ sought to show how their aban- p. . have been lost. Most histories of the donment lay behind the troubles  There is an entry for Hirst in the Liberal Party and Liberal ideas ignore of his day. However he failed to Dictionary of National Biography writ- or dismiss Hirst, although there is ten by Roger Fulford (), but he greater interest among libertarians; see, develop a modern and persuasive is not included in The Dictionary of for instance Mark Brady, Against the expression of these ideas to match Liberal Biography (). Some friends Tide: The Life of Francis W. Hirst (www. Keynes, Beveridge and other of Hirst’s including Gilbert Murray, libertyhaven.com, ). Hirst’s papers social liberal thinkers on the left, G. P. Gooch, Roger Fulford, Maurice (together with those of John Morley) or to pre-empt the neo-liberalism Bowra, Arthur Ransome, and Herbert were acquired by the Bodleian Library, Hoover produced a short volume of Oxford, in . Hirst’s memoirs, In of Hayek and the New Right. By recollections in his memory entitled the Golden Days (London ) only the time of his death his brand of F. W. Hirst By His Friends in . A go up to . Liberalism was almost extinct. In few of his books were reissued in the  Hirst, Golden Days, pp. –, . that sense he can indeed be seen s and ’s, but Liberty and Tyr-  J. Simon, Retrospect (London, ), p. as ‘the last of the Liberals’. anny and Economic Freedom and Private . Property have long been out of print  Hirst, Golden Days, p. –. and are now difficult to obtain. W. H.  Gooch, Friends, p. . For Hirst’s edi- Dr Jaime Reynolds is guest-editor of Greenleaf devoted considerable atten- torship of The Economist, see R. Dud- this special issue. He studied at LSE tion to Hirst in his book The British ley Edwards, The Pursuit of Reason and has written extensively on British Ideological Heritage (London, ) pp, – The Economist – (London, and East European political history. –. Anthony Howe, Free Trade and ). Liberal England – (Oxford,  Hirst, Golden Days, p. ; Hirst, Early ) also gives Hirst some promi- Life and Letters of John Morley (London,  Inscription by Hirst to the Bishop of nence (p. ). Howe cites Hirst’s diary, ) introduction. London in author’s copy of F. W. Hirst, but this refers only to limited extracts  However there is only one brief men- Liberty and Tyranny (London, ). included in Hirst’s privately published tion of Hirst in Morley’s Recollections  G. P. Gooch et al., F. W. Hirst By His pamphlet The Formation, History and (London, ). Friends (London, ), p. . Aims of the Liberal Free Trade Commit-  Ibid., pp. –.  F . W. Hirst (ed.), Alexander Gordon Cum- tee –; the diary itself appears to  Hirst, Gordon Harvey, p. vii. mins Harvey: a Memoir (London. ),  Hirst, Golden Days, pp. , .  Hirst, Golden Days, pp. –. This view is not shared by modern histo- Francis Wrigley Hirst 1873–1953: Selected rians, see I. R. Smith, The Origins of the South African War – (London, writings ).  Hirst, Golden Days, p. ; Simon, Ret- Hirst et al., Essays in Liberalism by Six Oxford Men (London, Cassell, 1897) rospect, p. . Hirst et al., Liberalism and the Empire, Three Essays (London, Brimley Johnson, 1900)  M. A. Hamilton, Remembering My Good Friends (London, ), p. . Joseph Redlich and F. W. Hirst, The History of Local Government in England (London, Macmillan, 1903,  Gooch, Friends, chapters by J. E. Allen reprinted until 1970s) (Hirst’s brother-in-law) and Arthur Free Trade and other Fundamental Doctrines of the Manchester School (London and New York, Harper Ransome (an angling partner), pp. , –. & Brothers, 1903, reprinted 1968)  Hirst, Golden Days, p. . Adam Smith (English Men of Letters series, London, Macmillan, 1904)  S. Koss, The Rise and Fall of the Political Press in Britain, vol.  (London, ), Arbiter in Council (London, Macmillan, 1906 anonymous) pp. –. S. Koss, Asquith (London, The Stock Exchange: A short study of investment and speculation (London, H. Holt, 1911; 2nd ed. ), pp. –. London, Thornton Butterworth, 1932)  S. Koss, Rise and Fall, p. .  Unfinished Peace, Report of the Interna- The Political Economy of War (London, J. M. Dent, 1915) tional Commission on the Balkans, . From Adam Smith to Philip Snowden: A History of Free Trade in Great Britain (London, T. Fisher Unwin, Carnegie Endowment for Interna- 1925) tional Peace, Washington. See also www.macedoniainfo.com/macedo- Hirst (ed.), Alexander Gordon Cummins Harvey: a memoir (London, Richard Cobden-Sanderson, 1925) nia/foreword.htm.  Hirst, Harvey, pp. , . Life and Letters of Thomas Jefferson (London, Macmillan, 1925)  C. Hazlehurst, Politicians at War (Lon- Hirst and J. E. Allen, British War Budgets (Oxford University Press, 1926) don, ), p.  citing letter from Hirst to C. P. Trevelyan,  August Early Life and Letters of John Morley (London, Macmillan, 1927; reprinted 1975) , Trevelyan MSS.. Gladstone as Financier & Economist (London, Ernest Benn, 1931)  C. Hazlehurst Politicians at War, p. .  Hirst, Harvey, pp. , –. See also Money: Gold, Silver and Paper (London, Scribner’s, 1933) Dudley Edwards, Pursuit of Reason, pp. –. The Consequences of the War to Great Britain (Oxford University Press, 1934)  F. W. Hirst, Money: Gold, Silver and Liberty and Tyranny (London, Duckworth & Co, 1935) Paper (London, ), p. .  Notably The Political Economy of War Economic Freedom and Private Property (London, Duckworth, 1935) (London, ). Armaments: the Race and the Crisis (London, Cobden-Sanderson, 1937)  Hirst, Golden Days, p. .  Gooch, Friends, p. . Principles of Prosperity (London, Hollis and Carter, 1944)  Hamilton, Remembering, p. . In the Golden Days (London, Frederick Muller, 1947) concluded on page 35

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 29 Even during its periods Leaders of the f the fate of the Liberal Party, novel: there was drama, with split: Asquith and early in the twentieth cen- strong personalities intriguing of greatest success, the Lloyd George tury, was to lose its inter- against a dramatic backdrop, Liberal Party suffered ventionist left wing to the ostensibly citing great issues of Labour Party, its libertarian state; there was comedy, with a many splits, but that Iright wing to the Conservative Whitehall farce of gossip and occasioned by the First Party, and in so doing render itself briefings, golf and bridge parties, flightless (if not, quite, like the scurrying and scribbling wives World War proved to be dodo), then the split between the and mistresses, and a pervasive the most damaging. The Prime Minister, H. H. Asquith, theatricality; and there was and the Secretary of State for War, tragedy, with the deadening contradictions evident David Lloyd George, in  can knowledge of the ultimate futility be seen as the moment when of everyone’s endeavours, as the in explaining the that which was merely possible party was lost through the dispute ideological foundations became that which was really and its aftermath, and the field quite likely. How far a process of of battle left to the enemy. To of the dispute help natural selection had been oper- exacerbate the frustrations, both explain why it is more ating remains unclear at the time protagonists were surrounded of writing. and distracted by lesser men, usually depicted as a The episode has featured many without a liberal bone in clash of personalities prominently in the study of the their bodies, and most of whom decline of the Liberal Party. The owed such positions of influence than of strategy. Martin immediate appeal is obvious. as they occupied, or were to Farr examines what The circumstances surrounding occupy, to the patronage of the the events of the first week of Right Honourable members for happened in December December  possessed the East Fife and Caernarvon. . gruesome attractions of a bad

30 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LEFT, RIGHT DECEMBER 1916: THE FORWARD MARCH OF LIBERALS HALTED

The personally political has to that end. The contrast with to hang together, the political remained the main appeal of the liberalism, as caricatured by the The liberals and the economic liberals subject. In the seductiveness popular press and opposition circum- thereafter hanged separately. of engaging with personalities politicians, was thought to be The ideological division rather than policy, the ideological clear: Liberals were antediluvian stances was closely bound with the significance of the split has been quasi-pacifists wedded to narrow personal disagreements that split marginalised as one of largely partisan advantage, resistant to surround- the Liberals during the war and academic interest, in both senses. the requirements of ‘total war’, subsequently: it was on the rock Insofar as ideas have registered, and who had to be dragged ing the of personality that principles the split is held to have marked from office by men of action. To events of broke. This has left philosophical the breaking of a party which, that extent, the hardy perennial analysis of this climactic episode despite the efforts of some of exam questions – ‘To what the first in Liberal government relatively before the war to engage with extent did war revolutionise or poorly served. Students still the challenges of industrial merely hasten existing trends?’ week of cling to ‘Liberal’ as a synonym democracy, was squeezed by left – is well suited to the Liberal for ‘laissez faire’, with Liberals and right, failing to recognise Party. If the party had been December airily conducting war policy as the necessity of organisation and managing, relatively comfortably, 1916 ‘business as usual’ on ‘limited intervention, or to at least mouth to accommodate New and liability principles’. While the the rhetoric of belligerence. Both Classical Liberals, Pro-Boers and possessed personal disagreements are well Labourism (notwithstanding the Liberal Imperialists, why could known, the ideological split opposition of some of its leading it not agree over the prosecution the is often misunderstood, being figures, such as Keir Hardie of a war that most supported? It both exaggerated in substance and Ramsay MacDonald) and appeared to many that the ‘New’ gruesome and compressed in form by Conservatism, in their different failed fully to overcome the ‘Old’: attractions the usual simplicities of party ways, recognised the importance the interventionists stymied by political philosophy. If aphoristic of a strong state in wartime, and the libertarians, the left thwarted of a bad definitions for ‘left’ and ‘right’ of subordinating other matters by the right, as it were. By failing might be, respectively, freedom novel.

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 31 LEFT, RIGHT through control, and freedom With the ministry was necessary. Of course, by Asquith’s leading lieutenants in from control, the dilemma for in times of crisis, coalitions may the three great offices of state: the Liberals in a wartime and post- most nota- be desirable even when they Home Secretary, Sir John Simon; war world was obvious. The are not necessary, though there the Foreign Secretary, Sir Edward popular desire – or perhaps need ble excep- were not then such precedents Grey; and the Chancellor of the – to label policies or politicians (although, in the curious Exchequer, McKenna – and, as being of the left or the right tions of circularity of the period, Lloyd indeed, by the majority of the that still besets Liberals early in John Burns George had tried to organise a ministerial Liberals. Whatever the the twenty-first century can be coalition in , and in so doing Liberals’ numerical superiority, seen to have its roots early in the and John infuriated many of his colleagues, a relentless intensification of the twentieth. Though conventional instilling in some the distrust of conflict as advocated by Tories political discourse requires it, Morley, the his methods and motives that became increasingly hard to deny, however, the  split cannot proved insurmountable in ). both politically and militarily. satisfactorily be explained in party went Asquith’s May  coalition was Conceived of as the panacea for such stark terms. That such an to war a tactical triumph but a strategic the western front, conscription ideologically polarised approach misjudgement. While Tories had proved to be the single most is not helpful does not necessarily united, if been denied the main offices controversial issue on the home mean it is not interesting. of state, their approach to the front, and, as is often the way with less enthu- conduct of the war – that of an divisive issues, had neither the Asquith and Lloyd George unlimited commitment – could disastrous consequences feared by were successive Chancellors siastically no longer be denied. Moreover, opponents nor the transformative of the Exchequer, pioneering than most the surrender of government, effect proclaimed by its advocates. that office into the engine of though necessary even by the In what could be described as government it has remained. of the peacetime electoral timetable, the first December crisis, of , Ideological change would find smarted for many Liberals, some Simon, Grey, McKenna, and the its expression there more than popula- of whom saw it as a betrayal by President of the Board of Trade, elsewhere, yet their policies Asquith; that they tended also to Walter Runciman, resigned marked a coherent philosophical tion, but be those who would come to hold from the Cabinet over the issue. progression. What was different that lack Lloyd George responsible for the Grey, McKenna, and Runciman – significantly, as far as Liberals December  split illustrates then changed their minds. The at war were concerned – was of evident how fractured the factions would government remained intact, and that there had been a dramatic become. Any move to the right, conscription was introduced in escalation of both rhetoric and enthusi- therefore, could thereafter appear January . ambition under Lloyd George by as a political defeat, which any The animosity caused by the the time the war broke out. With asm, even Liberal concerned with liberal debates over conscription, as well the most notable exceptions of on the part principles might feel inclined to as those concerning war strategy John Burns and John Morley, resist. The fear of emboldening and even the language of politics, the party went to war united, if of Liberal opponents served to hinder clear festered. This, together with the less enthusiastically than most action, and make change appear growing military impotence and of the population, but that lack Imperial- to be more resisted than it was. political anxiety of the French of evident enthusiasm, even on The issues around which and the Russians, the economic the part of Liberal Imperialists ists who this analysis can be based soon influence of the Americans, who could hardly be described could arose, and went beyond the and a Tory party and press as pacific, remained a crippling circumstantial (such as the mental revitalised by its apparent success handicap. Some German-speak- hardly be wellbeing of Admiral Fisher, the in accelerating the war effort, ers, such as R. B. Haldane and number of faulty shells at the produced the second December Prince Louis of Battenberg, described front, or the topography of the crisis, the political manoeuvrings were vilified for it and perished; Dardanelles) which helped derail of which led to Asquith’s others, like Reginald McKenna, as pacific, what proved to be the last Liberal resignation and Lloyd George’s were vilified but survived, forced remained government. Unfortunately for accession. The real division had into harrying dachshunds dur- Asquith, the divisions wrought by been over strategy: whether the ing the spy hysteria. a crippling the necessary escalation in the war war should be long or short, of It was only when those errors effort were felt most by the still- subsidies or armies, or whether and accidents inevitable in so handicap. ascendant Liberals. Compulsion the risk of achieving German unprecedented an undertaking in general, and conscription in capitulation was preferable to the were exploited by opponents particular, was advocated by a slow erosion of British economic well aware that the government group which, though few in power and diplomatic autonomy: required a fresh mandate even number, were loud in voice, with whether it was worth gambling without a great national crisis Lloyd George as its mouthpiece. all on a ‘knock-out blow’ when that a reconstruction of the In this, Lloyd George was opposed that blow might prove to be

32 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LEFT, RIGHT only glancing. That debate was be seen both as necessary Runciman, and it followed that rendered practically irrelevant precursors for the exercise of they were also two of the leading by increasingly desperate compulsion more generally, and opponents of conscription. Yet it representations from both Paris conscription in particular, as was the free-trader Chancellor and Petrograd, the failure of the well as of a continuation of pre- who, in what became almost his  summer offensive, and the war Liberal policy. This is a fact only popular historical footnote, portentous flexing of muscles often overlooked. The second introduced tariffs, in Septem- in Washington and New York. December crisis was a matter of ber . The McKenna Duties The German U-boat offensive degree and a matter of motive. In were essentially symbolic, but in the spring of  brought this light, ‘business as usual’ takes even a symbolic surrender to the Americans into the war, on a new meaning. protection could be seen as hand- and their implicit underwriting The notion that December ing over the keys to the fortress. became explicit participation.  marked no significant McKenna faced pronounced External pressures and internal change in policy is perhaps best criticism from Liberals, and he compromise had ensured that by illustrated by the single most offered a variety of explanations, the time of the split, there were controversial measure of the war: tailored to the critic in question. little grounds for disagreement conscription. Conscription is as To F. W. Hirst, of The Economist, amongst Liberals; another irony. central to the concerns of this for whom almost every aspect of For a war in which Britain article as it is to much else, for the financial management of the chose to fight, the principal the division over conscription war was an affront to Liberalism, political issue was and remained was a left/right issue, if not for they were presented as a tem- the extent to which choice was the reasons given at the time. porary gesture; to C. P. Scott, of summarily subordinated to the The opposition of Liberals to The Manchester Guardian, riding national interest. Organisation conscription tended to be twofold: the Liberal tiger more effectively would be the key to prevailing in from a libertarian objection to than most, they were a practical what would be an industrial war the assault on the freedom of the necessity. Of course, no number of against Germany, and German individual, in that a person should compromises could atone in the organisation had been a model not be compelled to fight, such as eyes of critics for the occasional for many New Liberal ideas of the that which Simon or F. W. Hirst The notion applications of traditional Liberal period. Nevertheless, the Liberals presented; or an economically that principle, a late example being were held to have failed since they liberal view, in that conscription the sale of enemy property in feared Prussian methods in a war could not be afforded, which December East Africa: the Nigeria debate against Prussianism. The extent to was McKenna’s and Runciman’s in November , like that of which this canard has remained is position. Yet where the former 1916 Norway in May , being a one of the enduring fascinations was a stance from which it was proximate cause of the collapse of of the war. The clarion ‘War difficult to retreat, from the marked no a national government. Socialism’ was, after all, uttered latter position compromise was significant The split did not lead to by a Liberal, albeit so irregular quite possible, and compromise opposition as such, official or a Liberal as Winston Churchill McKenna and Runciman did. change in otherwise. Notwithstanding the (who thus demonstrated that For the Chancellor and his geography of the chamber of the not all converts to Conservatism friend and adviser, John Maynard policy is House of Commons, Asquith were libertarian). In the spirit Keynes, it actually offered new and his Liberals were often not of the New Liberal reforms opportunities and firmer ground perhaps even metaphorically two swords’ of the Edwardian period, the for opposition to the conduct of best lengths away, and did not formally government had by the summer the war favoured by Lloyd George oppose Lloyd George over the of  already overseen the and the Conservative Party, but illustrated remaining controversial issues introduction of what at the by then the political momentum of the war, such as conscription times were draconian measures, was lost. by the in Ireland, or a negotiated peace dramatically imposing itself The next best indication of (the need for which, for many on areas of public life hitherto a policy already admitted yet single most Liberals – and the odd Tory – was untouched by central control. which was claimed to proffer the contro- desperate). When they did, as Left and right, as it were, were parting of the ways, was free trade. in the Maurice debate of May united, and no more starkly than It was, among other reasons, for versial , the party remained divided, Lloyd George and Ernest Benn the continuance of free trade, and and prey to the instincts of its in harness at the Ministry of the assuaging of its adherents, that measure opponents. Similarly, after the Munitions. The Defence of the Asquith gave the Treasury to the crash of the  general election, Realm Act, the Munitions of War once Secretary of the Free Trade of the the dispersal of Liberals in the Act, and related measures further Union, McKenna, and the Board war: con- wreckage was far from ordered. contributed to the subordination of Trade to another genetic lais- Principle played a part in where of the individual which may sez-fairer, and scion of shipping, scription. they fell, as did practice, and the

