For the study of Liberal, SDP and Issue 44 / Autumn 2004 / £5.00 Liberal Democrat history

Journal of LiberalHI ST O R Y

Spectacular victories Jaime Reynolds Spectacular victories Liberal wins against the odds at general elections Detmar Doering Wilhelm von Humboldt and early German Liberalism Martin Pugh Sir Archibald Sinclair, the Liberal Party and the abdication of Edward VIII J. Graham Jones Keeper of secrets Biography of Lloyd George’s private secretary, A. J. Sylvester James Taylor Public or private? Origins of the corporate economy Liberal Democrat History Group by David Dutton With a Preface by Charles Kennedy, MP September 2004

PB £15.99 £12.99 0-333-74656-2

Special offer for readers of Journal of Liberal History (free p&p)

‘The history of the liberal party in the twentieth century is a fascinating subject which David Dutton investigates with clarity, a masterly command of detail, and utter fairness. Everyone interested in British politics should read this book.’ - P.M.H. Bell

Most existing accounts of the British Liberal Party are written within the context of the party’s decline. The passage of the twentieth century, however, enables a fresh view to be taken, which recognizes that the party has now been strengthening its position for more than forty years and has once again become a major player in British politics. This survey of British Liberalism from the era of Campbell-Bannerman to that of Charles Kennedy reviews existing literature while offering its own distinctive perspective.

www.palgrave.com

To order contact Palgrave Macmillan Orders Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG21 6XS, United Kingdom � tel +44 (0)1256 302866 � fax +44 (0)1256 330688 � email [email protected] For any further information or to join our free mailing list visit www.palgrave.com/politics For orders in the US visit www.palgrave-usa.com

2 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 Journal of Liberal History Issue 44: Autumn 2004 The Journal of Liberal History is published quarterly by the Liberal Democrat History Group. ISSN 1479-9642 Spectacular victories 4 Editor: Duncan Brack Jaime Reynolds analyses Liberal wins against the odds at general elections Deputy Editor: Sarah Taft Assistant Editor: Siobhan Vitelli Biographies Editor: Robert Ingham News 9 Reviews Editor: Dr Eugenio Biagini Jo Grimond honoured in St Andrews

Patrons Philosopher of freedom 10 Dr Eugenio Biagini; Professor Michael Freeden; Wilhelm von Humboldt and early German Liberalism; by Dr Detmar Doering Professor Earl Russell; Professor John Vincent Sir Archibald Sinclair, the Liberal Party and the 18 Editorial Board Dr Malcolm Baines; Dr Roy Douglas; Dr Barry Doyle; abdication of Edward VIII Dr David Dutton; Professor David Gowland; Dr Richard Martin Pugh examines how close the Liberals came to backing the King’s Grayson; Dr Michael Hart; Peter Hellyer; Ian Hunter; cause during the abdication crisis of 1936 Dr J. Graham Jones; Tony Little; Professor Ian Machin; Dr Mark Pack; Dr Ian Packer; Dr John Powell; Jaime Reynolds; Iain Sharpe Interview: Lord Geraint of Ponterwyd 22 Geraint Howells (1925–2004) interviewed in 2003 by Dr Russell Deacon Editorial/Correspondence Contributions to the Journal – letters, articles, and Keeper of secrets 24 book reviews – are invited. The Journal is a refereed Biography of Lloyd George’s private secretary A. J. Sylvester (1889–1989); by publication; all articles submitted will be reviewed. Dr J. Graham Jones Contributions should be sent to: Duncan Brack (Editor) Public or private? 30 38 Salford Road, London SW2 4BQ email: [email protected] Dr James Taylor explores the origins of the corporate economy and assesses the implications for government policy today All articles copyright © Journal of Liberal History. Report: Winston Churchill – Liberal politician 34 Advertisements with Keith Robbins and Paul Addison; report by David Cloke Full page £100; half page £60; quarter page £35. Discounts available for repeat ads or offers to readers (e.g. discounted book prices). To place ads, please Through the magnifying glass 37 contact the Editor. Margaret Stacey, Banbury and the decline of the Liberal Party; by Robert Ingham Subscriptions/Membership An annual subscription to the Journal of Liberal Reviews 39 History costs £15.00 (£7.50 unwaged rate). This includes membership of the History Group unless you Bebbington: The Mind of Gladstone, reviewed by Peter C. Erb; Dale (ed.), The inform us otherwise. The institutional rate is £25.00. Politico’s Book of the Dead, reviewed by J. Graham Jones; Lynch, The Liberal Party in Rural England 1885–1910, reviewed by Tony Little; Brack and Overseas (non-UK) subscribers should add £5.00; Dales (eds.), Prime Minister Portillo and Other Things That Never Happened, or, a special three-year rate is available for £55.00 (individuals) or £85.00 (institutions). reviewed by Mark Pack

