‘A nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’ Liberalism, National Liberalism and the Editorship of the Dumfries Standard, 1957

In a brief statement and, it must be said, it caused to the British on 22 June 1957 the sometimes corrupt government, it was Dumfries and Galloway relationship between reported as far away as Standard and Advertiser British politicians the United States.2 It was announced that its editor and the country’s hardly even a matter of for the past three years, press the dismissal of national importance. A.G. Williamson, had the editor of a small But it did prompt a ceased to be associated Scottish newspaper heated debate in the with the newspaper. and, subsequently, the House of Commons Robert Fergusson, suggested involvement and a statement by the until then the political of the local MP in Prime Minister of the correspondent of this development day. It was perhaps, as the Glasgow Herald, was scarcely an event one MP put it, ‘a nasty, would take over with of international deplorable little incident 1 Dumfries High 3 immediate effect. significance. Yet, because Street in the in our political life’. By In the long, troubled of the embarrassment 1940s David Dutton.

16 Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013 ‘A nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’ Liberalism, National Liberalism and the Editorship of the Dumfries Standard, 1957

ounded in 1843, the Standard since 1919, was also chairman of ongoing and apparently irrevers- had a long tradition of sup- the Dumfriesshire Liberal Associa- ible decline of the orthodox Liberal Fport for Liberalism. By the tion. In an understated obituary Party. second half of the twentieth cen- following Reid’s death in 1962, the After 1945, by contrast, the Lib- tury this made it something of a Standard declared that the leading eral National Party looked to be rarity within the British press. At political articles of the former edi- little more than an increasingly a national level, the News Chroni- tor had been ‘forceful, fluent and anomalous survival from an ear- cle, which itself closed in 1960, was persuasive’.8 When in 1934, after a lier era, especially once the Wool- the nearest thing to a Liberal title, lengthy period of uncertainty, Dr ton–Teviot Agreement of 1947, and and even it gave its support to the Joseph Hunter MP announced that a subsequent arrangement relating Labour Party in the general elec- he was not only joining the Simo- specifically to Scottish constitu- tions of 1945, 1950 and 1951.4 The nite group of MPs in the House of encies, allowed for the fusion of Manchester Guardian, still pub- Commons but also taking up a sen- Conservative and Liberal National lished in Manchester but enjoy- ior administrative post within the (soon to be renamed National Lib- ing a national circulation, was Liberal National Party, the Stand- eral) Parties at constituency level.9 also broadly sympathetic. But ard and the local Liberal Associa- As National Liberals survived only local Liberal-supporting newspa- tion both gave their full support. by courtesy of their Tory masters, pers, of which there were around So total was the resulting eclipse and became almost indistinguish- twenty, were significant factors of orthodox Liberalism in the con- able from them, the Standard’s posi- in sustaining the party’s vital- stituency that the association was tion was ever harder to justify. ity in such disparate locations as able to hold on to the title of ‘Dum- In maintaining the same attitude Carlisle, Huddersfield, Rochdale, friesshire Liberal Association’ until towards Major Niall Macpherson, Greenock and Aberystwyth.5 ‘We as late as 1960. In its editorial col- elected as a Liberal National with have never tried to hide our Liber- umns the Standard insisted that not Conservative support in 1945 and alism under a bushel’, declared the Founded in only Hunter, who died suddenly in thereafter as a National-Liberal- Dumfries Standard in 1955, ‘no one 1935, but also his Liberal National Unionist, as it had towards Hunter can accuse us of concealing where 1843, the successor, Sir Henry Fildes, had and Fildes, the Standard could our true sympathies lie’.6 The close every bit as much right to the des- justly be accused of colluding in an relationship between the newspa- Standard ignation ‘Liberal’ as did repre- act of deception. Addressing the per and the local party was symbol- sentatives of the mainstream party Annan branch of the Dumfriesshire ised by the tradition, dating back to had a long – who were in any case conspicuous Unionist Association in Decem- ‘the early days of Queen Victoria’s by their absence from the constitu- ber 1946, Macpherson insisted that reign’, whereby successful Liberal tradition of ency. The only difference was that he was ‘a Liberal and proud to be and earlier Radical parliamentary Liberal Nationals recognised the