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 33 LEFT, RIGHT desire to practise in government Ramsay MacDonald, and became similar approach, reinforced this marked many defectors as being a notably Keynesian banker in a point; the war marked a classic more pragmatic than their time when there were no others, squeeze, the like of which would erstwhile colleagues, or more to be vilified anew. Even for those become all too familiar. Just as hungry than their erstwhile who remained at least nominally the personnel lined up personally leader. Yet another irony, or yet Liberal, identity could be indis- rather than politically, the system another tragedy, was that the most tinct. Far from dressing to either required a governing party of pragmatic and most hungry of left or right, few Liberals were the left and of the right. The all, Lloyd George, within four confessedly either Asquithian or ‘system’ may be a less engaging years never practised again. The Georgian, and for several years, or animating concept than either immediate victor was therefore their motion positively Brown- politicians or ideology, but no less also the ultimate loser, and a man ian. important, as (usually Liberal) of the left. The Liberals with efforts to reform it demonstrate. nearly as far to fall – Asquith, Grey, It is just as easy to over-dramatise The December  cleaving Haldane – were on the right of as it is to maintain that the did not split into left and right in the party. Their political fate was Liberal governments of – any meaningful way, nor should it comparable, suggesting the role represented the best chance of be expressed in such terms, even of ideology was less important Liberalism providing progressive when the historian is charged than that of tactics, personality, and effective government in with making sense of such things. the electoral system, and age, of the new mass democracy, and In  Lloyd George could be which Grey’s blindness was the that their failure was due almost claimed for the left and Asquith most poignant representation. wholly to the split of December for the right; four years later Both world wars offered pub- . The reasons for the split the former sat with the Tories lic figures undesirable but tenured were varied, and in many cases with the latter contemplating positions as scapegoats, and after longstanding. There was a association with Labour. The  they tended to be Liberals. It partisan aversion to conceding Liberal approach to the war was was left to the rest to make sense ground to Conservatives, as well a consistent one – one which of it as best they could, and in so as a fear of newly confident consistently moved with events. doing demonstrated the unfamil- organised labour. In that the war That is a better definition of iarity of the new landscape. Don- promoted the general acceptance governance than it is of indecision. ald Maclean and George Thorne of intervention and organisation, ‘Business as usual’ did not evolve stayed with the Old Man; Hilton it benefited both left and right, into ‘War Socialism’ as neither Young and Christopher Addison and, indeed, both Labour and ever really existed, away from the with the Son of the People. Some Conservatives – the flat-capped dais. The way in which Liberals went with neither; Edwin Mon- and the hard-faced – benefited extemporised the management of tagu with both. Sooner or later, Both from the war. The Liberals, who ‘total war’ was quite laudable, but to an extent lesser or greater, Hal- world wars had largely guided that advance, ensured that the partial fraud of dane, Josiah Wedgwood, Francis were broken, assisted by a more the change of personnel in  Acland, E. D. Morel, R. L. Out- offered general cultural disengagement, could come to be seen as all the hwaite, H. B. Lees-Smith, Joseph with few Liberals other than more frustrating. Insofar as the King, C. P. Trevelyan, Christopher public fig- Lloyd George conversant with political manifestation of the war Addison, and Ernest’s brother the language of war, or, as was to was a muddle, it was therefore at William Wedgwood Benn, veered ures unde- be proved, of popular politics. one, for once, with the military; left and found a more comfort- sirable but The second December crisis that the British system requires able berth in the Labour Party, as remains vital even as it is partially such contrapositional notions as did thousands of activists. Oth- tenured (or even mis)understood. For left and right is not the least irony ers, including, Churchill, McK- those without Liberal sympathies of the subject to Liberal history, enna, Simon, Runciman, Fred§dy positions it may demonstrate the vitality and, in that, is as satisfactory a Guest, Alfred Mond, and George of an adversarial system. It is microcosm of liberalism in the Lambert, either joined or at least as scape- certainly difficult accurately to twentieth century as one could endorsed the Tories, as did most of goats, colour the key political issues as hope to find. the electorate. Even here, however, either red or blue, even if, for the the dichotomy is unsatisfactory. and after purposes of this special edition, Martin Farr is a lecturer in history Churchill was no more reliable it is in some way desired. For at the University of Newcastle. a Conservative than he was Lib- 1918 they those with such sympathies, the His doctoral research at Glasgow eral; and McKenna, though he episode remains distressing when concerned Liberalism, strategy, and the endorsed Andrew Bonar Law, tended to its consequences are considered. First World War, and his biography of and consented to serve as Stanley be Liber- That the principal party victors Reginald McKenna will be published Baldwin’s Chancellor, advocated of the war were theoretically next year. closer links with Labour, advised als. oppositionist, yet advocated a

34 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LEFT, RIGHT

 Michael Fry, ‘Political Change in History Group Newsletter, , March –’, The Historical Journal, , Britain, August  to December . The  (), pp. –. More gener- : Lloyd George Replaces  Martin Farr, ‘Squiff, Lliar George, ally: A. J. A. Morris, The Scaremongers: Asquith: The Issues Underlying the and the McKennae: the unpersuasive December The Advocacy of War and Rearmament Drama’, Historical Journal, xxxi,  politics of personality in the Asquith – (London: Routledge & (), pp. –; R. J. Q. Adams, Coalition, –’, in Julie 1916 Kegan Paul, ). ‘Asquith’s Choice: the May Coalition Gottlieb and Richard Toye (eds.),  See Martin Horn, Britain, France, and the Coming of Conscription, Power, Personality and Persuasion: cleaving and the Financing of the First World –’, Journal of British Studies, Studies in British Political History War (Montreal: McGill-Queen’s  (July ), pp. –; Richard (London: I. B. Tauris, forthcoming). did not University Press, ); Keith Nielson, Murphy, ‘Walter Long, The Unionist  For government see Kathleen Strategy and Supply: The Anglo-Russian Ministers, and the Formation of Lloyd Burk (ed.), War and the State: The split into Alliance, – (London: George George’s Government in December Transformation of British Government Allen & Unwin, ). ’, Historical Journal, xxix,  (), – (London: George Allen & left and  See Kathleen Burk, Britain, America, pp. –; Peter Fraser, ‘British War Unwin, ); for finance see Hew and the Sinews of War (London: George Policy and the Crisis of Liberalism in Strachan, Financing the First World right in any Allen & Unwin, ). May ’, Journal of Modern History, War (Oxford: Oxford University  Though it has been addressed before  (March ), pp –; J. M. McE- Press, ); for politics see George meaningful in this journal: Chris Wrigley, ‘The wan, ‘The Struggle for Mastery in Cassar, Asquith as War Leader (London: First World War and Liberal Values’, Britain: Lloyd George versus Asquith, Hambledon, ), and John Turner, way, nor Liberal Democrat History Group December ’, Journal of British British Politics and the Great War (New Newsletter, , March . Studies, xviii (), pp. –; Haven: Yale, ); for strategy see  See Martin Farr, ‘A Compelling Case Martin Pugh, ‘Asquith, Bonar Law, David French, British Economic and should for Voluntarism: Britain’s Alternative and the First Coalition’, Historical Strategic Planning – (London: Strategy –’, War in History, Journal, xvii,  (), pp. –; Allen & Unwin, ), and David it be ,  (), pp. –; Robert Stephen Koss, ‘The Destruction of French, British Strategy & War Aims Skidelsky, John Maynard Keynes, Britain’s Last Liberal Government’, – (London: Allen & Unwin, expressed Volume One: Hopes Betrayed – Journal of Modern History, XL,  ). (London: Macmillan, ). (), pp. –; Barry McGill,  The best outline is Michael Bentley, in such  Some sifting has been done on these ‘Asquith’s Predicament: –’, ‘The Liberal Party, –: pages: Roy Douglas, ‘A failure of Journal of Modern History, ,  (), Summit and Descent’, in Chris terms, leadership: Defections –’, pp. –. Wrigley (ed.), A Companion to Early Journal of Liberal History, , ;  This has been touched on before on Twentieth-Century Britain (Oxford: even Nick Cott, ‘Liberal unity frustrated’, these pages. See John Grigg, ‘Asquith Blackwell, ), pp. –. Journal of Liberal History, , . and Lloyd George: Common  Only a mild exaggeration. See when the Misunderstandings’, Liberal Democrat David French, ‘Spy Fever in Britain, historian is charged with ‘The Last of the Liberals’ (concluded from page 29) making Journal online  D. Abel, Ernest Benn: Counsel for Liberty  Hirst, Money, pp. , n; Hirst, Prin- (London, ) ciples, p. –. Gooch, Friends, p. . sense subscriptions  For the classic Thatcherite interpreta-  Gooch, Friends, p. . tion see D. Willetts, Modern Conserva-  R. F. Harrod, The Prof: A Personal Mem- of such now available tism (Penguin, ). oir of Lord Cherwell (London, ), p. The Liberal Democrat History  R. Cockett, Thinking the Unthinkable . things. Group is pleased to announce the (London ,), p. –.  For example, he was elected st of availability of a new subscription  W. Lippmann, The Good Society (Bos-  members at the  Assembly. It service: online subscriptions. ton, ), p. viii. Lippmann’s book appears that he did not seek re-elec- also influenced the Ownership for All tion in . LPO reports –. In addition to printed copies, programme adopted by the Liberal  Hirst, Liberal Free Trade Committee, pp. online subscribers will be able to Party in . –. access pdf files of current and past  For example W. H. Hutt, who Hirst  Hirst, Money, p. x. Journals via the Group’s website, had helped to write The Philosophy of  Ibid. www.liberalhistory.org.uk. Online Individualism in .  Hoover and Hirst became friends subscribers will be sent a password  Hirst was on the executive of the FTU before  when Hoover worked (changed each year) for access to until the late s, overlapping with as an international engineer and vis- the protected area of the site. Arthur Seldon, for example. ited London where he was briefly  Letter from Hirst to R. F. Harrod,  a neighbour in Campden Hill. He Online subscriptions cost £35.00 November , refers to the ‘so- looked after Hirst when he was taken per year. Overseas (non-UK) online called Liberal Party’ and adds ‘Tories seriously ill during a visit to the US in subscriptions are available for are all for conscription and preferential . Hoover contributed to Gooch, £40.00 per year, or £100 for three protection. They are no more conserv- Friends (see p. ). years. ative than the Liberal Parties are Lib- Older copies of the Journal will eral’. See: http://e-server.e.u-tokyo. ac.jp/Exhibition/keynes/gif/- continue to be available to all .gif visitors to the site. Issues 1–24 are currently available as pdf files.

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 35 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP? IDEOLOGICAL STRUGGLE IN THE LIBERAL PARTY IN THE 1940s AND 1950s

‘The radical of one century is the conservative of the next’ – Mark Twain, attributed.

After the Second World War, the Liberal Party moved to the right and, in the early s, strongly reasserted its free-trade credentials. Robert Ingham analyses the different currents of right-wing thinking in the party at that time to assess the extent to which decisions on policy, particularly those made by the party assembly, Liberal Magazine uring the late s assembly were both battlegrounds reflected opinion cover, January and early s on which Liberals who sympa- 1947. the Liberal Party thised with the direction of the amongst the party’s appeared to undergo Attlee government engaged with activists. a period of intense those who deplored increased Dideological strife. The House government intervention in the of the Commons and the party economy and harked back to an

36 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP?

earlier period of laissez-faire eco- a dispute between left-wing and Was there  election manifesto than in nomics. There were high-profile right-wing factions in the s its  equivalent. In  the casualties on both sides. Megan and s. Firstly, the labelling of a real assembly backed unilateral free Lloyd George and Dingle Foot, particular groups within the Lib- trade and the abolition of guar- both former MPs, abandoned the eral Party as ‘left’ or ‘right’ is not debate anteed prices and assured mar- Liberal Party for Labour, accus- straightforward. David Dutton, in kets for agricultural products, to ing their former party of moving his recent history of the party, for going the consternation of many Lib- to the right. Another former MP, example, refers to ‘heated debates amongst eral candidates. The free traders George Wadsworth, moved to the between individualists, who con- lost ground at the  and  Conservative Party and, from the tinued to preach the time-hon- Liberals at assemblies, but the call for uni- mid-s onwards, there was a oured Liberal virtues of free trade, lateral free trade reasserted itself trickle of rightward defections, personal liberty and minimum all levels in  and . After that the led by former party organiser government intervention, and terms of the argument shifted to Edward Martell. radicals who traced their politi- about the focus on whether the UK should The purpose of this article is to cal pedigrees back via the inter- direction join the Common Market, which assess whether this battle between ventionist policies of Beveridge would necessarily involve accept- left and right was played out at the and Keynes to the New Liberals of their ance of a tariff barrier with non- local level at this time, or whether of the turn of the century’. It member countries. With some it was manifest solely at the level might seem simple to brand the party? firm leadership from Jo Grimond of the party leadership. Was there a individualists as right-wing and and his allies, the unilateral free real debate going amongst Liber- the radicals as left-wing; but this traders were comprehensively als at all levels about the direction would have been bitterly con- routed and the Liberal Party of their party and what liberalism tested by the s free traders emerged as strong supporters of meant in an era when the distinc- who regarded themselves as radi- British membership of the Com- tion between ‘left’ and ‘right’ was cals and the other side as essen- mon Market. stark (although not necessarily tially conservative. The free traders gener- reflected in the actions of the two The Liberal Party’s free-trade ally resented being branded as main parties when in govern- faction, under the de facto lead- right-wingers. Some drew their ment); or was the policy debate ership of parliamentary candi- inspiration from the tradition of in the party’s higher echelons an date Oliver Smedley and City Gladstone and Cobden, or were indicator of the direction and Press owner S. W. Alexander, was modern economic liberals. There strength of its leadership? a major force at party assemblies was a discernible streak of eco- throughout the period under nomic liberalism running through consideration. They ensured that mainstream Liberal policy in the Methodology the assembly voted for the elimi- s, evidenced by the promi- There are two fundamental dif- nation of tariffs in both  and nence given to the threat posed ficulties with assessing whether , which led to free trade tak- by inflation and monopolistic Liberal activists were engaged in ing a more prominent role in the practices. Many drew inspiration

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 37 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP? from the pre-First World War were in a minority in this group, following three areas of the coun- campaign for the taxation of and serious disagreements over try where a significant number land values, however, often citing policy would be likely to be set- of right-wing Liberals can be Henry George’s Progress and Pov- tled over a period of weeks or expected to be found: erty, written in the s, as the months, rather than rumble on starting point of their thinking. from year to year as was the case • London – where the Lib- They argued that government with the annual assembly. eral and Liberal National revenue should be raised from One problem with this area parties merged in , taxing land, rather than imports, approach was that sub-national bringing a number of Liberal with cheaper food and a redis- Liberal organisations devoted most Nationals, in particular Sir tribution of wealth away from of their time and energy during Alfred Suenson-Taylor, into the landed aristocracy being the this period to organisational mat- positions of prominence in main, beneficial side effects. ters – for example, finance (or lack the party. Free traders such Nevertheless, as we shall see, of it), the selection of parliamen- as Smedley, Alexander and there were points of contact tary candidates, and correspond- Roy Douglas were active between the free-trade wing of ence with the national party. In there; and Edward Martell the Liberal Party and more obvi- some parts of the country, policy was based there. ously right-wing ideas and per- discussions were rarely, if ever, a sonalities. In this article, strong feature of the activities of Liberal • Yorkshire – long regarded expressions of support for free organisations. In most, however, as the home of individual- trade, and the Smedley/Alexander motions relating to topical policy ist ‘economic liberals’ and faction, are taken as indicators of matters were recorded reason- which included towns such right-wing thinking at the Liberal ably often. These are the subject of as Huddersfield and Halifax, Party’s grassroots. Other indicators analysis in this article. where electoral agreements are opinions expressed on post- A survey of Liberal members were reached with the Con- war reconstruction, particularly on or activists during the s and servatives at local and, in the the Beveridge Report, the Labour s would, of course, be the case of Huddersfield, national government’s nationalisation plans, ideal method of assessing the level after . and the Suez campaign. extent to which the ideological The second difficulty lies in The free struggle evident at leadership • Lancashire – another area identifying grassroots opinion. traders level was reflected at local level. where support for the Lib- One way of doing so would be to No such survey was then under- eral Party remained strong analyse the topics debated at Lib- generally taken. Over a hundred Liber- at a local level after  eral assemblies and, if reported, als active during that period and where electoral agree- the tenor of the speeches made. resented were interviewed on policy and ments were reached at This approach would not be other matters in the s, how- national (Bolton) and local without its difficulties, however, being ever, and the results reported in (e.g. Rochdale) level after the and has not been taken in this branded as an unpublished doctoral thesis. Second World War. article. Although in theory strictly There are many difficulties with representative of the party’s mem- right-wing- interpreting the results of such a bership, in practice the assembly survey, not least because it was London was a largely self-selecting group ers. Some inevitably biased towards those During the Second World of grandees, candidates and the who stayed active in the Liberal War, the London Liberal Party principal activists. Its composi- drew their Party and the Liberal Democrats, expressed consistent support for tion was also heavily dependent inspiration rather than those who drifted the proposals published by the on where it met. Furthermore, away from the party, perhaps government on post-war recon- assembly proceedings were not from the because of dissatisfaction with struction, including the Beveridge well reported until the s. the party’s perceived shift to the Report. A strong minority view The main focus in this article tradition left under Jo Grimond. Never- was evident, although never suc- is on the views recorded in the theless, the survey produced clear cessful. Thus a resolution on the minutes of sub-national Liberal of Glad- results which are reported below. Beveridge Report describing it organisations, including regional stone and Information about the sample of as ‘another step on the slippery federations, constituency asso- activists interviewed is provided path of regimentation leading ciations, and district or ward Cobden, in the annex. to a totalitarian state’ and calling organisations. The people who on the Liberal Party Organisa- attended the executive commit- or were tion ‘not to espouse a pale imita- tee and council meetings of such Grassroots opinion tion of socialism’ was defeated. It organisations were the main- modern This survey of the views recorded followed a similarly florid con- stay of the Liberal Party, with- economic in the minutes of sub-national demnation of subsidies – ‘which out whom the ship would have Liberal organisations in the transform the individual into sunk. Attendees of the assembly liberals. s and s focuses on the a puppet of the state and pro-