Online subscriptions cost £35.00. In addition to printed copies, online subscribers will be able to Letters to the Editor 46 access online copies of current and past Journals. Sir Clement Freud (Lord Beaumont)

Overseas online subscriptions are available for £40.00 per year, or £100 for three years. Archives 47 Cheques (payable to ‘Liberal Democrat History Coventry, by M. J. Hinman; London; by Nicola Avery 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 Cover design concept: Lynne Featherstone topics relating to the histories of the Liberal Democrats, Liberal Party, and SDP, and of 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. September 2004 Hon. President: Earl Russell Chair: Tony Little

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 3 SPECTACULAR VICTORIES Jaime Reynolds examines Liberal wins against the odds at general elections. In June  Liberal Democrats celebrated the capture of Guildford, a seat that had been in Conservative possession for more than ninety years. It was the party’s first win in Surrey since . But, although it was a remarkable result, it was not an entirely unexpected one. The party had come to within . per cent of victory in  and, with a strong local government base and local issues working in their favour, a win was definitely on the cards in ; it duly came with a swing of . per cent. Guildford was an impressive Lib Dem victory, but not by historical standards a spectacular one.

4 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 SPECTACULAR VICTORIES

hat should count although lately there has been a To advance however welcome and creditable, as a spectacular sharp decline in their frequency will not be enough. victory? A good as the average age and mortality signifi- Historically – as one might working defini- rate of MPs fall and party manag- expect – such spectacular victories tion would be a ers strive to avoid resignations and cantly at by Liberals at general elections are Wseat that is won against the odds departures from politics between uncommon. Looking back into and beyond normal psephologi- general elections. the next electoral pre-history as it were, cal expectations: in other words Spectacular victories in general general before universal suffrage, when those cases where the Liberal vote elections are less common and, the Liberals were competing for leaps  or  per cent and the with the focus on the national election, government, it was not unu- opponent’s vote plunges dramati- contest between the parties, usu- sual for large numbers of seats to cally. To qualify, the Liberal should ally attract less attention. They are, the party change hands at general elections come from at least  per cent however, important – especially on swings of more than  per cent. behind, and in the really spectac- for the Liberals who in all gen- needs to The Liberals won a host of them ular cases  per cent or more. eral elections since the s have win not from the Tories in their triumph at Over the years the Liberals fought on a narrower front than the  general election. How- have made a speciality of such the other two parties, in the sense only its tar- ever, in more modern times and wins in by-elections. The first that there have been relatively few in the context of the three-party modern one was in  at Tor- marginal seats where the Liberals get seats contests that are now the norm, rington when they won a seat have been an obvious challenger the numbers drop dramatically. that they had not even contested to the incumbent party. Follow- but also The elections of the inter- at the previous two general elec- ing the general election of , some oth- war period were complicated by tions. The most famous and sen- for example, there are just fifteen both volatility in voting patterns sational victory was at Orpington Conservative and four Labour seats ers that and by shifting pacts and alliances in , a rock-solid Tory seat with a majority of less than  per between the parties at local and (majority . per cent), which cent over a Liberal Democrat. This appear to national level. Most of them were, Eric Lubbock won with a mas- means that, to advance signifi- in any case, disastrous for the sive swing of . per cent. Many cantly at the next general election, be ‘off the Liberals, and victories, let alone other by-election triumphs have the party needs to win not only map’. spectacular victories, were few followed: Sutton & Cheam in its target seats but also some oth- and far between. Nevertheless the , Bermondsey in , East- ers that appear to be ‘off the map’. two best Liberal general election bourne in , Newbury and By-elections and the defections performances of the period,  Christchurch in , Romsey of Labour and Conservative MPs and , provide some examples in  and most recently Brent are only likely to help at the mar- that are worth a closer look. East and Leicester South, to gins. For the Liberal Democrats to At the general election of name but a few. The special cir- break through from their present  the Liberals gained eighty cumstances of by-elections – the fifty-five MPs to, say, a hundred, seats. Some of their wins were media attention, the opportunity they would have to win all the regarded at the time as freakish. to concentrate resources, and the marginals within their range and Photos kindly In Hemel Hempstead, a Liberal, supplied by availability of large numbers of some thirty more in seats where nominated at the last moment, Liberal Democrats protest votes – all make for excite- they are currently over  per cent Campaigns ousted Baldwin’s chief lieuten- ment and unpredictability. In fact, behind the incumbent. In short & Elections ant, J. C. C. Davidson, overturn- by-election upsets have become a they need to win spectacular vic- Department; third ing a Conservative majority of regular feature in recent decades, tories; Guildford-type victories, one: Alex Folkes . per cent in a seat that the