one’. But, he continued, the inter- candidates would address their sup- support for need, even at the cost of the tem- ests of Conservatives and Liberals porters following the declaration porary abandonment in a hostile were ‘identical’, even though their of the poll from the first-floor win- Liberalism. world of the traditional Liberal backgrounds were different. ‘Their dow of the newspaper’s offices in doctrine of free trade, to enter into interests would gain the day in the the centre of Dumfries.7 By the sec- governmental partnership with the long run and he was confident that But the picture was in fact Conservatives to resist the domes- the Liberals and Conservatives more complex than the Standard’s ond half of tic challenge of socialism and, later, would be fighting side by side at repeated expressions of its undy- the increasingly menacing threat of the next election.’10 A short-lived ing commitment to Liberalism the twenti- political extremism in continental attempt the previous year to re- might suggest. The newspaper eth century Europe. establish an orthodox Liberal pres- had been complicit in the defec- Such a line was just about plau- ence in the constituency, including tion of the sitting Liberal MP to this made it sible. Having succeeded by the a forlorn candidature at the gen- the Liberal National camp in the middle of the 1930s in creating the eral election, soon spluttered out. early 1930s. Indeed, the Standard something apparatus and infrastructure of a No Liberal would contest the seat was an important factor in ensur- national political movement, and again until a by-election in 1963. ing that Liberalism in the Dum- of a rarity with the allegiance of around three In these circumstances Macpher- friesshire constituency became in dozen MPs, the Simonite faction son laid claim to represent Liberal- practice Liberal Nationalism. The within the had some claim to represent the ism – without prefix or suffix – in key to its influence lay in the fact authentic voice of modern Liberal- Dumfriesshire with little fear of that James Reid, editor of the paper British press. ism, not least in the context of the contradiction. As the 1950 general

Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013 17 ‘a nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’ election approached, the Standard newspaper was in any case appre- The newspaper adopted a harsher argued that ‘there is no difficulty in hensive that any attempt to unseat tone towards the MP than at any Dumfriesshire, where a good Lib- him by the nomination of a Liberal time since his first election to par- eral is standing in a straight fight candidate at the next general elec- liament more than a decade earlier: with a Labour opponent’.11 The tion might simply serve to split close and, as a small but growing the ‘Liberal vote’ and thus allow When a man thinks that the group of critics argued, unhealthy for the return of a socialist. The 60 nations who condemned relationship between the MP and ideal scenario from the Standard’s the Government at the United the local newspaper was empha- point of view was an arrangement Nations General Assembly are sised by Macpherson’s practice of with the Conservatives similar to ‘very probably wrong’ as he holding his regular constituency that which existed in Liberal seats remarked to the writer of this surgeries in the Standard’s offices, such as Bolton West and Hudders- column on Saturday 24 Novem- treating its premises ‘as almost an field West. Macpherson, an ‘ideal ber 1956, he is showing a good official office’.12 Member in every way, could not deal of independent thought. In 1954, however, the octoge- hold the seat as a Conservative However, most Liberals, includ- narian Reid finally stood down without Liberal support’. ‘As a Lib- ing Mr Clement Davies and from the editor’s chair. He was eral newspaper in a traditionally Mr Jo Grimond, who have replaced by A. G. Williamson, for- Liberal constituency, the Standard personally approved the stand merly editor of the Stirling Jour- would be happy if it had a Liberal the Standard has taken, remain nal. It was a curious appointment Member, without any other politi- unconvinced.19 granted that Williamson was a cal tag, who would have the sup- committed supporter of the ortho- port of Conservatives at election As the dust began to settle on Eden’s dox Liberal Party. The proprietors times.’16 disastrous Middle Eastern adven- of the Standard perhaps believed The new What changed matters was the ture, the Standard referred, with- that the new editor would mallea- Suez Crisis of 1956. As a junior out elaborating, to the ‘concerted bly follow the political line so long appointment minister in Anthony Eden’s gov- pressure’ brought to bear upon it pursued by his predecessor. Alter- ernment, Macpherson had either to to force it to ‘abandon its 113-year- natively, they may have come