38 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP? voke loss of fibre’ – in October to present the leadership’s view ‘Do not run Party is a centre party, fluc-  and which described free on how the party might bounce tuating between Toryism competition as ‘the life blood of back. Following the success of the away with and Socialism. It therefore progress’. The London Liberal electoral arrangement with the calls upon the leader of the Party agreed with a letter from Conservatives in Huddersfield, the idea party to propagate more its West Midlands counterpart Byers was on the look-out for militantly our radical pol- opposing the proposition that the similar opportunities. His report that Liber- icy, making it clear to the post-war general election could to the London party was received alism pro- electorate that neither the be fought in tandem with the without comment: Conservative Party nor the Conservatives, using a coupon vides the Labour Party are progres- arrangement like in . It also There must be no deals but, sive and that they are in fact took no action against the Chair- where possible, without in middle way fundamentally the same, man of the East Islington Lib- any way compromising the and that liberalism is the eral Association who spoke on a independence of the candi- between distinctive radical alterna- Labour platform in the  gen- date, we should try to bring the other tive to both these stagnant eral election, to argue that Liber- about straight fights. He creeds. als should not vote Conservative. believed there were occa- two, still It ‘noted with regret’ the activi- sions when this was possi- The London Liberal Party did ties of the left-wing ginger group ble by frightening the other less that it not wholeheartedly back the Radical Action, however, prob- parties. free-trade faction and, by the ably mindful that such groups had is a com- early s, stood full-square in the past tended to spearhead The Huddersfield arrangement promise behind party policy in sup- defections away from the party. was intended to benefit the port of UK membership of the After the war, the London Conservatives as well as the Lib- between Common Market. The shift in party became noticeably more erals and there were no areas of attitude appears to have been right-wing in its policy pro- London where the Liberals were them. Lib- sparked by the over-zealous pro- nouncements. This may have strong enough to offer a similar motion of free trade and related been due to the influx of Liberal bargain. Even in areas of residual eralism is right-wing ideas by Alexander, Nationals or to general antipathy strength, such as Bethnal Green, a distinct who was chairman of the Lon- with the actions of the Labour the Liberals were haemorrhag- don party in the mid-s. His government, or a combination ing support. Byers’ comments creed chairman’s report to the London of the two. A resolution against obviously aroused some interest, Liberal Council in  caused the repeal of the Trades Disputes however, as the sporadic attempts – a distinct a storm of protest, after he came and Trade Unions Act was passed to propose deals with the Con- out in support of the govern- unanimously; the London party servatives during the s often philoso- ment’s policy on Suez and against opposed the nationalisation of included London seats, particu- phy, dis- United Nations intervention. He any inland transport, including larly Bethnal Green. was forced to resign and in  the railways; the nationalisation The free-trade controversy was tinct from was ‘severely reprimanded’ by the of steel was ‘viewed with alarm’; reflected in the London Liberal Liberal Party Organisation for and the national party was taken Party throughout the s. The Socialism, an article in the City Press accus- to task for not providing suf- phrase barely appears before , ing the Liberal Party of playing ficient opposition to nationali- when the East Fulham Young Lib- from Com- down its Liberal credentials. sation proposals. Calls for the erals proposed a resolution in sup- munism, Simon Knott, another free trader, defence of freedom and liberty port of free trade and land value became something of a thorn in were not uncommon, but there taxation which, they claimed, and from the side of the London party at were signs too that Liberals were were ‘the only logical alternative this time. His appearance on a becoming uncomfortable about to socialism’. S. W. Alexander Conserva- Conservative platform at South- the broadening common ground became prominent from , gate in  had been noted and between their party and the Con- arguing that the party could use tism.’ in  his credentials as Liberal servatives. Edward Martell spoke support for free trade to raise (Clement candidate for Barons Court were of exposing ‘fraudulent Tory funds from the major industrial- questioned at the same time as he activists inside the Liberal Party’ ists. The views of the free traders Davies, was reprimanded for publishing and the London Liberal Council on the Liberal Party’s position in advertisements in the Liberal News sought to emphasise the distinc- the political spectrum were clearly 1949) in support of a ‘Keep Britain Out’ tiveness of co-ownership after reflected in a Council resolution of Europe campaign. Conservative claims that there passed unanimously in : Another sign that London were elements of it with which Liberals mostly backed British they could agree. This Council deplores the membership of the Common After the  election Frank fact that the party leader- Market was the decision of the Byers, formerly Liberal Chief ship is inclined to create the Clapham Liberals to deselect Whip, toured area federations impression that the Liberal their parliamentary candidate,

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 39 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP? David Russell, because of his years had featured denunciations Active in not cause a stir: it was backed by wish to campaign against Brit- of unemployment benefit and a the Leeds Liberals unanimously. ish membership of the Common diatribe against ‘rates of wages far the cause After the war neither the Leeds Market. He re-emerged as a beyond the capacity of industry nor the Yorkshire Liberal Federa- ‘Radical Liberal Anti-Common to bear’. Was Taylor, seemingly a of free tions got embroiled in controver- Market’ candidate for the seat, rigid economic liberal of the old sies about policy matters. The unveiling a number of policies school, a typical Yorkshire Liberal trade and comment of the President of the which he presumably did not dis- of the period we are consider- land value Leeds Federation in  that close when first adopted as a Lib- ing? Appearances can be decep- he ‘didn’t see much difference eral candidate, including support tive. Taylor’s maiden speech in the taxation between this [Labour Govern- for the white settlers in Southern House of Commons back in  ment] and Nazism and Commu- Rhodesia, a ban on immigration had been in support of state pro- when in nism’ was unusual in that respect, and ‘no more nationalisation in vision of old-age pensions, and as well as for its extremism. Nor our lifetime’. His Viewpoint news- there is barely an echo of his later his late was there any reflection of the letter baldly stated that a vote for views in the minutes of Yorkshire nineties, free-trade debate in the recorded Labour would ensure that ‘within Liberal organisations. deliberations of these bodies. five years Nasser and Khruschev During the Second World War, his annual Relations with the Conserva- will rule Europe and England’. the Yorkshire Liberal Federa- tive Party were a more pressing Dr Russell won some support tion was initially concerned with addresses concern, however. Byers’ tour of for his views, polling  votes the position of small shopkeep- the nation reached Yorkshire on at the  election. He per- ers, perhaps reflecting the back- to his  July . It might be thought haps reflected a small current of ground of many Liberal activists workforce that he would have been well opinion within the Liberal Party, at that time. In  it passed a received, after the national party flushed out by the clear lead motion ‘regarding the small shop- in the had endorsed the arrangement Grimond gave on issues such as keeper as a national asset’ and by which Donald Wade had been Europe and defence. Some free viewing ‘with alarm any threat depression elected in a straight fight with traders continued to fight on, by the Government to eliminate Labour in Huddersfield West in despite disagreeing with a cen- either by compulsion or by direct years had return for the Liberal candidate tral plank of Liberal policy: Roy or indirect pressure the vital place featured in the eastern division stand- Douglas contested Gainsbor- which their services occupy in ing down to the benefit of the ough in  and Simon Knott our national life’. At the same denun- Conservatives. In fact, Byers was was a perennial Liberal presence time, however, the Federation was criticised at the meeting of the in Hammersmith. The London calling for a fairer distribution of ciations of Yorkshire Federation, although Liberal Party had moved suffi- private property. he went on to rehearse his argu- ciently far to the left by  for The publication of the Bev- unemploy- ment that such arrangements did one of its Vice-Presidents, a Mr eridge Report provoked a stormy ment ben- not necessarily compromise the Bute Harris, to resign, however, debate within the Federation, independence of the party. complaining of ‘socialist infiltra- which was resolved in favour of efit … Agreements between the Lib- tion’. His is the only such res- the Report’s supporters. Ashley eral and Conservative Parties were ignation recorded in the minutes Mitchell, having already indicated also a feature of local government before . his opposition to the Report, politics in parts of Yorkshire. In tabled a resolution claiming that Huddersfield, for example, the Beveridge’s proposals had dealt two parties only fought each Yorkshire inadequately with old-age pen- other at by-elections: whichever The minutes of the Yorkshire sions, would prove burdensome to party polled best against Labour Liberal Federation record the finance and ‘would further extend then won the right to a straight dedication of many stalwart Lib- an already inflated bureaucracy fight in subsequent ward contests. erals, including John E. Walker, and make a serious attack on the Deals such as this were not dis- one of the few remaining Liber- liberty of the individual’. Dur- cussed by the regional federation, als who could remember ‘the day ing the debate on the resolution but there is evidence that they when Gladstone was a Tory’. Mitchell described Beveridge as were not viewed with satisfac- The grandfather of Yorkshire a socialist, leading Harry Will- tion. In  it was recorded that Liberalism in the late s and cock (later the successful oppo- the Yorkshire Liberal Federation early s was Theodore Tay- nent of identity cards) to brand was ‘endeavouring to displace lor, owner of a successful textiles Mitchell a Tory. Amidst some ran- the caucus rule which had been a firm, who worked until his death, cour, the Mitchell resolution was dominant feature of Halifax liber- at the age of , in . Active defeated and a resolution in sup- alism’. The county’s senior Lib- in the cause of free trade and land port of Beveridge was carried by erals backed attempts by young value taxation when in his late a large majority. Mitchell later Liberals in Halifax to oppose the nineties, his annual addresses to resigned. Elsewhere in York- Conservatives at local level and his workforce in the depression shire, the Beveridge Report did thereby eject from the coun-

40 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP? cil many long-standing Liberals, of whether or not to fight the focused mainly on municipal some of whom were thought to seat focused on which course of issues as the city’s Liberals tried be Conservative supporters in action would be of most ben- to win council seats once more. general elections. efit to the Conservatives. Two There was no echo of the free- years later, however, the Liberals trade debate being played out at decided to abandon their tra- national level. In  a motion Lancashire and Cheshire ditional, informal relationship calling for Megan Lloyd George Municipal liberalism in parts of with the Conservatives in Lit- and Violet Bonham Carter to the north-west of England in tleborough and contest all four leave the Liberal Party in order the two decades after  was wards in the town. The reason for to heal the rifts they were alleged little different to that which pre- changing tack was not recorded, to have caused was discussed but vailed in Yorkshire towns such although there were opponents not passed. In a reflection of a as Huddersfield and Halifax. In of this course of action. political debate to come, the Fed- Rochdale, for example, there was As in Halifax, challenges to eration demanded a reduction in an electoral arrangement with cosy electoral arrangements with fuel duty in  but rejected a the Conservatives at local level; the Conservatives became more call for greater use to be made of control of municipal candidate common during the s, and public transport in order to ease selection was in the hands of a were often led by a younger gen- traffic congestion.  small group of local businessmen, eration of Liberals. In Middleton, mostly themselves councillors; the local deal with the Conserva- and the town’s Liberals had only tives ended in . Arthur Holt, Activists’ survey limited contact with the national the MP for Bolton West, bravely An opinion poll in  showed party. Bulpitt, in his study of local accepted that the deal which had that  per cent of voters ‘inclin- politics in Lancashire, found the kept him in Parliament since  ing’ towards the Liberal Party Rochdale Liberals to be ‘more was at an end when he supported were opposed to the UK joining economy minded’ than the Con- the Liberal leadership’s desire to the Common Market. This was servatives and ‘well to the right of contest the Bolton East by-elec- cited by the free-trade faction as Grimond’. He discovered a sim- tion in . Change was more justification, on strategic as well ilar situation in Middleton, and gradual in Rochdale, although by as policy grounds, for their argu- in Bolton a deal was struck with As in Hali- the late s the cadre of right- ment that the Liberal Party should the Conservatives at national as fax, chal- wing Liberal councillors linked oppose Common Market mem- well as local level. by family and business ties rather bership. Douglas, in his history of More detailed scrutiny of what lenges than political commitment to the party, argues that support for was happening in Liberal asso- the Liberal Party had practically UK membership led the party to ciations across the area, however, to cosy vanished. There was no sign of suffer ‘some important losses’ and reveals a more complex picture. change in Chester in , where would have created ‘intolerable In Altrincham, for example, the electoral it was reported in the local news- strains’ if entry negotiations had Liberal General Council passed a arrange- paper that Liberal candidates had not collapsed in . This view resolution in support of the Bev- signed the nomination papers of is not borne out by the records eridge Report in June  and ments with Conservatives in other wards. of sub-national Liberal organisa- ten months later expressed dissat- The Manchester Liberal Fed- tions which record little debate isfaction at the lack of progress in the Con- eration and the declining Lib- on the issue and few resignations implementing its recommenda- eral group on Manchester City on the grounds of policy or the tions. Five years later, the Presi- servatives Council were, after , barely Liberal Party’s political direction dent of Altrincham & Sale Liberals became in contact. As in Rochdale, the in the late s and s. Nor struck a different tone in calling Liberal councillors and aldermen is it supported by a survey of Lib- on ‘all Tories [to] come over to more com- were politically and socially con- eral activists from the pre- the Liberal Party to stop Commu- tiguous with the city’s Conserva- period, conducted in the mid- nism’. Bulpitt found Sale Liber- mon during tives. During the  Parliament, s, which included a question als to be well to the left of those he however, Liberal councillors and about the free-trade issue. The encountered in Rochdale. the 1950s, activists in Manchester did not findings on this subject bear quo- The relationship between the and were necessarily hold different views tation in full: Liberal and Conservative Parties on the principal issues of the day. was a source of tension in Little- often In , the Federation called for The interview data strongly borough. A prominent member a united opposition to the nation- suggests that Liberal activ- of the town’s Liberal Association led by a alisation of the iron and steel ists, in contrast to some resigned in  in protest at industries, which would have Liberal voters, were strongly the decision of the Heywood & younger brought Conservatives and Liber- supportive of UK member- Royton Liberals not to contest generation als together on that issue. Later, ship of the EEC; that very that year’s general election. He political debate in the Manchester few Liberals were opposed was unhappy that the discussion of Liberals. Federation was more muted and to UK membership on the

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 41 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP?

grounds of its likely impact ing its back on old-style town have reflected the genuine antipa- on the progress towards free politics and seeking to do battle thy of some Liberals to Labour trade; and that a declining with the Conservatives as well and its nationalisation programme. proportion of Liberal activ- as with Labour. Municipal deals Such views were also indicative ists were interested in or with the Conservatives were not of the direction in which Clem- motivated by the traditional popular in the Liberal Party after ent Davies was taking the party, or Liberal rallying cry of free , largely because they were allowing it to drift. trade. reminiscent of the creation of the Some activists certainly felt at National Liberals. Even in York- the time that the party was being Some Liberals undoubtedly shire, Frank Byers faced criticism moved to the right, and did not drifted away from the party as it when he came in  to advo- like it. The prospective parlia- moved away from free trade; but cate deals with the Conservatives mentary candidate for Cam- others were attracted to the party along the lines of the Hudders- bridgeshire, for example, resigned by its clear support for joining the field arrangement (although it in , declaring that ‘the Liberal Common Market, and the terms quickly became clear that neither Association is tending towards of trade were in the party’s favour. Arthur Holt nor Donald Wade Conservatism, leaving [me] well A question about whether were prepared to act as Tory to the left of them’. This trend activists shared Grimond’s vision stooges). By the early s, after was not universal. In a handful of a realignment of the left in the party had publicly turned of areas, including Stockport and British politics showed that most its back on such deals, old-style Southport, the Liberals co-oper- regarded themselves as left-wing. municipal Liberals in Halifax ated with Labour at municipal Out of  activists interviewed, and elsewhere found themselves elections.  agreed with the concept of under pressure from the Liberal After  there are fewer ref- realignment; only  of the  who organisations in their own dis- erences to policy matters in the disagreed did so because they felt tricts to move to the left, in line records of sub-national Liberal the Liberal Party should move with the party as a whole. organisations. Many were strug- to the right and oppose Labour Given the spirited way in gling to survive and devoted all more vigorously. This provides which the free-trade debate was their time to organisational mat- further support for ‘the hypoth- conducted at the annual Liberal ters. No clear view can be derived esis that most Liberal activists assembly, it is perhaps surpris- of activists’ thinking at this time, saw themselves as being on the ing to find little reflection of it other than that evidence of their left of British politics, princi- at local level. Even in London, enthusiastic support for unilateral pally opposed to the Conserva- By the where one of the leaders of the free trade is lacking. From the tive Party and sharing historical free-trade faction was briefly mid-s onwards, support for and philosophical links with the 1960s a chairman of the London Liberal some of Jo Grimond’s initiatives is Labour Party’. Party, opposition to UK mem- expressed. There was certainly no new gen- bership of the Common Mar- organised opposition to Grimond eration of ket never gained a firm hold. and his determination to haul the Conclusion Of course, such a stance is not Liberal Party back to the progres- The first point to note from the Liberals in itself indicative of right-wing sive end of the political spectrum, survey of grassroots opinion in thinking on economic issues. except from the anti-Common London, Yorkshire and north- was turn- However, the Liberal Party’s free- Market group, and resignations west England is that the activities trade faction was identified by due to ‘socialist infiltration’ were of Edward Martell, who left the ing its back some with economic liberalism rarely recorded. Liberal Party in  to form the on old- – such as Theodore Taylor’s views Thus, the Liberal Party can People’s League for the Defence on unemployment benefit – and only be regarded as a party of the of Freedom and thereafter drifted style town with other right-wing causes – right for a brief period of Clem- to the far right, left no mark on witness S. W. Alexander’s support ent Davies’ leadership, perhaps the Liberal Party in that era. Such politics and for the Suez expedition. from , when he switched splinter organisations were, in The survey data shows that, in from lukewarm support of the fact, of more concern to the Con- seeking to all three regions, the Liberal Party Labour government to opposi- servatives, who feared that their do battle was a home to progressive think- tion, until , when he rejected supporters would be tempted to ing during the Second World War. Churchill’s offer of a ministe- support right-wing populism. with the The Beveridge Report, and other rial position. After  Dav- Old-fashioned municipal lib- reports on post-war reconstruc- ies offered no leadership on the eralism, with its golf-course and Conserva- tion, were warmly welcomed. main issues of the day, leaving the gentleman’s-club links to the There is a marked change in tone party to drift. It was during this Conservatives, was still appar- tives as after . Pronounced, and often period that the free-trade faction ent in the s but was clearly well as with extreme, reactions against the were most vocal and won their in decline. By the s a new Attlee government become com- most significant assembly vic- generation of Liberals was turn- Labour. mon. To some extent this must tories. Once Grimond took the