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 5 SPECTACULAR VICTORIES Liberals had not contested since larly spectacular fashion as the The Liberal . per cent), Flintshire (Con-  and where they had no con- voters polarised between the out- servative majority . per cent, stituency organisation. Liverpool going Labour Government and candidate swing  per cent) and Hunting- Wavertree, which the Liberals had the Conservative Opposition. All donshire (Conservative majority not contested in  and where the spectacular gains of  were overturned . per cent, swing . per cent, they had to contend with strong lost. In Rusholme, Masterman Labour intervention). Labour opposition in , was was ousted with a . per cent a Con- Such dramatic surges in the an even more extraordinary gain swing to the Tories. In Wavertree servative Liberal vote show clearly that from the Tories. and Gateshead the Liberals fell there was still considerable vitality However, nine Liberal gains back to third place, losing more majority of in the party in the s, particu- in , in seats that were fought than half of their  votes. larly in commercial and export- by all three parties in both  The  general election 38.6 per ing seats loyal to free trade and in and  and where the Liberal brought a new crop of spectacu- rural seats hit by the agricultural overturned a majority of over  lar wins, mostly in rural constitu- cent with a depression. The force with which per cent, are more comparable encies. The most sensational was swing of 21 the Liberals were able to bounce with modern elections. The most Ashford, a seat that had remained back in these areas suggests that impressive was perhaps Manches- Tory even in . The Liberal per cent, the party was perhaps not as ter Rusholme where Charles candidate, a Nonconformist min- doomed electorally after the First Masterman finally re-entered ister and campaigner against tithe increasing World War as many historians parliament with a  per cent collection, the Reverend Roder- have concluded. swing, overturning a Tory major- ick Kedward, overturned a Con- the Liberal The Liberals’ definitive elec- ity of . per cent to defeat servative majority of . per vote from toral collapse occurred after , Jeremy Thorpe’s father, the Con- cent with a swing of  per cent, and it was to be thirty years before servative incumbent. Masterman, increasing the Liberal vote from 22 per the Liberals even came close to whose ministerial career had been  per cent to  per cent. This another spectacular gain at a gen- wrecked in  by his defeat in was a victory almost on the scale cent to 46 eral election. That was in  a by-election and failure in sev- of that in nearby Orpington three when Jeremy Thorpe toppled a eral subsequent attempts to re- decades later. The seat returned per cent. Conservative majority of . per enter the Commons, exclaimed to the Conservative fold in  This was cent to win North Devon with to his wife as they heard the and has remained a Tory seat ever a swing of . per cent. He had result: ‘We’ve won, my dear, and since. It is unclear how far the tithe a victory raised the Liberal vote from  I thought we were never going issue helped Kedward’s victory in per cent in , to  per cent in to again.’ A slightly larger Con- , though the Tories certainly almost on  and to  per cent in . servative majority (. per cent) tried to use his support for non- In  Peter Bessell achieved was demolished by a Liberal in payment against him in . the scale a near-spectacular success in the Isle of Ely with a . per Other spectacular Liberal vic- of that Bodmin, having raised the Liberal cent swing. Among the more tories were secured at Eye, Dorset vote by . per cent between amazing victories was Gateshead, East and Hereford, where Con- in nearby  and  and a further where the Liberal jumped from servative majorities above  per . per cent between  and third place, . per cent behind cent were overturned. In all three Orpington . However, the Tory majority Labour, to win the seat; the Lib- the popularity of the candidate had been eroded to . per cent eral vote increased from  per seems to have played a part. Edgar three dec- by the time of Bessell’s break- cent to  per cent. Victories Granville won Eye in Suffolk ades later. through. Like North Devon, this from third place were also won with a swing of . per cent and gain owed much to a charismatic in Middlesbrough East, Bosworth was to hold the seat until . candidate, highly professional and Nuneaton. Alec Glassey gained Dorset East Liberal organisation and effective Of course the key factor in with a . per cent swing. In campaigning on local issues. these seismic electoral shifts was Hereford, despite the interven- Effective targeting of seats in the potency of the free trade tion of a Labour candidate, the the Scottish Highlands produced cause at the  election. It is -year-old Frank Owen won several spectacular gains in the clear that free-trade Conservatives with a . per cent swing. mid-s. In  Alastair Mac- abstained or transferred en masse Luton, which had been a spec- Kenzie defeated the National to the Liberals in many com- tacular gain in  and a bad Liberal and Conservative MP who mercial constituencies. In Waver- defeat in , was again won in had represented Ross & Cromarty tree and Gateshead the Tory vote spectacular style in  by Leslie since . Mackenzie jumped almost halved. Elsewhere, such Burgin with a . per cent swing. from third place, making up a . as in Luton, the Labour vote Two safe Tory seats were gained per cent deficit to win with a . collapsed as free traders rallied in Manchester with swings of  per cent swing. In neighbouring behind the Liberals. per cent. There were also wins Inverness, Russell Johnston over- In the  election these Lib- in Dumfriesshire (Conservative turned a Conservative majority eral gains were reversed in simi- majority . per cent, swing of . per cent with an . per