to soon effected give full support to the Prime Min- old Liberal principles’ and back the believe their own propaganda that ister’s fateful policy, or to resign. government. This was a matter of National Liberalism was a genuine a marked He opted for the former course and ‘real concern to everyone, irrespec- and legitimate variant of the Lib- thereby inevitably incurred mount- tive of political sympathies’ which eral creed, and expected William- change in the ing criticism from the Standard. ‘struck at the very roots of a free son to do the same. At all events, Although the Parliamentary Lib- press in this country’ and had to be the new appointment soon effected coverage and eral Party under Clement Davies resisted ‘no matter the source’ from a marked change in the coverage editorial line had tended, more often than not, which it came.20 and editorial line of the Standard. to vote with the Conservative gov- It was later revealed in parlia- This was greeted by a significantly of the Stand- ernment of 1951–55, Suez opened ment that, as early as August 1954, increased circulation and, as far as up a clear division between the two only five months into Williamson’s could be divined from the news- ard. This was parties.17 The Standard presented the editorship, Macpherson had asked paper’s correspondence columns, issue as clearly as it could: him not to differentiate so clearly a warm reception from its reader- greeted by a between Liberalism and National ship. One correspondent expressed Major Niall Macpherson, MP Liberalism. The following month his relief that the Standard ‘seems to significantly for Dumfriesshire, who claims he raised the matter again and said have taken a stand for the princi- to represent the Liberal as well that he wanted to discuss it with ples for which it was founded, and increased as the Conservative interests in the directors of the newspaper.21 discarded the mean expediencies the constituency, again voted This was arranged and Macpherson which could only have brought it circulation for the Government in the vital attended a meeting of the directors into disgrace and disrepute’.13 Sup- opposition censure motion last on 29 September. An uneasy truce port for the Liberal Party inevi- and, as far Thursday 1 November 1956. Mr then remained in place between the tably involved opposition to the Clement Davies, Leader of the MP and the editor until the Suez National Liberals, whom the as could be Liberals and the Liberal MPs in Crisis of 1956 brought matters to a Standard now described as merely the House all voted against the head. Macpherson now complained ‘henchmen’ of the Conservatives.14 divined from Government. Yesterday, Major again to Williamson and the direc- It also meant disowning most of Macpherson told the Standard: tors. The latter met on 20 Novem- the political analysis developed by the newspa- ‘I am sorry that your views and ber to consider the position against the previous editor. The National per’s corre- mine seem to be so far apart in the background of the recent deci- Governments of 1931 and 1935, regard to the action of the Gov- sion of the South West Scotland which had given the National Lib- spondence ernment in intervening in the Liberal Federation to select a can- erals their raison d’être, were now Israeli–Egyptian war. My own didate to oppose Macpherson at the castigated as ‘the worst Govern- columns, a view is that we are both legally next general election. The direc- ments in history’.15 For the time and morally entitled to do so, tors decided to invite Macpherson being, however, any criticism of warm recep- and that we are acting in the best to a meeting the following Satur- Macpherson personally remained interests, not only of ourselves, day, 24 November. Ironically, in muted. The MP was recognised tion from its but of world peace, however view of the fate which awaited him, to be a conscientious and reliable paradoxically it may appear at Williamson was asked to issue the constituency Member and the readership. the present time.’18 invitation:

18 Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013 ‘a nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’