42 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP? reins the free traders were swiftly sor, Frank Moore, did not detect When Gri-  London Liberal Party, Council Min- marginalised. As so often, the rank any support for Smedley’s extreme utes,  Jun . The merger was and file was content to support views. Prominent free traders approved by  votes to . Ten mond led Liberal Nationals were immediately the leadership, even when that such as Alexander used their influ- co-opted onto the London Liberal involved reversing decisions on ence to secure candidacies for the party Council. free trade made only a year or their allies in such areas, presum-  London Liberal Party, Council Minutes, two before. ably because of their convenience leftwards  May  and Executive Committee This leaves the question of for someone working in London. Minutes,  April ,  November again, it . how the free-trade faction were Organisation was not a factor  London Liberal Party, Executive Com- so successful in influencing the in the success of the free traders. followed mittee Minutes,  April . party’s policy in the early and Groups like the Free Trade Union  London Liberal Party, Executive Com- mid-s when they appeared had money to fund a few par- – and few mittee Minutes,  October . to have so little support in the liamentary candidates, but were  Ibid.,  October .  Ibid.,  August .  Liberals constituencies. tiny. It was oratory, not organi-  Ibid.,  March . Lancelot Spicer, Firstly, they did not just appeal sation, which won the day at suc- were left the Chairman of Radical Action, was to economic liberals within the cessive assemblies. In the absence a prominent member of the London party: Liberals who wished to of counter-argument from the by the way- Liberal Party. emphasise the distinctive nature party leadership, the free traders  Ibid.,  February .  London Liberal Party, Council Minutes, of the party’s appeal were also were able to commit the party side.  March  and Executive Commit- persuaded to support them. In an to unilateral free trade and the tee Minutes,  May . era when the Liberal Party came deregulation of agricultural mar-  London Liberal Party, Council Min- close to being extinguished and kets. Their views were cogently utes,  November . when the division between the argued and struck a chord with  London Liberal Party, Executive Com- mittee Minutes,  September . two main parties on matters of ordinary activists, who wanted  For example, London Liberal Party, practical policy was small, many more than anything to preserve Council Minutes,  March  and Liberals felt the need to empha- the party’s independence and Council Minutes,  May . sise why they were different and, somehow rediscover the path  London Liberal Party, Executive Com- mittee Minutes,  November . therefore, not capable of being back to electoral success. For a  London Liberal Party, Council Min- swallowed up by either Con- time, some were convinced that utes,  May . servatives or Labour. Unilateral an appeal back to pre-First World  London Liberal Party, Executive Com- free trade and land value taxation War economics offered the best mittee Minutes,  July . were both distinctive and com- way ahead. It was more difficult to  Despite the arrangement, the Con- servatives were not able to take Hud- forting, in that they harked back engage with contemporary polit- dersfield East from Labour. to the Liberal Party’s Edwardian ical issues in a realistic manner  Memorandum by I. Macleod on golden age. and yet still retain a distinctively Conservative/Liberal talks, , Secondly, some of the free trad- Liberal approach which could Conservative Party Archive. The Lib- ers had access to money. They be differentiated from that of the erals were unlikely to benefit from a were able to churn out leaflets and main parties. Grimond realised Conservative withdrawal from con- testing Bethnal Green at this time pamphlets arguing their case and that this, rather than grasping for – in  the successful Labour can- use their influence to secure par- the shibboleths of an earlier era, didate secured a fraction under % liamentary candidacies and thus a was the only way forward for the of the vote. platform within the party. David party. When he led the party left-  London Liberal Party, Council Min- Russell became Liberal candidate wards again, it followed – and few utes,  June .  London Liberal Party, Executive Com- for Clapham after promising to Liberals were left by the wayside. mittee Minutes,  October  and pay his own deposit. It was not Finance and General Purposes Com- uncommon for Liberal candi- Robert Ingham is a historical writer mittee Minutes,  July  for plans dates to be selected after paying and Biographies Editor of, and a for a fundraising meeting to which  ‘shipping magnates’ would be their expenses, or a substantial regular contributor to, the Journal of invited. contribution towards them. Cer- Liberal History.  London Liberal Party, Council Min- tain constituencies, mostly within utes,  September . commuting distance of the City,  Martell’s political odyssey from  Ibid.,  December  and Execu- seemed to attract free-trade candi- the Liberal Party to the far right is tive Committee Minutes,  December described by R. Douglas and R. In- ,  April . dates – for example Ilford North, gham in Brack, D., et al, Dictionary of  London Liberal Party, Finance and Walthamstow West and Saffron Liberal Biography (Politico’s, ), pp. General Purposes Committee Minutes,  Walden. There is no other evi- –. September  and Executive Com- dence that these areas were hot-  Dutton, D., A History of the Liberal mittee Minutes,  May . beds of economic liberalism. At Party in the Twentieth Century (Pal-  Clapham Liberal Association, Minutes, grave Macmillan, ), p. . Saffron Walden, Oliver Smedley’s  December .  For a fuller discussion see J. S. Ras-  Knott fought Hammersmith as a Lib- successor, David Ridley, found mussen, The Liberal Party: A study of eral at successive general elections in barely any Liberal organisation in retrenchment and revival (Constable, the s, s and s, includ- the constituency and his succes- ), pp. – ing as an Independent Liberal against

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 43 BATTLE OF IDEAS OR ABSENCE OF LEADERSHIP?

a Social Democrat in , and was described as treasurer of the Interna-  Manchester Liberal Federation, Gen- also a Liberal councillor in the bor- tional Union for Land Value Taxation eral Committee Minutes,  November ough. and Free Trade. .  London Liberal Party, Finance and  Leeds Liberal Federation, Minutes,   Ibid.,  April . General Purposes Committee Minutes, April .  Ibid.,  October .  January   Ibid.,  Jun .  Douglas, R., History of the Liberal  Yorkshire Liberal Federation, Min-  Yorkshire Liberal Federation, Minutes, Party – (Sidgwick and Jack- utes,  March . Walker’s son, Sir  July . son, ), pp. –. Ronald, and grandson, John, were  Ibid.,  March .  Egan, M., ‘Grassroots organisation of prominent members of the Yorkshire  Interview, Allen Clegg. the Liberal Party –’, unpub- Liberal Federation.  Bulpitt, J. G., Party Politics in English lished D.Phil thesis, Oxford Univer-  Greenwood, G. A., Taylor of Batley Local Government (Longmans, ), sity, , p. . (Max Parrish, ), pp. , –. pp. , .  Ibid., p. .  Ibid., p. .  Ibid., p. .  Report into the People’s League for the  Yorkshire Liberal Federation, Minutes,  Altrincham Liberal Association, Gen- Defence of Freedom and the Middle Class  May . eral Council Minutes,  June ,  Alliance, November , Conserva-  Ibid.,  January ,  May . April . tive Party Archive.  Ibid.,  May ,  July .  Ibid.,  April .  Cambridgeshire Liberal Association,  Letter, A. Mitchell to R. Walker,   Bulpitt, J. G., Party Politics in English Minutes,  May . July , reported in Yorkshire Lib- Local Government (Longmans, ),  Clapham Liberal Association, Minutes, eral Federation, Minutes,  Septem- p. .  September . ber . Mitchell contested Batley  Letter, B. Hall to I. Eastwood,  July  Interviews, David Ridley and Frank & Morley as an Independent Liberal . Moore. in  (although he was included  Littleborough Liberal Association,  Interviews, Simon Knott and Peter on the official list of Liberal candi- Executive Committee Minutes,  Janu- Linfoot. dates) and Keighley as an official Lib- ary .  Egan, M., op. cit., Chapter V. eral in , at which point he was  Chester Chronicle,  July .

Annex: sample of Liberal activists interviewed

The views of Liberal activists on Table 1:Background of interview sample free trade and British member- ship of the Common Market, and Background of interviewees Number on the concept of the ‘realign- Member of Parliament 3 ment of the left’, are cited in this Parliamentary candidate 49 article. One hundred and forty- Parliamentary candidate and local councillor 7 Local councillor 24 two Liberals were interviewed Liberal or Young Liberal Association activist 55 as part of research for an unpub- Liberal Party staff 4 lished doctoral thesis. The background of those interviewed is given in Table ; Table  shows where those inter- Table 2: Where interviewees joined the Liberal Party viewed joined the Liberal Party; Region Number of interviewees (%) and Table  shows when they South east England 18.3 joined the party. North west England 13.4 London 12.7 South west England 9.9 East Anglia 9.9 West Midlands 9.9 Scotland 8.5 Yorkshire and Humberside 7.7 Northern England 4.2 East Midlands 3.5 Wales 2.0

Table 3: When interviewees joined the Liberal Party

n = 142 Pre-war 1939–44 1945–49 1950–54 1955–59 1960–64

Number of interviewees joining the Liberal Party (%) 12.7 6.3 29.6 15.5 23.9 12.0

44 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 John Meadowcroft and Jaime Reynolds examine the role of Arthur Seldon (– ) and the Liberal antecedents of the Institute of Economic Affairs.

LIBERALS AND THE NEW RIGHT

‘I was persuaded into economic ‘I say and I shall continue to say The young Arthur hough few Liberal liberalism by intellectual convic- that the worst thing you can do Seldon Democrats would rec- tion and the evidence of events with your money is to hand it ognise him as such, and into Liberal Party sympathies over to be spent by the State … Arthur Seldon was because the Conservatives were Far better keep it in a money-box probably one of the too socialist and the socialists too and sleep with it under your pil- Tmost influential Liberal think- conservative.’ low at night. But, better still, invest ers and publicists in Britain in it in your business or somone the period from the s to the ‘I graduated by national insur- else’s business. Anywhere else is s. Seldon was founder Edito- ance and state education to the better than letting it pass through rial Director of the Institute of LSE. There I read voraciously the slippery fingers of the State.’ Economic Affairs, the free-mar- Lenin, Laski, Strachey, Dalton but Oliver Smedley, Vice-Preisdent of ket think tank, which played an was more influenced by Robbins, the Liberal Party () important role in the revival of Plant and Hayek. The war and economic liberalism that led to post-war siege economy, several ‘We lost people from the Lib- the global implementation of pol- years as editor of a trade jour- eral Party who described them- icies such as the privatisation of nal, the years as an economist in selves as neo-liberals of the sort of previously nationalised industries, industry and five years working Thatcherite school. I was reading the control of inflation via sound in fruitful partnership with Ralph the other day that Arthur Seldon monetary policy and the applica- Harris at the IEA have reinforced was involved in the Liberal Party tion of market-oriented service the view I had acquired from a in Orpington at the time of the regimes where public goods were teacher that the nineteenth cen- by-election. He was typical of a provided by the state. tury was the great age of eman- certain school of Liberal who In the UK these policies were cipation and that the classical abounded in the party at that implemented by the Conserva- economists were basically right.’ time …’ tive government of Margaret David Steel, interview in Marxism Thatcher and its successors. This Arthur Seldon, Capitalism () Today, October  association with Thatcherism has

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 45 LIBERALS AND THE NEW RIGHT led many Liberal Democrats to went to live with uncles, and two Seldon described as ‘the hostile reject the notion that the ideas were sent to an orphanage). Sel- anti-capitalist environment of the Seldon advocated had any con- don’s foster parents were Jewish s’. It was during his time at nection with Liberalism. Conrad refugees from Ukraine, whose the LSE that Seldon Anglicised Russell, in the opening of his An family name Schaberdain was his surname, apparently following Intelligent Person’s Guide to Liberal- adopted by Arthur. His foster- advice from Arnold Plant who ism, contrasts the ‘moral’ liberal- father died in . His foster- thought such a change wise in the ism of Roy Jenkins (of which he mother set up ‘shop’ in the front light of the rise of anti-Semitism clearly approves) with the eco- room of their East End home in Europe. nomic liberalism of the IEA (of selling lisle stockings in order In  the Liberal Party estab- which he clearly disapproves). Yet to pay the rent. The family were lished a committee of inquiry while it is true to say that Seldon’s kept afloat by a £ payment into the distribution of property tireless advocacy of economic from a Friendly Society, paid for inspired and chaired by Elliott liberalism had its greatest impact by his late foster-father’s weekly Dodds. It included Harcourt on the Conservative Party, rather contributions of two shillings. Johnstone, the leader Sir Archibald than the Liberal Party, it is nev- For Seldon such enterprise and Sinclair’s right-hand man and ertheless the case that many Lib- mutual insurance was a model of expert on economic issues in the erals recognised the continued voluntary working-class responsi- party leadership. Plant and Rob- relevance of economic liberalism bility and welfare that was to be bins were approached for their to the Liberal cause. replaced by state benefits and the advice and they asked Seldon to Jo Grimond was a regular IEA ‘dependency culture’. write a paper on the effect of an author, contributing papers to six The family fortunes improved inheritance tax. This led Dodds to different IEA publications, and in  when his foster-mother ask him to draft the committee’s he wrote that ‘Liberals must at remarried (a tailor) and they report, Ownership for All, which all times stress the virtues of the moved to the relatively middle- was adopted by the party confer- market, not only for efficiency class suburb of Stroud Green. In ence in . In Seldon’s view, but to enable the widest possi-  Seldon won a free place ‘the proposals for the diffusion ble choice … Much of what Mrs to Sir Henry Raine’s (Gram- of private property rather than its Thatcher and Sir Keith Joseph mar) School, off the Commer- replacement by public (socialised) say and do is in the mainstream cial Road, where he was taught property raised the flag of classical of liberal philosophy.’ Certainly, history in the sixth form by E. J. liberalism for the last time in the Seldon, who is now eighty-eight Owner- Hayward, a Liberal of the old Liberal Party’. Its questioning of years old and living in retirement school ‘whose teachings on the public ownership and proposals in Kent, always saw himself as ship for guild system and its replacement for selective privatisation were more of a liberal, or ‘conserva- by industrial capitalism, with its denounced by the Labour Party tive radical’ than a Tory. For over All was advantages for living standards as a violent shift in the Liberal three decades he was an active and liberties, intrigued me more position back to laissez-faire and member of the Liberal Party and a radical than the Fabian influence of the individualism, at odds with both only severed his connection with attack on persuasive economics master’. Labour and Conservative think- it in the s. Nevertheless, when he arrived ing on the ‘socialised sector’. the maldis- at the LSE in , having won a Yet despite its unfashionable state scholarship, he seems initially and ‘right-wing’ reputation, Own- Arthur Seldon, the Liberal tribution of to have shared the prevailing far- ership for All has stood the test of Party and the IEA3 left attitudes of the majority of time better than many of the so- Seldon was born on  May . wealth and students, before joining the tiny called radical tracts of the s, He later described his tragic and property in Liberal Society. He supported the and many of its arguments would poverty-stricken childhood, anti-Fascist protests against Sir be regarded as mainstream, if not upbringing and education in the inter-war Oswald Mosley’s march through left-wing, today. It was a radical East End of London, as an ‘indoc- the East End in . attack on the maldistribution of trination against capitalism’. He Britain – Seldon studied and researched wealth and property in inter-war recalled that at the age of eight at the LSE from  to , Britain – inequalities which it in the  general election, he inequalities graduating with first-class hon- described as ‘gross and shocking’. cheered the Labour candidate for which it ours in economics in , and The uneven spread of property Stepney, and booed the Conserv- then becoming a research assistant prevented equality of opportunity, ative and Liberal cars. described to Arnold Plant. He also stud- wasted social resources, reduced Seldon’s family name was Mar- ied under other liberal and Lib- consumer choice and menaced golis, but both his parents died in as ‘gross eral academics including Hayek, democracy by providing a recruit- the Spanish flu epidemic of  Lionel Robbins, Frank Paish and ing ground for Fascism. The and he was brought up by foster- and shock- George Schwartz, who kept alive report rejected outright any abso- parents (two of his elder siblings ing’. free-market economics in what lute right of property and insisted

46 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LIBERALS AND THE NEW RIGHT on society’s right to modify laws style of argument anticipated his Owner- nature writer for the Daily Worker. of inheritance to reduce inequal- later critique of state ownership Up to his death in , he and ity and spread wealth. The causes and provision and his champion- ship for Seldon would debate the issues of the maldistribution of property ing of markets and competition, of communism versus capitalism. were traced to faulty laws and which essentially built on the All was Marjorie was to become in her policies, particularly inheritance framework laid down in Own- own right an active Liberal, free law, lack of educational opportu- ership for All. The Liberal Party unusual for trader and campaigner for educa- nity for the poor, encouragement continued to use the ‘Ownership the times tion vouchers. of monopolistic industrial con- for All’ slogan into the late s. On his return to Britain after centration, divorce of ownership In July  the Liberal Party in reject- discharge from the army in , from control of companies, and Organisation published Seldon’s he was drawn back into Liberal indirect taxation on wage-earners pamphlet, The Drift to the Cor- ing statist Party activity after attending a in the form of tariffs, quotas and porate State, which analysed the meeting chaired by Clement subsidies. However, Ownership for likely effects of wartime economy solutions Davies at which Roy Harrod, All was unusual for the times in measures, especially those encour- such as the Keynesian economist, was rejecting statist solutions such as aging monopoly, on the post-war a speaker. In  Seldon was planning and public ownership; it economy. He was scathing about planning asked by Philip Fothergill to argued unashamedly for market what he described as ‘the ten- chair a committee on the aged. solutions, greater competition and dency in the s to the forma- and public He consulted Beveridge, whom the extension and permeation of tion in many basic industries of he knew from LSE days, and property ownership throughout joint monopolies of employers ownership; who was, by the late s, con- society. It combined a positive and workers for the exploitation it argued cerned that the expansion of the view of freedom and economic of consumers’. While conced- welfare state was jeopardising the liberal ideas in a distinctive plat- ing the need for some industrial unasham- voluntary welfare movement and form for the party: concentration and planning in Friendly Societies. The com- time of national emergency, Sel- edly for mittee’s report was unanimously The policy we have advo- don was blunt about the potential endorsed by the Liberal Assem- cated is not one of ‘laissez- dangers it posed: ‘it is the corpora- market bly in . faire’. Quite the reverse. tive system of industrial organisa- solutions, Arthur and Marjorie Seldon It would involve deter- tion, which is incompatible with were very active in the Orping- mined, and even drastic, parliamentary democracy; it is the greater ton Liberal Association in the State action at numerous British variant of what in Italy is s as it began the local suc- points. Such action, how- called Fascism’. Where monopoly competi- cess that culminated in Eric Lub- ever, would not take the was unavoidable (‘natural monop- bock’s famous by-election victory form of Government con- olies’) he argued – anticipating tion and in . Each of them served as trol or management … Its ideas that were novel in the s the exten- president. Marjorie organised main objects would be to but have become commonplace local anti-Eden demonstrations create the legal structure in recent decades – that ‘public sion and over Suez in . They had three in which a free economy regulation may … be more suit- sons, Michael, Peter and Anthony, can best function; to see able … than public ownership … permeation Anthony becoming the well- that the market is effi- [and] there would appear to be no known political writer and biog- cient and honest; to outlaw good reason for exclusive public of property rapher of John Major and Tony restraint of trade; to break ownership in the public utility ownership Blair. down unjust and artificial field, where a mixed regime of For some ten years after the privileges; to preserve the private, public, and semi-public throughout war, Seldon worked in industry national resources …; to monopolies, all equally subject to as editor of a retailing magazine, maintain and expand the regulation by Parliament or a del- society. Store, from  to , and social services; and to place egated authority would be supe- then as an economic adviser in before all the opportunities rior’. He called for ‘State action to the brewing industry in an office of a full life hitherto open “cleanse” industry of its avoidable headed by Lord Tedder, former only to the rich. In a word, monopoly; and this will involve Air Chief Marshal of the RAF, the Liberal view is that it a more active State, a State more where his connections with the is the function of the State conscious of the conditions and Liberal Party, still associated with ‘to create the conditions of consequences of monopoly …’ Methodism, the nonconform- liberty’… Between  and  Seldon ist conscience and temperance, served in the army in North Africa aroused some unease. While it is unclear how far Sel- and Italy. He married Marjorie The Institute of Economic don’s drafts shaped the final doc- Willett in . Her father Wilfred Affairs (IEA), founded in , ument, it is striking that many of was a formerly devout Christian was the brainchild of Antony the arguments and much of the who became a communist and Fisher and future Nobel laureate