Dear Major, Following upon was dissatisfied with the conduct of ‘This ridicu- meeting the editor was sacked’.29 the decision by the Liberal Fed- matters ‘unconnected with politics’ After an intervention by the Leader eration to contest the seat at the and that his removal had not been lous row has of the Opposition, Hugh Gaitskell, next General Election, the direc- ‘at the instigation of the member of Prime Minister Harold Macmil- tors had a meeting on Tuesday Parliament for the constituency’. been ele- lan agreed to look into the matter. morning to consider the new Indeed, the board’s decision was ‘in When the Prime Minister made a situation which has arisen, and no way influenced’ by Macpher- vated into a statement two days later, he chose it was felt that a word with you son who had ‘no part whatsoever’ to focus his defence of Macpher- would be helpful. Could you in choosing the new editor.25 Yet great scan- son on the rather narrow point that come to my room at 11.30 on Williamson claimed to have been dal’, Macmil- the Under-Secretary was involved Saturday morning, when they told by the chairman of the board ‘solely as the member for the con- will be there to see you? … If I that the directors were dissatis- lan noted. stituency’ and not as a junior minis- do not hear, I will assume you fied with his work and considered ter. Not surprisingly, this argument will be present. Many thanks. that he was ‘going towards Labour ‘PQs and pro- failed to satisfy Macpherson’s crit- Regards. Yours sincerely, A.G. in his writing’.26 This last charge is ics. Gaitskell tried to ridicule the Williamson22 difficult to sustain on the evidence tests to me MP’s actions. To opposition laugh- of Williamson’s recent editorials ter he suggested that Macpherson When the meeting took place the and only makes sense in light of from Labour had complained to the directors chairman, before allowing the busi- the difficulty the directors would about the level of attention given by ness to begin, required Williamson have faced in accusing the editor of and Liberal the newspaper to Liberalism instead to leave the room, even though that supporting ‘Liberalism’, when this of National Liberalism. ‘Was it not room was the editor’s own office. remained the official stance of the MPs.’ very unreasonable to ask the editor Williamson did so under protest. newspaper. As Williamson later to devote more space to National Precisely what happened next put it, ‘As for my alleged Labour Liberalism’, enquired Gaitskell, is an area of some dispute. What leanings, a newspaper which was ‘when not one of us knows what it is clear is that when Williamson personally commended by two is?’ Fraser, by contrast, insisted on was allowed to return he was successive leaders of the Liberal tabling a motion ‘that this House told that the Standard would in party and Liberal headquarters for has taken note of the action of the future support Macpherson and its Liberalism was in no danger of Joint Under-Secretary of State for the Conservative government. going Socialist.’27 Furthermore, Scotland, the member for Dum- Williamson asked whether the when Macpherson was interviewed friesshire, which led to the dis- Standard was still a Liberal news- on the matter by the Scottish Daily missal of the editor of the Dumfries paper and was told that it was. His Express, he admitted that, about and Galloway Standard and strongly suggestion that a genuinely Liberal two months after the November deprecates such action as being paper could not give full support to meeting, he was asked by one of inconsistent with his tenure of either the MP or the government the directors whether, in the event office as a Minister’.30 was left unanswered. of Williamson’s dismissal, he knew A further statement by Mac- There matters rested until 19 of anyone who might take his millan on 30 July to the effect that June, the following year, when place. ‘I thought about it’, recalled Macpherson had not been involved Williamson was summarily dis- Macpherson, ‘and mentioned Mr with Williamson’s dismissal failed missed.23 He was given two months’ Fergusson’ – Williamson’s eventual to close the matter, especially as it salary and informed that there replacement.28 coincided with Macpherson’s own would be a new editor in the edi- Williamson claimed compen- admission that he had indeed been tor’s chair the following morn- sation for wrongful dismissal and asked for suggestions about a pos- ing. But what was the relationship his claim was supported by the sible replacement editor.31 Labour between these developments and Newspaper Society and the Guild members gave the Prime Minis- the November meeting? The of Editors. More significantly, ter’s statement a noisy and hostile Labour MP Tom Fraser later told he appears to have approached at reception, with Gaitskell suggest- the House of Commons that the least one opposition MP. At a time ing that it was quite unconvincing. minutes of the meeting had subse- when the Conservative govern- Macpherson, he argued, should quently been deleted from the firm’s ment remained in some disarray resign. A censure motion was tabled minute book and a revised set sub- following the upheavals of Suez, for 1 August.32 Macmillan was suf- stituted from which Macpherson’s the Labour Party in particular ficiently concerned to record these role was omitted. Furthermore, quickly appreciated the oppor- developments in the privacy of his Fraser claimed that the minutes of tunity to cause it further embar- diary. ‘This ridiculous row has been another meeting, at which consid- rassment. On 23 July 1957, Tom elevated into a great scandal’, he eration was given to the question Fraser, Labour MP for Hamilton, noted. ‘P[arliamentary] Q[uestions] of whether to support Macpherson asked the Scottish Secretary, Jack and protests to me from Labour and or the official Liberal candidate for Maclay, himself a National Lib- Liberal MPs. There is now a hostile Dumfriesshire at the next general eral, whether he was aware that his motion on the order paper (sup- election, were also deleted and the Under-Secretary, Macpherson, had ported by Grimond) and I have told relevant paragraph rewritten by had a meeting with the directors of the Chief Whip that we must dis- one of the directors.24 The board of the Dumfries Standard at which the pose of it by debate if necessary.’33 directors, however, later issued a editor had been criticised for writ- Opening the debate, with statement insisting that Williamson ing editorials hostile to the gov- Macpherson sitting silently on the was dismissed because the board ernment and that ‘as a result of that Treasury bench, Fraser argued

Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013 19 ‘a nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’

that, at the November meeting, by 293 votes to 233. Macmillan Harold realistically possible. At the Fed- the Dumfries MP had exercised seemed well pleased with his own Macmillan MP eration’s annual general meeting in ‘improper influence’ over the direc- performance and with the impact (Prime Minister Dumfries in February 1958 it was tors to have the editor sacked. On of the vote: 1957–63); announced that the Carlisle Journal, the evidence available, suggested Major Niall a newspaper with a 160-year-old Fraser, Macpherson had ‘been in I spoke for twenty minutes or Macpherson MP radical tradition, untainted by asso- the whole affair up to the neck’. He less, and managed to squash the ciation with the National Liberals, had ‘behaved in a way inconsistent accusation. The Opposition (Lib would shortly launch a South West with his tenure of office as a Min- and Labour) was very weak. Scotland title, based on Dumfries ister’. Fraser called upon the Prime Gaitskell behaved lamentably. and under the editorship of the Minister to appoint an independent He allowed the whips to be put ex-Standard editor, A. G. William- enquiry to establish all the facts of on; but (altho’ he was in his place son. Sir Gordon Lethem, chairman the case. His motion was seconded when I sat down) he hadn’t the of the Federation, referred to the by the Liberal leader, Jo Grimond, courage to answer me. We won recent silencing of ‘one of the most and vociferously supported by easily, and our boys were very vigorous and independent voices in opposition MPs who, even with- pleased at a) my loyalty b) my their midst’. Now, he was happy to out an enquiry, appeared convinced success in the debate. All this report, the voice of Liberalism was that Macpherson had behaved helps, with so many divisions again to be raised.38 improperly. ‘This was a plot’, and disaffections in the Party on The South-West Scottish Jour- insisted Emrys Hughes, Labour MP more serious affairs.36 nal duly made its first appearance for South Ayrshire and Bute, ‘to on 7 March 1958 amid messages of get rid of an editor who had cour- Macpherson thus survived and welcome and support from lead- age and independent-mindedness went on to hold a succession of ing Liberals such as Jo Grimond and and who had become something junior offices in the governments sympathetic journalists, including of a thorn in the side of the Tory of Macmillan and Alec Douglas- Alastair Hetherington of the Man- Party’ in South West Scotland.34 In Home until the Tories lost office chester Guardian. With a cover price response, Macmillan pointed to the in the general election of October of just 2d, it was clearly intended to inconsistency between Fraser’s cen- 1964.37 But for the Liberals, strug- undercut its rivals and, by the end sure motion and his call for an inde- gling to re-establish a genuine pres- of the month, it was reported that pendent inquiry before the House ence in South West Scotland after total circulation already exceeded reached a conclusion on the matter. more than two decades of virtual that of the five established newspa- It was, argued the Prime Minis- extinction, the loss of the Stand- pers currently serving the Dum- ter, ‘a compromise by malice out of ard’s support was a significant blow. fries and Galloway area.39 One of innuendo’.35 The South-West Scotland Lib- the new paper’s key aims was to These were difficult days for eral Federation had been set up in undermine Macpherson’s position a government still struggling to February 1955 with the clear aim and, in particular, his continuing recover from the seismic shock of of recreating a Liberal infrastruc- pretentions to represent the Liberal the Suez Crisis and the resulting ture that would enable the party to cause. ‘Why go on masquerading change of premier but, when the put forward candidates in Dum- under the guise of Liberal’, asked House divided on strictly party friesshire and the adjoining constit- the Journal, ‘when even the head lines, Fraser’s motion was rejected uency of Galloway as soon as was of the Tory Party and their chief