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 47 LIBERALS AND THE NEW RIGHT F. A. Hayek. Fisher, like its first ‘In my life- –, speaking at a ‘Liberal- In contrast to the Smedleyites’ Director, Ralph Harris, was a ism is about Liberty’ fringe meet- hostility to the Common Mar- Conservative – the two first met time the ing at the Liberal Assembly in ket, Seldon seems to have taken at a Conservative Party meet-  on ‘The Welfare State and a pragmatic approach to Europe, ing – though the IEA was always Tories have the Economy in the s’. He though he was critical of the level non-partisan, such that when also wrote articles in support of of subsidies under the Common Harris was raised to the peerage enlarged vouchers in the Liberal maga- Agricultural Policy and the oper- by the newly elected Margaret state zine New Outlook at this time. ation of monetary union. There is Thatcher in June  he sat as a Other proponents of vouchers, surprisingly little about Europe in crossbencher in the Lords. How- authority or a more pluralist approach to his writings. ever Liberals played a major part welfare, included Professors Alan The Conservative Party had in its early days. Oliver Smedley, by fits of Peacock and Michael Fogarty, little appeal for Seldon until the a free-market zealot, a vice-presi- and John Pardoe MP. era of Margaret Thatcher. He dent of the Liberal Party and its absent- The prominence in the IEA of wrote that ‘in my lifetime the most vocal free-trade campaigner minded- the Liberal founders diminished Tories have enlarged state author- at assemblies in the s, whom in the late s. Fisher and Har- ity by fits of absent-mindedness, Fisher knew through the Society ness, and ris found Smedley’s outspokenness and my political sympathies have of Individualists, played an impor- a handicap in securing business been Liberal, but I prefer to think tant role in the early formation of my political funding, and with Grantches- of myself as a conservative radi- the IEA, providing the organisa- ter he was gradually pushed out, cal: conservative about preserving tion’s first offices at his business sympathies although Smedley remained one the principles of a good society premises (and campaigning head- have been of the seven ‘subscribers’ when but radical about reforming the quarters) at  Austin Friars in the the IEA became incorporated institutions required to preserve City of London. Other Liberals Liberal, but in . Graham Hutton, an ex- them in a world of change’. He – Lord Grantchester (Sir Alfred Fabian economist and journalist did not regard the Tories as a free- Suenson-Taylor) and Sir Oscar I prefer to linked to the Liberals, was brought market party: ‘the Conservatives Hobson – were on its advisory in as a replacement. in general have had an indifferent board, while academics associated think of Smedley, Grantchester and record. In the s they spon- with the Liberal Party, such as myself as a S. W. Alexander increasingly sored producer protection when Alan Peacock and Jack Wiseman, focused their efforts on the Free they abandoned free trade in were to become active in the IEA. conserva- Trade Union (FTU), which they , introduced transport licens- The IEA’s first pamphlet, The Free took control of following a fund- ing, agricultural marketing boards Convertibility of Sterling, published tive radi- ing crisis in  (and renamed and other “anti-capitalist” restric- in , was written by another it the Free Trade League). The tionist policies.’ Liberal, George Winder. cal.’ FTU had strong connections His final break with the Liber- In  Arnold Plant recom- with the Liberal Party into the als seems to have occurred in the mended Seldon to Lord Grantch- s and s (Sinclair and s, though Seldon is somewhat ester who was trying to give Samuel were vice-presidents). unclear exactly when. He later the newly formed IEA ‘a liberal It also provided a link between recalled that he ‘retained private intellectual thrust’. Seldon was post-war economic liberals like hopes of a Liberal revival under Jo appointed Editorial Director of Seldon, who sat on the FTU Grimond but abandoned it when the IEA in , a function he executive from , and the he was followed in  by David held until his retirement in , pre-war Liberal free marketeers Steel, a party manager with little and then again between  and such as F. W. Hirst, Sir George interest in policy and, it seemed, his second and final retirement Paish and Vivian Phillipps. Sel- almost no understanding of eco- in . From  he was also don, sometimes with Marjorie, nomic liberalism, indicated by a Executive Director of the IEA. was a contributor to the FTU remark in a Marxism Today inter- Seldon’s direct involvement journal The Free Trader. After view about my outdated laissez- with the Liberal Party seems to the Smedleyite takeover in , faire’. However,it was Jeremy have wound down from  as its Liberal stalwarts Sir Andrew Thorpe, not Steel, who suc- the IEA, seen by some poten- McFadyean and Deryck Abel ceeded Grimond in ; Steel tial sponsors as a Liberal ‘front’, withdrew. Smedley, Alexander did not become leader until  worked to establish its non-party and Grantchester carried on, and the Marxism Today interview credentials. Nevertheless he con- with a rump of like-minded, did not appear until . When- tinued to sympathise with and mostly Liberal, free traders and ever Seldon finally broke with the vote for the Liberals for another anti-common-marketeers into Liberals, he continued to claim two decades. He took part as the s. Seldon was dropped some of their leading figures for ‘an independent economist’ in a from the executive in , sug- his ideas. When he dedicated his fierce debate on health and edu- gesting that his sympathies did collected writings to the ‘politi- cation vouchers in the party in not lie with the Smedley group. cians who rolled back the State’,

48 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LIBERALS AND THE NEW RIGHT he included, alongside Thatcher, Seldon’s principal contri- public sector led him to develop Joseph, Tebbit, Powell and other bution, in his role as commis- a critique of the pathologies of Tories, the Liberals Elliott Dodds, sioning editor of more than  democratic government that Jo Grimond and John Pardoe. IEA monographs and author of anticipated the emergence of twenty-eight book and mono- public-choice theory. In , graphs and  articles, was to two years before the publication Arthur Seldon’s liberal apply these principles as a cri- of Buchanan and Tullock’s land- thought tique of all forms of government mark work The Calculus of Con- Arthur Seldon’s political phi- intervention, ranging from Marx- sent, Seldon wrote: losophy was founded upon the ist-Leninist state socialism to the consistent application of the post-war social democratic con- Representative government principles of economic liberalism sensus, and from the provision of … at its worst … impov- to economic, social and politi- public goods by local authorities erishes and enfeebles the cal problems. Seldon’s training to national land-use planning community by capitulation in classical economics at the LSE controls. Seldon wrote: to articulate and persist- instilled in him the belief that it ent sections at the expense was only a market economy that Micro-economic analysis of the long-term general could efficiently and fairly ration of the prices and costs of He held interest. Much so-called scarce resources, ensure that the individual goods or services ‘economic policy’ can be benefits of economic action and their adjustment at the that not understood only in terms exceeded the costs, including the margin by individual sup- of pressure from organised opportunity costs, and co-ordi- pliers and demanders can be only was producers – in trade asso- nate the actions of the many indi- no less enlightening in the ciations, trade unions or viduals and firms who constituted public than in the private a market other groups. an advanced economy. sector of the economy. economy In Seldon’s view a market For Seldon, the tyranny of the economy was able to perform While accepting that markets superior in majority that had so concerned this function because it utilised were not perfect, Seldon sought classical liberals such as John Stu- the knowledge communicated to show that markets were almost terms of art Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville by prices generated in the mar- always a more effective means had been realised in the ability ketplace. The price mechanism of providing goods and services efficiency, of organised minorities to extract worked spontaneously without than via government diktat, and, it was also special privileges (rents) from the need for a single co-ordinat- moreover, such outcomes could government at the expense of the ing body. The failure of social- be achieved without the need morally unorganised majority. The politi- ism relative to capitalism could for restrictions on individual lib- cal muscle of French and German be explained by the economic erty that so often accompanied superior to farmers, British coalminers and chaos caused by the attempt to attempts to achieve similar out- American steel producers meant abolish markets and prices: ‘The comes by central direction. For alternative that through a combination of use of the free-market pricing Seldon there did not exist a cat- economic subsidy and protection these system explains the relative suc- egory of public goods and a cat- groups were allocated privileges cess of capitalism and the fail- egory of private goods to which models that far exceeded the market ure of socialism.’ The pricing different principles should be value of their economic con- system was the invisible hand of applied; rather, there existed a because it tribution. The result of the abil- the market that led self-inter- whole range of goods and serv- ity of such groups to capture the ested individuals to undertake ices that people wanted, but achieved political process for their own actions that benefited others because resources were finite, economic advantage was not only the unfair even if such altruistic outcomes some mechanism was needed to transfer of resources via political were no part of their original ensure the production of those co-ordina- means (rent-seeking), but dis- intention. goods for which demand was tortions of the price system that He held that not only was greatest at a cost that did not tion with- impoverished society as a whole a market economy superior in exceed the benefits. In Charge, because it led producers to misal- terms of efficiency, it was also Seldon set out his thesis that out the locate capital in response to dis- morally superior to alterna- many public services would be need for torted price signals. tive economic models because delivered more efficiently and One of Seldon’s most original it achieved economic co-ordi- used more sparingly if users were an over- contributions was his application nation without the need for an required to pay for them at the of the principles of public-choice over-arching political authority point of delivery just as they did arching theory to an analysis of the role that directed particular individu- in the private sector. of producer interests in education als to undertake certain tasks or Seldon’s application of micro- political in the defeat of the Thatcher gov- use resources in particular ways. economic principles to the authority. ernment’s attempt to introduce

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 49 LIBERALS AND THE NEW RIGHT education vouchers, a subject from the economic right; Many of It should be noted that close to his heart. In The Riddle Grimond’s political strategy of while economic liberalism was of the Voucher, Seldon argued that replacing Labour as the principal the eco- extremely influential within the the combined power of teacher anti-Conservative force in Brit- Conservative Party during the unions and civil servants in the ish politics led him to emphasise nomic s, s and s, it never Department of Education had the more ‘progressive’ aspects of achieved the level of orthodoxy prevented the implementation party policy. This, combined with liberal poli- that is sometimes portrayed. The of a policy that was supported by community politics and grow- cies pur- early Thatcher cabinets contained ministers and many politicians, ing local-government strength, a number of ‘wets’ in senior academics and parents. attracted a new generation of sued by the posts, while Michael Heseltine’s party supporters and activists with famous declaration as President little sympathy for the economic Thatcher of the Board of Trade at the  Arthur Seldon and Liberal liberal traditions of the party. Conservative conference that he Party politics Grimond was succeeded by and Major would intervene in the economy One of the most intriguing ques- Jeremy Thorpe, who had long govern- ‘before breakfast, before lunch, tions of British political history been an opponent of the eco- before dinner and before tea’ was is why the economic counter- nomic liberal wing of the party, ments indicative of the hostility to eco- revolution led by Seldon and the but probably the crucial break nomic liberalism that endured IEA had its greatest impact on the with economic liberalism came would have amongst large swathes of the Conservative Party rather than with the election of David Steel Conservative Party. on the Liberal Party. Economic as party leader in . Steel, who been rec- liberalism had long been a cor- described himself as a Keynesian ognised nerstone of the Liberal Party; the Liberal, was intent on positioning Conclusion party had been formed from the the Liberal Party as the centre-left as within While today the economic liber- coalition of Whigs, Radicals and alternative to the extremes of left alism espoused by Arthur Seldon Peelites united by Peel’s repeal and right deemed to be presented the main- and the IEA is most closely asso- of the Corn Laws, and the rai- by the Labour and Conserva- ciated with Thatcherism and the son d’être of many of those who tive Parties. As the Liberal Party stream of Conservative Party, many of the had kept the party alive from the went into alliance with the SDP liberalism economic liberal policies pursued s to the s was to pre- in  and reacted against eco- by the Thatcher and Major gov- serve the spirit and natural home nomic liberalism à la Thatcher, by previ- ernments would have been rec- of free trade. with its apparent rejection of ognised as within the mainstream Indeed, there seems good much of the Liberal/Keynes/ ous gen- of liberalism by previous genera- reason to believe that in the Beveridge welfare heritage, any tions of Liberals and by members mid-s the great majority prospects of an economic liberal erations of continental European Liberal of economic liberals were to be revival within the party quickly of Liberals parties. It is open to question found in the Liberal rather than evaporated. what would have happened to the Conservative Party. The story The conversion of the Con- and by the Liberal Party and to UK pub- of the adoption of economic lib- servative Party to economic lib- lic policy had the economic lib- eralism by the Conservative Party eralism can be dated to the  members eral counter-revolution occurred is the story of how the economic election of Margaret Thatcher within Liberal rather than Con- liberals came into the ascendancy to the party leadership. Thatcher of con- servative ranks. Certainly, it may in that party as they were simulta- was the leader of a relatively tinental have been possible that economic neously marginalised in the Lib- small faction within the Con- liberalism could have been com- eral Party. servative Party which had long European bined with social liberalism to While at certain elections, advocated the adoption of mon- form the basis of a truly libertar- notably  and , the appeal etarist policies and greater indi- Liberal par- ian movement, rather than with of the Liberal Party had inclined vidual freedom in the economic the social conservatism of the to the centre-left, up until the sphere as the solution to Britain’s ties. Tory Party. What is clear is that s it was still the party of relative economic decline. On the long-standing practical and economic liberalism, the open election to the party leadership intellectual links between Arthur economy and free markets. It was she set out her belief in ‘a free Seldon and the IEA and the Lib- under the leadership of Jo Gri- society with power well distrib- eral Party are indisputable. mond after  that the party uted amongst the citizens and not shifted to the centre-left, despite concentrated in the hands of the Jaime Reynolds is guest-editor of the fact that Grimond him- state. And the power supported this Special Issue. John Meadowcroft self had strong economic liberal by a wide distribution of private is Deputy Editorial Director at the sympathies and for much of his property amongst citizens and Institute of Economic Affairs and Lec- early career was an outspoken subjects and not in the hands of turer in Parliament and Politics on critic of the post-war consensus the state.’ the Hansard Scholars Programme at

50 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 LIBERALS AND THE NEW RIGHT the London School of Economics and  Schwartz, George Leopold (– –. President of the Society Political Science. His first book, The ): academic and financial for Individual Freedom and the Free Ethics of the Market, will be pub- journalist. Wrote Liberal Party pub- Trade Union/League. Established lications: ‘To all who live on the the International Liberal Exchange lished by Palgrave in December . land’, ‘To practical men in mining’, before  and edited the Journal of ‘To all who live in towns and cities’. International Liberal Exchange, later The  It should be noted that the IEA Involved in Free Trade Union. Owl. Helped fund Hayek’s activities does not have, nor has it ever had, a  Capitalism, p. . and Mont Pelerin Society, –, and corporate view on any matter, but  A. Seldon, The State is Rolling Back: participated in meetings. In – rather its mission is to promote public Essays in Persuasion (London, ) on Advisory Council of IEA. understanding of the role of markets includes extracts. R. Fraser What’s  Hobson, Sir Oscar (Rudolf) (– in solving economic and social prob- What in Politics (Labour Book Serv- ): a leading financial journalist of lems. ice, ), pp. –, . his day.  Jo Grimond, ‘Eighty Club’ lecture to  Ownership for All. The Liberal Enquiry  New Outlook, September . the Association of Liberal Lawyers, into the Distribution of Property (LPO/  A. and M. Seldon, ‘How welfare London,  October . LPD, March ) vouchers work’, New Outlook , June  Mostly based on Seldon, Capitalism  A. Seldon, The Drift to the Corporate ; ‘Welfare in the s’ (report (London, ), especially chapter State: A Preliminary Enquiry into the on the New Outlook forum at the . See also Seldon’s interview with Impact of War Economy (Liberal Pub-  Brighton conference at which Christopher Muller in M. Kandiah lication Dept, ) The pamphlet is Seldon spoke); and A. Seldon, ‘The and A. Seldon (eds.), Ideas and Think headed ‘printed for private circula- Case for Vouchers’ (his speech to the Tanks in Contemporary Britain vol  tion’ and was presumably intended Forum), New Outlook , October (London, ). for a limited readership among the ; A. Seldon, ‘Liberal Controversy  Plant, (Sir) Arnold (–): Pro- party leadership. Simplified’, New Outlook  April fessor of Commerce, LSE, –;  The other members were Lord . an economic liberal and Liberal Party Amulree, Mrs B. Lewis (later Dame  Information provided by Lord Har- supporter. Barbara Shenfield), Dr J. A. Gorsky ris.  Paish, Frank Walter (–): LSE and Leonard M. Harris. th Report  Free Trade and a Free Society, Febru- Professor of Economics. Son of Sir to the Assembly Meeting at Hastings, ary . George Paish, also an academic econ- March .  Abel, Deryck (–?): author, histo- omist and indefatigable Liberal and  Capitalism, p. . rian and journalist. Chairman of the free trade campaigner. F. Paish was  For a full account of the formation of Liberal Party –. active in the Liberal Party from the the IEA, see John Blundell, Waging  His chapter in The Rebirth of Britain s to the s and was an influ- the War of Ideas, Second Edition (IEA, (), p. . ential adviser to Jo Grimond as well ); Ralph Harris and Arthur  Capitalism, p. . as the government. Seldon, A Conversation with Harris  Capitalism p. . and Seldon (IEA, ); Ralph Har-  The State is Rolling Back, p. v. ris chapter in Philip Booth (ed.),  Capitalism, p. . Towards a Liberal Utopia (IEA, );  Making of the Institute, p. . ‘A Little Laissez-Faire’ R. Crockett, Thinking the Unthinkable  A. Seldon, Charge (London, Temple (London, ). Smith, ). Amoroso  Smedley, W. Oliver (–): Para-  Making of the Institute, p. . All parties have their fancies trooper during the Second World War,  In retirement Seldon wrote a book- In political romances, won the Military Cross at Arnhem. In length treatment of these issues: The And a Liberal his devotion must declare;  resigned from accounting part- Dilemma of Democracy: The Political Though the object of my passion nership and set up various free trade Economics of Over-Government (IEA, campaigns from office at  Austin ). Is at present out of fashion, Friars: Cheap Food League, Farmer’s  A. Seldon, The Riddle of the Voucher I love a little lassie fair. and Smallholder’s Association, Coun- (IEA, ). In the total planning era cil for the Reduction of Taxation,  On this point and for a discussion She’s dismissed as a chimera, etc. Vice-President of Liberal Party. of the issues at stake and what might Her regalia shows signs of wear and tear; Liberal candidate five times –. have happened had the Liberal Party A Gladstonian survival, Resigned as Liberal candidate in pro- adopted economic liberal policies, see She is not without a rival, test at resolution supporting entry to James Parry, ‘What if the Liberal Party But I love a little lassie fair. Common Market at  Assembly. had Broken through from the Right?’ Founded the Keep Britain Out Cam- in D. Brack (ed.), Prime Minister Por- Though Stafford, Nye and Morgan paign, later Get Britain Out and stood tillo… and Other Things that Never May prefer a planning Gorgon, as anti-common market candidate on Happened (London, ). A stern inamorata doctrinaire, various occasions. Finally resigned  M. MacManus, Jo Grimond: Towards The Liberal will egg on from Liberal Party . Founded the Sound of Gunfire (London, ). Lady Vi and Lady Megan, the Free Trade Liberal Party, .  Margaret Thatcher, press conference For he loves a little lassie fair. In  founded Radio Caroline. In after winning Conservative Party  acquitted for manslaughter of a leadership,  February . Tran- The rulers and the masses business colleague. script available at And continues to endeavour banker. Wealthy from mother’s side To make the others love his lassie fair. (she was a Littlewood). Liberal candi- date  and . Liberal National Up the Poll by Sagittarius and Vicky (general election after . President of the London 1950) Liberal Party. Liberal Party Treasurer