20 Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013 ‘a nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’ propagandist Lord Hailsham, the candidate in a calculated effort to fulfilled. Over the next few years Conservative Party Chairman goes extend his electoral appeal. This several local Conservative associa- out of his way to attack Liberalism? ‘disguise’, argued Lethem, ‘had tions reached the conclusion that The electorate is not all that daft caused misunderstanding and had the National Liberals had exhausted not to see through the stratagem.’40 deceived a number of Liberals who their usefulness and took the deci- The most important thing was were perhaps too guileless to realise sion to drop the hybrid labels under for the Liberals to put up a candi- there were people who could be so which they had been known ever date and thus prevent Macpher- treacherous as to fight their political since the Woolton–Teviot Agree- son from tapping unchallenged battles under the flag of the other ment of 1947. Yet this was not the into the continuing Liberal vote. side’. 43 When the Liberal Party in way matters were seen in Dun- ‘The Dumfriesshire Liberals must Dumfriesshire finally managed to friesshire, where Macpherson con- contest the seat at the next Gen- re-form a constituency association, tinued to cling tenaciously to his eral Election, if only to dispose its chairman, Ralph Hetherington, National Liberal affiliation, while of the National Liberal myth, or called upon Macpherson to make stressing the ongoing similarity cease to be a political force in the it ‘abundantly clear’ that he did not between Liberalism and the mod- constituency.’41 The Journal sought represent Dumfriesshire Liberals. ern Conservative Party. Election- to differentiate between the two ‘Otherwise’, Hetherington added eering in 1959, he suggested that movements laying claim to the title with scarcely concealed sarcasm, everything advocated by the Lib- ‘Liberal’ with a clarity to which ‘people might be led to suspect the eral Party in its manifestos for 1951 the Standard had seldom aspired in Unionist candidate of a little sordid and 1955 had been implemented the years since the original split of vote-catching.’44 by the Conservative government the early 1930s. It looked forward On the national plane, the brief of which he was a member.47 Even to a time when the political life of life of the South-West Scottish Journal in 1963, when the Conservative South West Scotland ‘would not be did witness one decisive moment administration’s mounting troubles as confused as it is today’. At pre- in the relationship between the gave rise to renewed expectations sent, ‘we have two rival Liberal Liberal and National Liberal Par- of an imminent general election, it organisations, one of which just ties. The seat of Torrington in was announced at the annual gen- manages to hold itself together to Devon, held by the National Liber- eral meeting of the Dumfriesshire give the National Liberal Member als ever since 1931, was recaptured Unionist Association that the MP its blessing and the other does all by the Liberals at a by-election would once again be standing as it can to prepare for the day when in March 1958. This was the first a National-Liberal-Unionist. By it expects to throw him out’.42 But time that the Liberals had gained this stage even the Standard, while the new paper’s momentum was not a seat at a by-election since 1929 still offering Macpherson its sup- maintained. Just six months after its and victory was all the sweeter for port, doubted the wisdom of his launch the South-West Scottish Jour- being secured at the expense of a designation and suggested that nal was merged with its parent pub- ‘National Liberal and Conserva- it would now be difficult to find lication, the Carlisle Journal. tive’ opponent. As Lady Violet ‘even a handful of the old National One key question remains. Why Bonham Carter, whose son Mark Liberals’ in the constituency.48 was Macpherson, supported by the With one was the victorious candidate, later Macpherson, however, justified the Dumfries Standard, so determined to recalled, there was a ‘strange sense designation with a logic which at preserve his National Liberal cre- eye clearly of being a member of an army of least satisfied himself, if not his Lib- dentials at a time when all objec- liberation entering occupied terri- eral critics: tive indicators pointed to his being on the local tory which for years had been ruled an unreconstructed Tory? Both by quislings and collaborators and The title National-Liberal- Macpherson and many of his politi- situation, that their day was over once and for Unionist fits the facts and no cal opponents believed, almost as an all’. 45 With one eye clearly on the one can object to a title that article of faith, that the MP would the Journal local situation, the Journal echoed fits the facts. It is historically be unable to hold on to his constitu- this sentiment. Its leading article and factually accurate. I am a ency without the support of a sig- echoed this was confidently entitled ‘Tor- member of the Liberal Union- nificant number of Liberal votes, rington Means End of National- ist group in the House of Com- or even, on the basis of its electoral sentiment. Liberals’. The lesson, it claimed, mons and everyone knows I am history before the 1930s, that Dum- was clear: ‘the sham of the Liberal- a member of the Conservative friesshire was a ‘natural’ Liberal Its leading Nationalist cum Conservative label Government. There is noth- seat. This proposition had not been is clearly understood by the elector- ing whatever incompatible in seriously tested. Because of a lack of article was ate and … the days of the so-called this and there is nothing strange time in 1955 and out of the appar- confidently Liberal-Nationalist are well and or anomalous in the joint title ent fear in 1959 that a split Liberal truly over’. It was now important National-Liberal-Unionist.49 vote would result in the return of entitled that ‘every effort should be made to the Labour candidate, the South- perfect organisation in the constit- Hector Munro, chairman of the West Scotland Liberal Federation ‘Torrington uencies … What was done at Tor- Unionist association, offered a drew back from fielding a candi- rington should be possible in many less opaque explanation: ‘We have date. To the mounting irritation of Means End of other places at the general election no intention of surrendering our his critics, therefore, Macpherson if some time and effort are devoted right in choosing a label that is continued to put himself forward National-Lib- to organisation now.’46 most appropriate’.50 In other words, to the voters of Dumfriesshire as In many parts of the country Dumfriesshire Tories would hold the National-Liberal-Unionist erals’. the Journal’s prediction was quickly on to their hybrid designation for

Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013 21 ‘a nasty, deplorable little incident in our political life’ as long as they saw advantage in David Dutton is the author of Lib- 19 Standard, 28 November 1956. Cecil King, commented: ‘Lord doing so. erals in Schism: A History of 20 Standard, 5 December 1956. Drumalbyn (né Macpherson), a In the event, the new Prime the National Liberal Party (I. 21 The Standard was owned by Thos pleasant fool, is resurrected to Minister, Alec Douglas-Home, B. Tauris, 2008) and A History Hunter, Watson and Co. Ltd. It be Minister without Portfolio to determined that Macpherson of the Liberal Party since 1900 was taken over by George Out- deal with the new Labour Rela- could best serve the interests (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013), and ram and Co. Ltd, owners of the tions Bill in the Lords.’ The Cecil of his beleaguered government contributes regularly to the Journal Glasgow Herald, in August 1958. King Diaries 1970–1974 (London: from the House of Lords. In the of Liberal History. 22 Manchester Guardian, 31 July 1957. Jonathan Cape, 1975), p.48. resulting by-election a genu- 23 Manchester Guardian, 27 July 1957. 38 Carlisle Journal, 25 February 1958. inely Liberal candidate stood 1 Dumfries and Galloway Standard 24 Enquiries to the current Deputy 39 South-West Scottish Journal (here- in the constituency for only and Advertiser (hereafter Stand- Editor of the Dumfries Stand- after S-W S Journal), 28 March the second time since 1931. In ard), 22 June 1957. ard have failed to determine the 1958. that contest the Unionist can- 2 New York Times, 2 August 1957. present location of these minute 40 S-W S Journal, 4 April 1958. didate stood as just that – albeit 3 Emrys Hughes, Labour MP books or, indeed, whether they 41 S-W S Journal, 20 June 1958. with the stated support of the for Ayrshire South and Bute, still survive. 42 S-W S Journal, 30 May 1958. National Liberal Association, 1946–69, House of Commons 25 Manchester Guardian, 27 July 43 Standard, 20 November 1957. For whose very existence in any Debates (hereafter H of C Debs), 1957. a discussion of the wider sig- meaningful form many now 5th Series, vol. 574, col. 1553. 26 ibid. nificance of the National Lib- questioned. Meanwhile Charles The son-in-law of Keir Hardie, 27 ibid. eral factor in Scottish politics Abernethy, the Liberal candi- this left-wing MP was as often a 28 Scottish Daily Express, 27 July after 1945, see I G C Hutchison, date, spoke confidently of his thorn in the side of his own party, 1957. Scottish Politics in the Twentieth aim to ‘return the constitu- which twice withdrew the whip 29 Standard, 24 July 1957. Century (Palgrave: Basingstoke, ency to the Liberal tradition’51 from him, as he was, as on this 30 Standard, 27 July 1957. 