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 51 ‘Suddenly a new idea is abroad; an idea with the power to divide one political party, unite another and dissolve the dilemmas of a third. Owenites claim DAVID OWEN AND THE it as their true credo; Conservatives as the faith they have always professed, if sometimes unknowingly; Liberals define themselves SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY as its oldest British guardian, while even one or two luminaries in the Labour Party see it as the route to modernising socialism. What can this androgynous, all- purpose, elastic idea be? Why, the social market economy, of course; the idea, that if only one knew what it was, as the SDP delegate said in their debate on the matter, one would be bound to endorse it.’

Duncan Brack examines the origins of David Owen’s concept of the social market economy uch of the divi- pressure group ‘Compass’ put it in sion between early : – and its use both as right and left an idea and, perhaps centres around The critical point of align- different views ment between the parties more importantly, as a Mon the combination of social jus- is the markets. Labour once political weapon. tice and market economics. As aspired to make people the Neal Lawson, chair of the Labour masters of the market – now

52 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 DAVID OWEN AND THE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY

it has given in to global of the  election. He needed The com- German Christian Democrats in capitalism by inverting that to define his ideological position their  Dusseldorf Programme. principle. The fundamental – different from the Conservatives bination of For them, the social market repre- political shift was equating and Labour, and increasingly dif- sented a third way, between social- economic efficiency with ferent from the Jenkinsites within policy goals ism and monopoly capitalism: the social justice. Social justice the SDP, and his Alliance partners Programme included minimum is no longer to be achieved the Liberals. The concept he came – economic state control of industry, power- by taming capitalism but by up with was the ‘social market’, efficiency ful anti-trust laws and co-opera- ensuring employability in a which he claimed was borrowed tion between trade unions and global economy. from ‘the  Bad Godesberg through companies. ‘Outlaw monopoly’, Programme of the German Social wrote Ludwig Erhard, the Chris- Twenty years earlier David Owen, Democratic Party, when they market tian Democrat Minister for Eco- the second leader of the Social abandoned Marxist economics nomic Affairs, ‘turn the people Democratic Party, attempted to and achieved electoral success with allocation, and the money loose and they formulate just such a combination thirteen years of a Social Demo- plus social will make the economy strong’. of policy goals – economic effi- cratic/Liberal government’ – an And strong the German economy ciency through market allocation, obvious lesson for the British Lib- justice turned out to be – although Mar- plus social justice via redistribution eral–SDP Alliance to learn. shall Aid, the refugee inflow of – which he called ‘the social mar- In fact the phrase originated via redis- cheap labour from the East, cur- ket economy’. This article traces earlier than : die soziale Mark- rency reform and an undervalued the story of the social market, twirtschaft was first coined in  tribution Deutschmark, a booming world both as an idea and, perhaps more by Alfred Müller-Armack, an – which economy, and reconstructed, and importantly, as a political weapon. adherent of the Freiburg school therefore modern, industrial plant of ‘ordo-liberal’ economists, asso- he called must take a substantial degree of ciated with the German resist- credit. One factor that was not Origins ance to Hitler. Writing in the ‘the social noticeably present, however, was Owen was elected to the leader- wreckage of the thousand-year social justice; Erhard was implac- ship of the SDP in , after its Reich, the Freiburg school was market ably opposed to universal welfare founding leader, Roy Jenkins, searching for an economic system economy’. provision and redistributive fiscal stood down in the wake of a disap- that would keep the state from policy. True competition would pointing election result which saw interfering in individuals’ lives: by itself produce prosperity and the party’s parliamentary strength a perfect, undistorted, liberating higher living standards for all: the fall by four-fifths, even while the market, in which the only role of only ‘social’ element in die soziale Liberal-SDP Alliance was winning government would be to ensure Marktwirtschaft. the highest third-party vote for that market forces worked freely, In the face of this continuing more than fifty years. He moved through breaking up concentra- economic success, and electoral immediately to stamp his authority tions of economic power. dominance by the Christian Dem- on the party, and retained it, largely The theory was taken up and ocrats, it was hardly surprising that unchallenged, until the aftermath turned into practical politics by the the opposition SPD responded by

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 53 DAVID OWEN AND THE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY shifting their own policy stance. from the surplus produced by markets, and insufficient priority Their  Bad Godesberg pro- an efficient and competitive given to exports. An important gramme, however, contained economy: higher profits, higher part of the policy of the social ‘neither the term nor the notion wages and higher employment market was recognition and wel- of the “social market economy”’, all resulted in a higher tax yield, come for the role of markets. according to Dr Susanne Miller, which could be used to ‘alleviate The creation of a small Ministry widow of SPD leader Willi Eich- distress and advance education’. of Competition was therefore ler. Public ownership and invest- Despite Joseph’s support for the important, to break up cartels ment controls as means to control social market, however, the term and monopolies and to promote the economy, counter private never featured in the slogans of competition and fair trading. influence and achieve social jus- Thatcherism – perhaps because Owen concentrated mostly on tice featured strongly, as they did it sounded too remote and aca- the public sector, where he tended also in the SPD’s  Long-Term demic, perhaps because the word cautiously towards denationalisa- Programme, adopted six years ‘social’ fitted rather poorly with tion – an innovation in the early after it finally achieved power. In Thatcherite rhetoric. Thus David s, before the large-scale Con- any case, the pure social market Owen was the first politician to servative privatisation programme had long since been subverted, attempt to inject it fully into the had gathered pace – though at the with the introduction of subsidies vocabulary of British politics. Yet same time accepting that publicly for agriculture in , for coal in even he was never clear in defin- owned industries could be used , and subsequently for other ing precisely what it meant. imaginatively and at greater risk key industries and sectors. than would be possible in pri- Owen was therefore on rather vately owned firms. Monopolies shaky ground in claiming that the David Owen and the social in the public service sector were ideas behind the social market market to be broken up; franchising was originated with the political left, Owen first started systematically favoured for such services as tel- or even the centre. He was also to use the term ‘social market’ in ephones, post, gas, electricity, rail- inaccurate in claiming that the September , at his first con- ways and water. Owen saw the concept was taken up by moder- ference as SDP leader. He had main obstacle to efficiency and ate Conservatives in Britain in the outlined his interpretation of it in competition, however, as organised the article ‘Agenda for Competi- labour, and dealt at some length s. Certainly John Biffen used  it, but during his early, monetar- tion with Compassion’, which with remedies for the labour ist, phase. It owed most of all to actually appeared a month later in market: industrial democracy (to that pre-Thatcher Thatcherite, Sir the October issue of the journal of ensure that workers fully under- the free-market-promoting Insti- stood the commercial realities fac- Keith Joseph, and his creation, the Owen was Centre for Policy Studies, whose tute of Economic Affairs. This was ing their firms); greater democracy first publication, in , was supposed to mark Owen’s conver- within trade unions; disaggrega- therefore sion to the policy. ‘I did it quite tion of wage bargaining structures called Why Britain Needs a Social  Market Economy. on rather deliberately,’ he explained later. (including ending comparability In his foreword to the booklet, ‘I knew I’d have more publicity linkages and national pay settle- Joseph explained how he founded shaky for a switch like that if I did it in ments); and, to control inflation the IEA journal than if I did it in (at least in the short term, before the CPS, ‘to survey the scope ground for replacing increasingly inter- Open Forum in the SDP.’ This was these changes had worked their ventionist government by social in claim- followed a year later by the ‘The way through), an incomes policy. market policies’. For Joseph and Social Market Approach’, the first Something of a macro element the booklet’s authors, the mean- ing that chapter of his book A Future That made its appearance in the last ing of the term ‘social market’ was Will Work; but in fact both article version of the paper (the chap- clear, and the same as it had been the ideas and chapter are based very heav- ter in A Future That Will Work): an ily on a speech Owen gave in industrial strategy, to assist firms for Muller-Armack and Erhard: behind the ‘a socially responsible market May , just two months after to develop and adjust to changing economy, for a market economy is social mar- the foundation of the SDP, when patterns of demand in the market- perfectly compatible with the pro- he delivered the fourth Hoover place – research and development, motion of a more compassionate ket origi- lecture (‘The Social Market’) to skill training, and restructuring of society … Industry alone creates Strathclyde University. declining industries; central plan- the wealth which pays for social nated with In each case the prescription ning, ‘anticipating trends and tak- was the same. The source of Brit- ing action to prevent or mitigate welfare’. Government interven- the politi- tion was justified only where it was ain’s economic and industrial foreseeable adverse social situ- designed to limit market distor- cal left, or decline was poor productivity, ations’; and reform of the social tions such as the abuse of monop- caused by a failure to develop a security system (mainly through oly power or restrictive practices. even the commercially oriented social replacing universal benefits with The ‘social’ aspect derived entirely climate within industry, far too targeting) to reduce poverty centre. weak an emphasis on winning and social deprivation. Social

54 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 DAVID OWEN AND THE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY partnership thus took its place the subject did generate genuine ‘The actual ture. The commitment to the free beside industrial partnership to debate among other members of market, unhindered by govern- create ‘the background of under- the SDP, though it largely failed programme ment intervention, was now much standing and shared interests that to arouse much interest outside clearer and stronger. is inherent in the social market’. the party. After Owen became for tender- In making these claims, Owen Although Müller-Armack and leader in , his economic was continuing the strategy he had Erhard would have recognised policy adviser, Alex de Mont, and ness is a developed since , of attracting much of this – promotion of the the social policy specialist, Nick bit thin’, those he saw as the new Conserv- market, encouragement of com- Bosanquet, in particular were ative voters, those who possessed petition, opposition to monopo- responsible for developing the he com- some commitment to social jus- lies – there was equally much that idea, and especially its relevance to tice and who might have voted did not fit at all with the origi- the social justice aims of the party. mented. Labour a decade earlier, but now nal concept of the social mar- De Mont saw the key aspect of the valued the affluence they believed ket. Owen’s writings abounded social market as ‘the modification ‘Every time the Conservatives were creating with proposals for government of market economy in the name David Owen and distrusted Labour for its inter- intervention – incomes policy, of social equality’. Bosanquet ventionist style and its unilateralist industrial strategies, central plan- went further, by arguing that the enthuses defence policy. To his detractors ning – and he possessed the clear market was still an essential tool to this approach was simply an commitment to a more generous be used to achieve economic suc- about acceptance of the new Thatcher- welfare system that would have cess, but by itself could not provide ite consensus, with a human face; been anathema to Erhard and the the road to social harmony; rather, bombs and but to Owen’s supporters it was Centre for Policy Studies. The key government had to intervene to the free an attempt to face up to the same to Owen’s social market, at least create the political climate neces- political and economic realities at this stage, was revealed in his sary to allow the market to oper- market that Thatcher had correctly iden- interview with Alliance magazine ate (by, for example, redistributing tified, but with a different, and of in July . The SDP, he claimed, the surpluses of ‘market gainers’) he carries course superior, set of solutions. had ‘taken on the necessity to – almost the exact opposite of the ‘Tough and tender’ was to be the think commercially, to recognise original meaning of the term. conviction. message in the SDP’s attempt to the place of markets and to try and Owen himself was influenced Every time win votes from the Conservatives; reorientate union attitudes as well by this debate, and a lecture he and, since they were targeting the as management, so that we can get delivered in January , enti- he talks of centre-right vote, it was hardly a more commercial atmosphere tled ‘Social Market and Social surprising that in most of Owen’s within what I would call a social Justice’, borrowed heavily from welfarism writings and speeches the tough market framework’. Bosanquet’s article. The opera- aspect was stressed more than the The largest section of each of tion of the market was essential and public tender. The journalist Charles these first three of Owen’s papers for reviving the British economy, services Moore had noticed this as early as on the social market dealt with he concluded, but it ‘can only . ‘The actual programme for reform of the labour market, to exist within a stable framework he sounds tenderness is a bit thin’, he com- hold down real wage costs and of policies for winning consent to mented. ‘Every time David Owen increase international competi- economic adjustment’ – includ- bored.’ enthuses about bombs and the tiveness. Strong government and ing not only investment in human free market he carries conviction. weak unions – otherwise referred capital and welfare selectivity but Every time he talks of welfarism to as ‘partnership’ – were the also electoral reform and decen- and public services he sounds means to create wealth; the mar- tralisation. The speech contained bored.’ ket should indeed be encouraged, the most coherent commitment but government still had rather a to social justice that Owen had large part to play within it. On the made, and he received praise from The failure of the social other hand, the surplus thus pro- a number of commentators for it market duced could be used in a more – the Guardian columnist Hugo Yet Owen had his opponents, positive way to reduce inequality Young, for instance, comparing both within his own party and and stamp out deprivation. In his him favourably to Roy Hattersley amongst his Alliance partners, own fashion, Owen was attempt- and the Labour right. The speech the Liberals. Roy Jenkins and Bill ing to create a new ‘third way’ for was also significant, however, for Rodgers, from the original Gang the s; but his frequently used the changes it made from Owen’s of Four, and the academic and phrase ‘tough and tender’ probably original thinking on the social former Labour MP, David Mar- summed it up more accurately market. Gone this time was the quand, all at times warned against than did ‘social market’. belief in planning, a hangover from adopting a ‘junior Thatcherite’ Although this article con- Owen’s Labour days; gone was any approach; Marquand in particular centrates on David Owen’s own mention of an incomes policy; opposed the trend against positive writings and speeches on the and present was a new criticism state intervention. The danger social market, it is true to say that of high levels of public expendi- they saw was that by effectively

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 55 DAVID OWEN AND THE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY enlisting in the Thatcherite pro- market versus state, but in the dis- While David edge, and it wouldn’t be his fault market crusade, Owen was help- tribution of power in society, and if it had been blunted by the com- ing to lend credibility to its claims, how it could be devolved to afford Owen may promisers of the Alliance. and undermining the strength of the individual and the commu- The major inconsistency in any opposition. As Jenkins com- nity maximum influence over the have been this story, however, is that neither mented, why put all that effort forces and institutions that shaped Owen nor any of his supporters at into promoting the market when their lives. For many Liberals, superb at any time requested that the social it was the public sector that was therefore, the argument over the leading by market as a phrase should feature in going under? social market was thus not only a the election manifesto; so, given Some Liberals similarly viewed difficult one (because Owen kept inspira- the hostility to it, or lack of interest the social market with distaste, on changing its meaning), but not in it, from most of the Liberals and largely because they saw its pro- even a terribly important one. tion and some of the SDP, it was hardly sur- ponent in the same light. Others, The term ‘social market’ did prising that it did not appear. The particularly in the Liberal establish- not feature at all, either in the Lib- example, reason behind this failure to press ment, tended to argue that there eral-SDP manifesto for the  no one, not the issue underlies both the inabil- was no real difference from Liberal election, Britain United, or in the ity of the social market to take off economic thinking. The Liberal more detailed explanation of the even his as a slogan outside the SDP, and energy spokesman Malcolm Bruce Alliance approach set out in the the ultimate failure and disintegra- MP, for example, observed in  book The Time Has Come. Some supporters, tion of the Alliance. that many politicians of the left, of Owen’s social market themes, The explanation lies in the faced with the dominance of the including a strong competition ever sug- character of the SDP leader. While New Right, seemed to feel a need policy, the taming of monopo- gested he David Owen may have been to express their understanding of lies and the removal of restrictive superb at leading by inspiration and commitment to the opera- practices, were included, but the was much and example, no one, not even his tion of market forces. Liberals, by general tone of both was far more supporters, ever suggested he was contrast, had never questioned the critical of the limitations of the good at much good at leading by agree- role of the market – social market market than Owen tended to be. ment. As Richard Holme put it economics ‘seemed to me no dif- Both also contained clear com- leading by after the election, Owen could ferent from the Liberal economic mitments to an incomes strategy, agreement. ‘be identified as a politician in pragmatism that evolved over the budgetary expansion and higher flight from politics. The Hound of past century’ – but equally had public expenditure – all policies Heaven which has pursued him long been aware of its limitations. which Owen had abandoned or down the years is collective deci- Similarly, the Liberal leader, David of which he was becoming more sion-making. He couldn’t stand it Steel, commented that had he sceptical. in the Labour Party, he wouldn’t been talking about markets rather Owen chose to express his irri- stand it in the SDP, and he no than David Owen, it would have tation at this supposedly fudged longer has to stand it in the Alli- attracted no media attention at all, approach in the middle of the ance … for a loner like Owen, since ‘this has been classical Liberal election campaign. In a speech hell is other people.’ Bill Rodg- thinking for a very long time’. in Leeds on  May , Owen ers agreed: ‘he’s a brilliant leader if The main Liberal response, explicitly restated his belief in the he can give orders – but he doesn’t however, was that Owen was sim- social market – according to the want to persuade. He doesn’t like ply tilting at the wrong windmill. Independent, ‘the combination of having colleagues on an equal There was a general acceptance in “toughness and tenderness” which footing.’ Although Owen may Liberal economic thinking that Liberal leaders had previously kept have used the social market in the market was, if operated with- out of the Alliance campaign’. his own speeches and booklets, out distortion, a relatively efficient Owen was frustrated, claimed the and within his own party, where way of allocating resources with- paper the next day (following a opposition hardly existed, when out excessive state intervention; personal briefing), with the bland- it came to the Alliance, and argu- but would not, by itself, lead to ness and caution of Britain United ing for his beliefs with the scepti- that distribution of power, income and its failure to carry any specific cal Liberals, he simply opted out: and wealth that was essential for a mention of the market economy. if they wouldn’t agree with him, Liberal society. The question was His speech had been an attempt why should he waste his time in not to what extent the market was to restore the cutting edge to the argument? needed, but to what extent the Alliance challenge, and to appeal state had to take action to adjust, once more to wavering Tory vot- supplement or replace market ers. This outburst can also be seen, The death – and rebirth? – of outcomes, in the pursuit of indi- of course, as preparing the ground the social market vidual liberty, opportunity, or an for laying the blame on others for In one sense Owen got his wish; environmentally sustainable econ- losing the election: Owen would the general election of  June omy. Liberals thus tended to be have done his best in trying to  effectively marked the end of interested, not in the question of present a tough, radical, cutting the Liberal-SDP Alliance. Owen

56 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 DAVID OWEN AND THE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY resigned as leader of the SDP after and so on), to hold down real confidently and with a proud sense it voted to open merger talks with wages and increase international of identity.’ Twenty months later the Liberals, and founded his own competitiveness; but the commit- the Owenite SDP wound itself Campaign for Social Democracy, ment to an incomes policy was up after a record of electoral fail- pledged to keep social democ- explicitly dropped. Still present ure culminating in finishing sev- racy – or at least his version of it was the belief in social justice, but enth (behind the Monster Raving – alive; on  March , the day redistribution was no longer so Loony Party) in the Bootle by- after the launch of the merged important (and while real wages election of May . Social & Liberal Democrats, this had to be kept down, differentials The Torquay conference also transformed itself into the ‘con- had to be maintained, to preserve saw news of a new think tank, tinuing SDP’. incentives: not much redistribution the Social Market Foundation, Throughout the process Owen there). The emphasis on selectivity organised and promoted by a continued to proclaim his belief in in social security grew stronger group of SDP peers and Skidel- the social market. In July , he all the time, coupled with a move sky himself. The Foundation was explained to the House of Com- towards the US ‘workfare’ work- eventually established under the mons in his reply to the Queen’s for-benefits system. No mention Owenite peer Lord Kilmarnock; Speech that he had learned his here of Nick Bosanquet’s concep- its first publication was a reprint of lesson: ‘the most crucial linkage tion of the need for social harmony Skidelsky’s SDP Conference paper. between social policy and the to allow the market to operate; Nowadays, however, although market economy’. The real test instead this was much closer to the Foundation is still very much of the next four years was whether the original German ordo-liberal active, there seems little link with ‘we can outflank the Government view of social harmony resulting its Owenite past. ‘Steering an inde- in winning people’s confidence in from the unhindered operation of pendent course between political what I have called the social market the market. parties and conflicting ideologies,’ economy’. In September Owen Although something of a as its website claims, ‘the SMF has addressed the American Chamber debate about the social market been an influential voice in recent of Commerce in a speech emo- sprang up in the press in the three health, education, welfare and pen- tively entitled ‘Blunt – Not Bland’. or four months after the  sions policy reform.’ Its entry in a No party could hope to succeed, election, and the various opposi- guide to think tanks states that ‘the he claimed, unless it was forthright tion parties – particularly Labour SMF undertakes and commissions in its commitment to the market: – began to reconsider their eco- original research and writing on a ‘not a token commitment; not a nomic policies in the light of range of public policy issues where commitment hedged in with ifs three successive election defeats, understanding both the vitality of and buts; a full-blooded commit- it cannot be said that support for markets and the need for social ment to make the market econ- the term spread beyond Owen’s consent can advance debate and omy succeed. Only then will you splinter SDP. Just before it merged help to shape new ideas. It devel- be listened to and believed when with the Liberals, in January , ops ideas that are pro-market but you introduce the element miss- the SDP, post-Owen, adopted the not laissez-faire, setting markets ing from the Conservative market policy statement The Social Market in their social context and recog- economy: social justice.’ and Social Democracy, but this owed nising that outside the realm of The speech (later reprinted as far more to the de Mont/Bosan- theory they are underpinned by Sticking With It, the first publica- quet approach than to latter-day social consent.’ The Foundation tion of the Campaign for Social Owen. The term has never fea- does seem to have been influential Democracy) presented a new ver- tured in Liberal Democrat policy in underpinning New Labour’s sion of the social market, one fitted papers, though possibly some of move in the direction of ‘social to the ‘self-confident, determined the Orange Book authors might go market’-type policies, and after the and tough third force’ that Owen along happily with Owen’s pre-  election its director left to was trying to create. Commit- scriptions. join the  Downing Street Policy ment to the market was to be the The precise Owen and the ‘continuing SDP’ Directorate (though former direc- touchstone of success in the s. persisted in placing the social mar- tors were subsequently active in Therefore, gone were any of the identity ket at the heart of their approach. Conservative politics). criticisms of the market which had of Owen’s Their first conference, at Torquay marked Owen’s earlier speeches; in , featured a debate on a gone was any caution over pri- social mar- paper by the economic historian Myth or reality? vatisation, which he advocated (and later peer) Robert Skidelsky, The precise identity of Owen’s for steel, coal, and, later, electric- ket itself, called The Social Market Economy, social market itself, however, was ity. Back once more was the con- and Owen continued to stress the always in doubt. Owen claimed cern with the reform of the labour however, idea of the social market as ‘our big that he first employed it to get market (decentralisation and dis- was always idea, our very own idea. If we work away from the term ‘mixed aggregation of wage bargaining, it out further we could make it our economy’, which anyone, from encouragement of labour mobility, in doubt. flagship. We can face the future neo-liberal to neo-marxist, could

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 57 DAVID OWEN AND THE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY support; but he then redefined it poratist, interventionist strategy – had to stress their attachment to so many times that the same prob- that he was trying to avoid, were it again and again, to mark their lem ended up dogging his phrase not terribly important. If offered a separation from the anti-market as well. Owen’s original version neat parable, and the phrase itself socialists. Hence the social market of the social market was quite dif- sounded new and vaguely techno- formed part of the constant grad- ferent from that of the German cratic; and, as one of his associates ual evolution of political language, ordo-liberals, littered as it was said, Owen was always possessed at that time trending towards with examples of state interven- of ‘an entrepreneurial view of talk of the role of the market, in tion, including training, planning, history’ – he took what suited the face of three successive elec- incomes policy, and industrial strat- him and ignored the rest. The tion victories for Mrs Thatcher’s egy. At times it seemed little more social market was in this sense a market-stressing Conservatives. than a camouflage for breaking the PR slogan, an advertising ploy: it Although Owen and the SDP power of the unions, fragmenting suggested that the SDP was new may have failed, they did at least the labour market, and holding and exciting. It was, of course, par- to some extent affect the agenda down real wages so that British ticularly aimed at wavering Con- of the political debate – as can per- industry could compete effec- servative voters – so it is hardly haps be seen in the story of New tively in world markets. At other surprising if it did appear to have Labour. As Peter Mandelson put it times – most clearly when under a right-wing slant. in June , ‘New Labour’s blue- the influence of Alex de Mont To be fair, however, the social print is quite distinct from any US and Nick Bosanquet – he stressed market was a little more than model. It is far closer to Ludwig the social justice aspect; the need just a PR slogan; it did indicate a Erhard’s post-war social market to create social harmony through genuine shift in political thinking. economy …’ redistribution of income, wealth Owen’s use of the term marked The main role of the social and opportunity, to establish the Owen’s use his ideological as well as his politi- market, however, was always as society in which the market could cal split from the Labour Party, and a political tool; a weapon with be allowed to function relatively of the term carried with it a substantial ditch- which David Owen could flail his unchecked. Thus Erhard’s concep- ing of old Labour commitments, opponents – and allies – accusing tion was inverted: social harmony marked his including nationalisation and the them of too little commitment to was needed to create the market, primacy of the trade unions. (His the creation of economic prosper- rather than the market to create ideological book, Face the Future, published ity, and too much soft-hearted, social harmony. as well as in , had contained no refer- woolly-minded attachment to a Probably, to Owen, this didn’t ence to the social market, even bygone interventionist era. As a really matter. His aim in taking up his political in his account of the SPD’s Bad tool, in the end, it did not prove the term was not to create a new Godesberg Programme – but it all that useful; although a few economic or social theory, but to split from was written when he was still a journalists (notably those writing provide a pointer towards where member of the Labour Party.) To for the Independent) picked it up, he was taking the SDP. After his the Labour his followers in the SDP, the social it was hardly a phrase that reso- election as SDP leader in , Party, and market became the latest stage in nated with the electorate. Owen Owen deliberately set out to cre- the march of British social democ- tried to ensure that it was associ- ate a new image for his new party, carried racy: from Marx to Bernstein to ated with the promotion of per- one untainted by the centrist Durbin to Crosland, and then to sonal prosperity, and opposition to interventionist corporatism of the with it a Owenite social market theory. In the interventionism, high tax rates past – particularly, in his eyes, asso- one sense, there had to be something and excessive union power of the ciated with Roy Jenkins and his substantial like the social market, something s, but in practice the social associates, and David Steel and the ditching of new; otherwise, as Ralf Dahren- market, along with its promoter, Liberals. He happened to choose dorf observed, Social Democrats disappeared into what Trotsky the phrase ‘social market econ- old Labour would be ‘merely survival politi- called the ‘dustbin of history’. omy’, borrowing a term from West cians, essentially about the past The final use to which the Germany, and associating it with commit- rather than about the future’. social market was put was not the SPD’s ditching of their out- Owen’s Alliance partners, the only to present the SDP as new moded rhetoric and programme ments, Liberals, would of course have and exciting, but also to pic- at Bad Godesberg, supposedly fol- including argued that his emphasis on the ture David Owen himself in the lowed by their accession to power. market marked nothing more than same light. Owen was, in British The facts that the phrase was nationalisa- a recognition of the economic terms, an unusual politician. As never really used by the SPD at realities that they had always Richard Holme observed, he all, but stemmed from a far more tion and accepted. Owen and the SDP, was by temperament very like an right-wing origin, that its original however, because of their Labour American presidential candidate, meaning was very different from the primacy past – especially their immediate identifying himself clearly with Owen’s, and that by the time he of the trade past, when the word ‘market’ was particular issues, impressing media took it up it had mutated, in West particularly associated with capi- and voters by demonstrating his Germany, into just the sort of cor- unions. talist exploitation of the workers grasp of policy positions and his

58 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 DAVID OWEN AND THE SOCIAL MARKET ECONOMY personal qualities of toughness by Owen to his term, the social The story Spectator,  September . and decisiveness. The party itself market economy, and it was almost  The phrase is Roy Jenkins’ – from became almost unnecessary, as it entirely due to his conviction that Roy Jenkins, Three Years from War- of the rington: Retrospect and Prospect (Tawney is in the US. In the story of the adopting both Mrs Thatcher’s pol- Society, ). social market, David Owen is far icies and her style was the route to political  See David Marquand, ‘The Great more important than is the SDP electoral success. Divide’, New Democrat, April/May – though it afforded him the plat- Maybe, in one sense, it was – but failure of . form he needed in the British it was Tony Blair’s New Labour  Malcolm Bruce MP, ‘The politics of the social economics’, New Democrat, April/May context to advance his ideas. Party that in the end proved more . ‘Thank God I’m free’, were adept at moving to the right, while market is  Cited in Andrews, Liberalism Versus the supposed to have been Owen’s Owen, largely because of his own Social Market Economy, p. . first words on leaving the Labour inability to work with anyone the story of  David Owen and David Steel, The Party; free of the shackles of prone to disagree with him, failed Time Has Come (Weidenfeld and the politi- Nicolson, ). other people. There were few to persuade his own party, and its  ‘Owen risks rift to revitalise Alliance enough restraints within the Alliance partners, that it was sen- cal failure hopes’, Independent,  May . SDP, especially after he became sible politics. His cause was not  David Marquand, personal communi- its leader; but there were some in helped by the very imprecision of of David cation, March . the Alliance, which explained his the term social market, the mul-  According to both Alex de Mont and Michael Meadowcroft (then vice- growing contempt for his part- tiple meanings he gave it, and its Owen. chair of the Liberal Policy Commit- ners, his hostility to merger, and close identification with himself. tee). his determination to regain his The story of the political failure of  Richard Holme, ‘Fear and Loathing in freedom by founding yet another the social market is the story of the Limehouse’, London Review of Books,  third party, the ‘continuing SDP’. political failure of David Owen. September .  Quoted in Pauline Peters, ‘David As Richard Holme saw it, what Owen: Coming or Going?’, Telegraph drove him was his perception of Duncan Brack is a freelance researcher, Sunday Magazine,  February . himself as ‘a blow-torch aimed at and the Editor of the Journal of  Hansard,  July , col. . the liberal establishment, burn- Liberal History. This article is a  David Owen, Sticking With It (Social Democratic Publications, ) – ing with a hard gem-like flame to summary and updating of his booklet, another speech was also incorporated. cut through their soggy consen- The Myth of the Social Market: A  SDP Green paper no. , The Social sus … What he wants to achieve Critique of Owenite Economics Market Economy (SDP Enterprises Ltd, is his manifest destiny, and what (LINk Publications, ). ). he stands for is the inspired will of  Reported in the Guardian,  Sep-  Will Hutton, ‘Stalking the social mar- tember  (‘Owen stress on social the leader, whatever that may be conscience’). from one moment to another.’ ket’, The Listener,  September .  Neal Lawson, ‘This is the party of the  www.smf.co.uk/site/smf/Members/ In a revealing interview in , living dead’, Guardian,  January   National Institute for Research Owen affirmed his loathing for – extracted from Neal Lawson et al., Advancement (Japan), World Directory the ‘Establishment’: ‘They’ve never Dare More Democracy (Compass, ). of Think Tanks  – SMF entry at been able to envelop me.’ He  David Owen, A Future That Will Work www.nira.go.jp/ice/nwdtt/dat/. html. saw himself as a crusader, battling (Penguin, ), p. .  Quoted in Hutton, ‘Stalking the social  David Owen, The Social Market against ‘the cotton wool of indif- market’. (Fourth Hoover Lecture, Strathclyde ference … I cannot get people to  Susanne Miller, letter to the Guardian, University, ), pp. –. understand the facts’. His model  October .  Private conversation with one of was Mrs Thatcher, with her tough-  Centre for Policy Studies, Why Britain Owen’s advisers, April .  David Owen, Face the Future (Jonathan ness and conviction; by adopting Needs a Social Market Economy (CPS, ). Cape, London, ). her style, one day, Owenism would  David Owen, ‘Agenda for Compe-  As argued by Danny Finkelstein in replace Thatcherism, and his mis- tition with Compassion’, Economic ‘Revisionists without a Cause’, Chap- sion would be done. Affairs, vol. , no. , October . ter  of Alistair Kilmarnock (ed.), The  At the ‘Liberals and Radicals’ con- Radical Challenge: The Response of Social Reading the original lit- Democracy (Andre Deutsch, ). erature on the SDP, published ference in March  – cited in Leighton Andrews, Liberalism Versus the  R. Dahrendorf, in David Steel and between  and , and the Social Market Economy (Hebden Royd, Richard Holme (ed.), Partners in One early speeches of its leaders, one is ), p. . Nation: A New Vision of Britain  struck by the widespread assump-  David Owen, ‘Why I am standing for (Bodley Head, ). leader’, Alliance, No.  (July ).  Cited in Martin Kettle, ‘Rupert Mur- tion that the breakaway party rep- doch may be the man who saved resented a new, radical force on the  Alex de Mont, A Theory of the Social Market (Tawney Society, ). Europe’, Guardian,  June . left of the Liberal Party. By , it  Nick Bosanquet, ‘The “Social Mar-  Holme, ‘Fear and Loathing’ . was difficult to identify any single ket Economy”: Principles Behind the  David Marquand, personal communi- issue on which SDP policy was, in Policies?’, The Political Quarterly, vol. cation, March . conventional terms, to the left of /, July–September .  Holme, ‘Fear and Loathing’.  Quoted in Terry Coleman, ‘The all- the Liberals’. This shift across the  David Owen, Social Market and Social Justice (Tawney Society, ). or-nothing man’, Guardian,  Septem- political spectrum can be followed  Charles Moore, ‘Dr Owen’s model’, ber . in the successive meanings given