2001), pp. 76–8. and of the voters’ opportunity occasion, of the Conservatives. 31 H of C Debs, 5th Series, vol. 574, 44 Standard, 23 September 1959. of ‘returning again to their old 4 York Membery, ‘Who killed the col. 1069. 45 Arthur Cyr, Liberal Party Politics allegiance and voting Liberal’.52 News Chronicle?’, Journal of Liberal 32 The Times, 31 July 1957. in Britain (London: John Calder, In the event the Unionists nar- History, 69, winter 2010–11, p.5. 33 P. Catterall (ed.), The Macmillan 1977), p. 101. rowly held off Labour’s chal- 5 For a recent analysis of the Diaries. Prime Minister and After 46 S-W S Journal, 4 April 1958. lenge; but the Liberal candidate importance of a supportive local 1957–1966 (London: Macmillan, 47 Standard, 3 October 1959. The lost his deposit.53 press in the constituency of Colne 2011), p. 52. dying years of the National Lib- Over thirty years, excepting Valley, see Matt Cole, Richard 34 H of C Debs, 5th Series, vol. 574, eral party in Britain as a whole the brief interval of William- Wainwright, the Liberals and Lib- cols 1539–56. are considered in David Dut- son’s three-year editorship, the eral Democrats: Unfinished Business 35 The Times, 2 August 1957. ton, Liberals in Schism: A History Dumfries Standard had played a (Manchester University Press: 36 Catterall, The Macmillan Diaries, of the National Liberal Party (Lon- significant role in transforming Manchester, 2011), pp. 61–66. p. 53. don: I B Tauris, 2008), chapter 5, Dumfriesshire from a ‘natu- 6 Standard, 25 May 1955. 37 Macpherson served as Joint ‘The Long Road to Extinction, ral’ Liberal to a ‘natural’ Con- 7 Standard, 28 May 1955. Under-Secretary at the Scot- 1947–68’. servative seat. The National 8 Standard, 24 January 1962. tish Office, June 1955–October 48 Standard, 5 October 1963. Liberal ‘deception’ had done 9 Fusion did not in fact take place in 1960; Parliamentary Secretary 49 ibid. lasting damage to the Liberal Dumfriesshire. The Unionist and at the Board of Trade, October 50 ibid. cause which the restoration of ‘Liberal’ Associations retained 1960–July 1962; Minister of Pen- 51 Standard, 27 November 1963. more honest politics at the 1963 their separate identities, but sions and National Insurance, 52 Ewart Library, Dumfries, box by-election could not easily agreed to form a joint committee July 1962–October 1963; and, 10, Abernethy election leaflet. reverse. Writing in the mid- of equal membership at election as Lord Drumalbyn, Minister 53 The full result was: David 1920s the celebrated newspaper times to support their candidate. of State at the Board of Trade, Colville Anderson (Union- magnate, Lord Beaverbrook, Standard, 25 October 1947. October 1963–October 1964. He ist) 16,762; Ian Jordan (Labour) argued that when politicians 10 Standard, 11 December 1946. re-emerged as Minister with- 15,791; Charles Abernethy (Lib- and newspapers were in ‘cor- 11 Standard, 8 February 1950. out Portfolio in Edward Heath’s eral) 4,491; John Gair (Scottish dial and sincere agreement on 12 Sir Gordon Lethem quoted in government, October 1970– Nationalist) 4,001 any departure of policy, noth- Manchester Guardian, 16 Novem- January 1974. In the wake of this 54 Lord Beaverbrook, Politicians and ing but good results from their ber 1957. last political reincarnation, the the Press (London: Hutchinson, cooperation in educating the 13 Standard, 2 April 1955, letter waspish newspaper proprietor, 1925), p. 10. nation’. But, he continued, ‘the from A I Milton. agreement must be an hon- 14 Standard, 11 June 1955. est one in which both parties 15 Standard, 25 May 1955. The History on Twitter attain conviction by a process Standard extended this descrip- of rational argument’.54 Over a tion jointly to the Lloyd George Liberal Democrat History Group generation the Dumfries Stand- Coalition of 1918–22. The History Group is now on Twitter! A daily posting of Liberal events ard and a succession of Liberal 16 Standard, 19 September 1956. on this day in history. @LibHistoryToday. National, National Liberal and 17 For the broader significance of National-Liberal-Unionist the Suez Crisis for the Liberal Other History Groups MPs had acted in ‘cordial and Party, see M McManus, ‘Liber- Labour: @LabourHistory. Conservatives: @ConHistGrp. sincere agreement’. But the als and the Suez Crisis’, Journal of ‘honesty’ of which Beaver- Liberal History, 42, spring 2004, Others of interest brook wrote was marked only pp. 38–41. History of Parliament project: @HistParl. Alun Wyburn-Powell (Liberal by its absence. 18 Standard, 7 November 1956. historian): @liberalhistory.

22 Journal of Liberal History 79 Summer 2013