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 59 of past generations, or praising the new free-market vitality of REVIEWS the twenty-first century Liberal Democrats, it would be important to pay attention to historical con- Is the future orange? text. Regrettably, this is something which the contributors to this Paul Marshall and David Laws (eds.), The Orange Book: volume are not always prepared to do. For example, it is fair to say Reclaiming Liberalism (Profile Books, 2004) that Beveridge supported a degree Reviewed by Eugenio Biagini and Duncan Brack of collectivism (‘bulk production’, p.) which would not normally be associated with liberalism, but ver the past seventy years on topics such as localism, the EU, this was in  – that is, in the the ideological outlook global governance, economics and midst of the unprecedented social Oof both the Conserva- social justice, the health service, and economic crisis caused by tive and the Labour Parties has crime, the family and pension the Second World War. Likewise, undergone radical reformations reform. The authors comprise a when discussing the post-Thatch- and counter-reformations, with number of MPs, MEPs, and Par- erite rejection of state socialism, ‘New Labours’ and more or less liamentary candidates. The central let us remember that Grimond’s new Conservatisms emerging at ‘orange’ theme is the need to important  National Liberal regular intervals, each of them rethink party policy in ways more Club lecture was the culmination, effectively refuting the legacy of consistent with the post-Thatch- There not the starting point, of his criti- their predecessors. erite consensus about market is much cism of the notion that the state By contrast, the Liberals and values, national power and citi- could take care of all our prob- the Liberal Democrats have zenship. The last one is a concept here with lems (p.). generally displayed a remarkable in great need of being further re- Arguably, proportional rep- degree of consistency and con- evaluated and restored, in contrast which most resentation – had it been imple- tinuity. Important changes have to both the Tory notion of the mented at some stage before indeed taken place, sometimes ‘British national’ as a consumer Liberal  – would have created a less amounting to real paradigm of government products, and the Democrats Manichean political system, one shifts, but always as part of some (hopefully now defunct) socialist within which economic and sort of organic evolution. Thus idea of overriding class identi- will read- class ideologies would have been Keynes built upon the traditions ties as the organising principle of moderated and their excesses cor- established by Alfred Marshall political life. ily agree. rected by coalition governments. and J.A. Hobson in the con- Obviously there is much here However, the ‘orange’ authors text of the post- crisis, and with which most Liberal Demo- What is have little to say about the con- was deeply rooted in the older crats will readily agree. What is controver- tinuing relevance of proportional free-trade economics of global controversial is the deliberately representation. In view of its interdependence. Again, after provocative, and sometimes sial is the adoption for both Scottish and the Second World War, when misleadingly provocative, way EU elections it is surprising that the party adopted the agenda of in which these ideas have been deliberately it should deserve only a cursory European integration, their new presented. In particular, the dis- mention in the chapters on local policy was closely linked to the missive references to ‘nanny-state provoca- government (E. Davey, pp.–) traditional Liberal commitments liberalism’ (p.) suggest that tive, and and the EU (Nick Clegg). to the ‘Concert of Europe’, the the party was responsible for the Devolution – another old League of Nations and, generally mistakes which led, as a reaction, sometimes Liberal cause – has been imple- speaking, multilateralism in for- to Thatcherism. In reality, while mented by Mr Blair along lines eign affairs. Beveridge and Keynes redefined mislead- reminiscent of Mr Gladstone’s Not surprisingly, the editors the intellectual boundaries of  Home Rule Bill, including and contributors to the Orange social justice and ‘positive’ liberty, ingly pro- the latter’s potential pitfalls in Book are eager to stress that they, they were not in control of the vocative, terms of the confused relation- too, work within the tradition. way in which their ideas were ship between Westminster and Charles Kennedy, in his ‘Fore- implemented (or hijacked) by way in the new coordinated/subordi- word’, further underscores this successive Labour and Conserva- nated parliaments and assemblies. point. Littered with the names tive governments. Had the Liber- which these How does this affect the two of old masters – including J. als been in office, would they have questions of local government Bentham, J.S. Mill, W.E. Glad- been able to do better? This is a ideas have and the constitutional relation- stone, L.T. Hobhouse, J.A. Hob- counterfactual which we cannot been pre- ship between the UK and the son and W. Beveridge – this book reasonably explore, but before EU? Are the Liberal Democrats consists of ten chapters focusing condemning the ‘socialist’ sins sented. going to help Mr Blair to emerge

60 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 REVIEWS from the constitutional fogs of can provide a new excuse for community. There is every reason the late nineteenth century? unbridled liberal imperialism. to suspect that a significant and From the start (i.e. in –) The latter, besides being ques- public reversal of this trend will some critics of Gladstonian tionably ‘liberal’, would soon have the opposite effect, creating home rule pointed out that be constrained by the disastrous a virtuous circle of responsibility a federal arrangement would economic costs and military and active, participatory citizen- require a written constitution. overstretch that a philosophy of ship. (p.) Yet, while the Orange Book pro- universal intervention for the Whatever its contents, the way vides a convincing defence of protection of civil rights would in which the Orange Book was the EU constitution, it neglects entail. Moreover, let us bear in promoted and launched hardly the question of whether a writ- mind that Gladstone’s foreign made the impression its authors ten constitution would help to policy was based on the firm could have wished. In August rationalise not only the messy belief in a hierarchy of civilisa- , a month before its appear- European institutions which tions and cultures – one which ance, the Guardian led an article have organically grown over few Liberals would accept nowa- with the claim that ‘The high- the past fifty years, but also the days. Finally, insufficient con- riding Liberal Democrats are set equally messy British institu- sideration has been given to the to be shaken by a controversial tions which have evolved in a question whether some of the call from the party’s young Turks similar way during the same problems of ‘global governance’ to adopt new “tough liberal” period. In particular, addressing are so deeply rooted in local con- policies which are pro-market the reciprocally interdependent ditions and cultures and so com- and more Eurosceptic and place questions of local government plex that they cannot be quickly new responsibilities on persist- and EU reform, should we not fixed by either the UN or any ent offenders’. Similar stories first decide what to do with self-styled ‘coalition of the will- appeared elsewhere in the media, the quasi-but-not-really federal ing’. If gunboats cannot export indicating a coordinated attempt structure of the UK? liberal democracy, we should to set the agenda ahead of the The book contains proposals perhaps reconsider the value of Liberal Democrat conference which many Liberal Democrat other Liberal traditions in foreign in Bournemouth in September; readers may find disconcerting. policy – especially non-inter- they were planted, and the media For example, we may wonder vention and the respect of other operation coordinated, by David whether Christopher Huhne’s nations’ rights to regulate their Laws’ office. neo-Gladstonian prescriptions internal affairs. The timing was spectacu- for global governance (p.) Yet, there is much to be larly inept. The centrepiece of said for this book. The final the conference, the last before chapter on the Beveridge tradi- the general election, was the tion and the challenges of the presentation of the party’s ‘pre- pensions scheme is fascinating manifesto’ paper, an indication of and thought-provoking. Dav- the themes on which the Liberal ey’s strategy for the renewal of Democrats planned to fight the local democracy reminds us of election. Laws’ proposal for a the consistency between what social insurance basis for health Quentin Skinner has recently care – in reality almost the only described as ‘neo-roman’ liberty major departure from exist- and the views which the party ing party policy in the Orange inherited from its Victorian Book – naturally did not feature. founders. Both Gladstone and Furthermore, the idea had been Joseph Chamberlain would have explicitly rejected by a party enthusiastically agreed with Dav- policy working group on public ey’s prescription for the reversal services in , and Laws did of the over-centralised state: not choose to put it forward as an If political power shifts, option in the separate debate on people will shift with it. Many health policy at Bournemouth. people have been put off local Issuing a call for such a major government in recent decades as revision of policy, accompanied by local government’s powers have the broad criticism of the party’s been stripped away. Some areas approach as ‘nanny-state Liberal- have witnessed a vicious circle, ism’, could well have been accept- whereby people of talent moved able two or three years before out of local politics, as it was no an election, or immediately after longer the vehicle for them to one – but to do so just before a put something back into their campaign struck many Lib Dems

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 61 REVIEWS as unnecessarily divisive and likely carefully considered. In keeping There is a The sum charged in warrants only to give ammunition to the with the editors’ precepts, perhaps against Balfour was £, – the party’s opponents (as it did, with those interested in the future of good case same amount as the paper profit Labour canvassers in the Hartle- liberal democracy need to make amassed by Henry Adams in the pool by-election the week after more use of another Liberal for publica- film story. the conference claiming that the tradition – the Liberal Summer Without the million-pound Lib Dems wished to privatise the School – or of a similar device to tions which note as proof of Adams’s wealth, NHS). Laws was subject to bitter encourage dialogue and cross-fer- stimulate people begin to believe he has lost criticism within the parliamentary tilisation between party politicians his fortune or that he never had party, the book’s launch meeting and the many intellectuals and and pro- the note in the first place. They at Bournemouth was cancelled, scholars who are actually ‘Liberal’, accuse him of dishonesty and and speaker after speaker in con- whether or not they are party voke new fraud and they blame him for the ference debates took the opportu- members, in order to recreate that failure of the gold-mine shares, nity to denounce the Orange Book, extraordinarily powerful unique thought shares that had been bought by its authors and its contents. In synergy which enabled Liberal on current many small shareholders on the the end the timing of the launch ideas – if not the Liberal Party basis of Adams’ good name and guaranteed a backlash against its – to dominate the past century. issues of reputation. The victims of the authors’ ideas, rendering them crash, including widows and their less rather than more likely to be Eugenio Biagini is the Reviews Edi- public pol- offspring, confront Adams with taken up in the aftermath of the tor of the Journal, and Duncan Brack the possibility of their ruination  election. is its Editor. icy. But the just like those who lost the money In conclusion, there is a good approach, they had invested in Balfour’s case for publications which stimu-  Patrick Wintour, ‘Lib Dem radicals enterprises, such as the Libera- late and provoke new thought on call for pro-market switch’, Guardian, tor Building Society. One poor  August . as well as current issues of public policy. But  For its current activities see www. schoolteacher, quoted by McKie, the approach, as well as the tim- cfr.org.uk/Events/SummerSchool/ the timing, wrote ‘I have worked as hard as ing, of such publications must be MP.htm. any woman could since I was  of such … I know not in the least what publica- will become of me … I have looked forward to my little home, tions must with my books, so longingly, save me, oh save me from the work- Of rogues and ruin be carefully house.’ The Million Pound Note being David McKie, Jabez – The Rise and Fall of a Victorian considered. the movies, there was, of course, Rogue (Atlantic Books, 2004) a happy ending. Adams gets through the month without cash- Reviewed by Graham Lippiatt ing the note, keeps his fortune on the stock market and even gets the girl, marrying into the aristoc- n the  film comedy The At one point in the plot, racy. Jabez and his victims did not Million Pound Note, an adapta- Adams lends his name to a fad- live happily ever after. Ition of a short story by Mark ing gold-mining enterprise Jabez – The Rise and Fall of a Twain, Gregory Peck plays Henry whose stock-market ratings soar Victorian Rogue can be read on a Adams, a penniless American overnight on the strength of number of levels: as a Victorian in Edwardian London. Adams his endorsement and he makes morality tale, like Thomas Hardy’s becomes the subject of a bet himself £, without invest- Mayor of Casterbridge, or perhaps between two rich brothers who ing a penny. Unfortunately his Augustus Melmotte in Trollope’s want to find out if someone with million-pound note goes missing The Way We Live Now – where a a million-pound note could live temporarily and he finds the value man rises to the top of his chosen for one month by the power of its of his shares melt away. This epi- tree and is seemingly unassailable, possession alone without need- sode provides an uncanny parallel until the truth of his position is ing to break into it. Adams finds with the career of Jabez Spencer revealed and his wealth and status that just by showing the note, Balfour, the subject of this highly unravel before his eyes. Another everyone extends him credit in readable biography by David interpretation is to see the story anticipation of future business and McKie. Balfour was a Victorian of Balfour as a parallel to the great in the knowledge that the very Liberal politician and capitalist, political, capitalist scoundrels of fact of their being patronised by convicted of fraud as a director of his own time such as George a well-known millionaire will a public company and of obtain- Hudson, the so-called Railway attract additional customers. ing money by false pretences. King, or Horatio Bottomley. McKie himself also suggests we

62 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 REVIEWS compare Balfour’s life and com- edge, using innovative account- tics in the Victorian age. Balfour mercial dealings to the political ing and commercial techniques was from an early age interested and commercial miscreants of the but on essentially the same basis in politics. His father had been a contemporary era such as Jeffery as everyone else – except that he messenger at the Houses of Par- Archer or, more exactly, as he does got caught out? Ironically, in view liament. He was associated with himself in the book, to the bul- of Balfour’s association with high- local government in Croydon, lying, manoeuvrings and greed Victorian religious feeling and championing its claims to become of Robert Maxwell. Taking this the temperance movement, the a borough, won in , and for approach does, however, highlight modern-day example that comes the separate status as a Parliamen- one of the problems at the heart to mind is Ernest Saunders. tary seat which this would bring. of the story, and in the book’s sub- In August , Saunders He started his political career by title. The modern use of the word was found guilty with three co- getting elected to the Croydon ‘rogue’ presents two particular defendants of conspiracy, theft schools board in . Eventually difficulties. and false accounting in the wake he was twice elected Mayor of the Firstly, while it may be a cliché, of a DTI investigation into share town but was unsuccessful as Par- we are used to seeing ‘rogue’ jux- support dealings. In his political liamentary candidate in . taposed with the word ‘lovable’. memoir, Here Today, Gone Tomor- Before that, however, as

When asked to name or picture row, former Tory Defence the general election of  a rogue today, people are more Secretary John Nott, who was approached, Balfour was selected likely to visualise someone like chairman of investment bankers as Liberal candidate in Tamworth, Phil Tufnell, or the ageing Den Lazards and who provided Saun- having carefully cultivated Liberal Watts from East Enders, than Rob- ders and Guinness with financial society there with the help of ert Maxwell. Today on the dep- advice, asks ‘was Saunders really his brother John. Tamworth was recation scale a ‘rogue’ is closer to guilty? Certainly he behaved fool- Sir Robert Peel�s seat but Peel a buffoon than to someone who ishly, certainly he didn’t always tell was standing down and Balfour�s has done real and lasting damage the truth and certainly he allowed more radical approach was in to other people’s lives. manoeuvrings to go on which fashion. The Tamworth election Second, as McKie himself he shouldn’t … it is arguable that is an interesting case study of acknowledges in the book, how the other side in the battle, Argyll, Victorian politics. It was a two- can we be sure that Jabez Spencer was bending the rules as much member seat and even after two Balfour really was a rogue? Could as the Guinness camp.’ In Nott’s Reform Acts, the total elector- he not have been a pioneering opinion Saunders committed ‘a ate was only ,. There were Victorian capitalist, pushing the series of misdemeanours’ but it is three candidates: Hamar Bass (a boundaries of conducting his clear that, in his view, what Saun- brewer) was the senior Liberal, business, running close to the ders and Guinness got up to was maintaining a distance between still within the – albeit elastically himself and his pro-temperance stretched – bounds of acceptable colleague Balfour; the other can- business practice. It is a constant didate was another brewer (this worry, reading about Jabez Bal- was beer and brewery country) four, to know whether he was W. H. Worthington, Mayor of just keeping one step ahead of the Burton-on-Trent. Worthington auditors in his commercial deal- initially decided to stand as a ings like so many others, until the Liberal-Conservative but in the financial pressures got too oppres- end dropped the Liberal descrip- sive, or whether he deliberately tion while still claiming liberal misappropriated monies, cyni- principles. It was not enough, nor cally engaged in false accounting was his topsy-turvy appeal to the and wilfully risked and lost the working men of the town that the savings of many small investors, election of Balfour would see tee- knowing they could end up in the totalism forced down their throats. poorhouse, simply to enable him Bass and Balfour topped the poll. to live in a luxury he believed he The Tamworth constituency was entitled to, whatever the cost disappeared before the next elec- to others. tion in a boundary reorganisation, But there are other perspec- and having failed to get back at tives to this story too. Balfour’s Croydon, Balfour also fought businesses provided him the unsuccessfully at Walworth and income and independence he Doncaster before securing the needed to fund a political career nomination for Burnley at a by- and the tale of his rise and fall election in . The Conserva- tells us a lot about Liberal poli- tives and Liberal Unionists were

Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005 63 A Liberal Democrat History Group evening meeting JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN AND THE UNAUTHORISED PROGRAMME Radical Joe Chamberlain’s programme for the 1885 general election has been summed up as ‘the intervention of the state on behalf of the weak against the strong, in the interests of labour against capital, of want and suffering against luxury and ease.’ It was denounced by his Whig colleagues as ‘an unauthorised programme’ but it influenced the Liberal manifesto and can be seen as paving the way for the New Liberalism of the twentieth century. It was a major factor in the loss of the Whigs to the Liberal Party and so had a profound effect both on the future direction of the party and its developing ideology.

Speakers: Peter Marsh (Emeritus Professor of History and Professor of International Relations at Syracuse University, New York; author of Joseph Chamberlain, Entrepreneur in Politics) and Terry Jenkins, Senior Research Officer at the History of Parliament; author of Gladstone, Whiggery and the Liberal Party, 1874–1886 and The Liberal Ascendancy, 1830–1886. Chair: Lord Wallace.

7.00pm Monday 25 July Lady Violet Room, National Liberal; Club, 1 Whitehall Place, London SW1 poorly organised and unpre- something of a hero. His in October , in the same the index and jumping about pared, and in the end they clever efforts to avoid detec- court in which the trial of the text. Some of the accounts could not find candidates. Bal- tion, arrest and extradition, Oscar Wilde had been heard of Balfour’s business history four was returned unopposed. his ingenious legal defences only a few months earlier. He also suffer from this approach. He easily held the seat against and the civilised way he was sentenced to fourteen On the other hand, there Tory challenge in  and engages with the Argentin- years’ imprisonment with are excerpts which follow a established himself as a popu- ian people and authorities, hard labour, a term imposed compelling narrative, such as lar local member, becoming serve to rehabilitate him in the as much as an example as a Jabez’s exile in Argentina, and chairman of Burnley Foot- author’s estimation. McKie punishment. He served ten what we discover from this ball Club. But by this time follows the minutes on Bal- years and was released in . book is something of what it the financial troubles which four’s Foreign Office file, He spent his years following meant to live and thrive and brought him down were which become increasingly his release writing a little for be ruined, socially, financially building and, as close business gloomy and desperate, at one the papers and composing his and politically, in Victorian associates were being arrested, point considering abduction. memoirs, My Prison Life. He England at both the top of he resigned his seat, disap- Balfour’s eventual arrest was died in February . pile, like Balfour, and a little peared from his Oxfordshire almost thwarted and seems While its prose and style further down the scale, like his estate and fled to Buenos Aires due mostly to the determina- make this a highly readable constituents and his investors. in December . tion of the detective inspec- and entertaining book, it does Jabez’ story now takes tor sent out to Argentina by suffer as history by not adopt- Graham Lippiatt is Secretary of another twist and we are Scotland Yard. In the end, ing a chronological approach. the Liberal Democrat History almost reading a ‘boy’s own’ Balfour was brought back to It is difficult to follow the Group. adventure. At this point in England, closely guarded all detail of Balfour’s political McKie’s narrative, Balfour the way across the Atlantic, to career, for instance, except by  Here Today, Gone Tomorrow, Recol- the fugitive rogue becomes stand trial at the Old Bailey referring over and again to lections of an Errant Politician (Lon- don, Politico’s, ).

64 Journal of Liberal History 47 Summer 2005