6 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 SPECTACULAR VICTORIES cent swing, while George Mackie cit of . per cent with a swing there, although this estimate has captured Caithness & Sutherland, of . per cent. The compari- been questioned. a seat that the Liberals had last son here is with the Liberal who There are some obvious com- fought in  when they had stood in  and came fourth. mon factors in these wins. Clearly gathered only . per cent of the This win was a unique example the quality of candidates, both in vote. At the  general elec- of a gain from fourth place at the terms of charisma and organisa- tion in Aberdeenshire West, James previous election, although, as tional ability, has often been a key Davidson overcame a . per we have seen, there was a signifi- factor in these victories. It is no cent Conservative majority, win- cant Liberal tradition in the seat. accident that later leaders of the ning with a . per cent swing. In Yeovil Paddy Ashdown over- party – Jeremy Thorpe, Paddy Davidson had laid the foundation turned a Conservative majority Ashdown and Charles Kennedy for this victory in  when he of . per cent with an . per – started their Commons careers won  per cent of the votes in a cent swing. The third gain that with spectacular gains. Many seat that the Liberals had not con- year was exceptional. Michael other victors – from Alec Glas- tested in . Meadowcroft demolished a sey, Edgar Granville and Frank The other spectacular win Labour majority of . per cent Owen in the s to Michael in  was suburban Cheadle, to win Leeds West with a . Winstanley, Stephen Ross and captured from the Conserva- per cent swing. This was one of Michael Meadowcroft more tives (majority . per cent) by the very rare spectacular Liberal recently – built their victories on Dr Michael Winstanley with a gains from Labour, comparable significant personal votes. swing of . per cent. Like North only with Gateshead in  and Secondly, many of the victories Devon, Bodmin and Aberdeen- Chesterfield in . have been in areas of traditional shire West, the relentless build-up  saw another spectacular Liberal strength, notably the Scot- was as spectacular as the victory Scottish Highland gain in Argyll. tish Highlands where electoral itself. The Liberals got . per Ray Michie gained the seat with volatility is greater and personali- cent of the votes in , . per a swing of . per cent, overcom- ties count for more than in most cent in , . per cent in  ing a Conservative majority of parts of the country. Liberal suc- and . per cent in . This . per cent. cesses in local government elec- was the only seat faintly resem- There were no big wins in tions have also paved the way for bling Orpington that the Liberals , but a bumper harvest of wins in a number of cases. Stephen picked up during the s ‘Orp- It is no fourteen in the Tory debacle Ross’s win in Isle of Wight ington revival’. Winstanley actu- of . In three seats in south- undoubtedly owed something to ally pushed his vote up further to accident west London, Lib Dems over- this, and Michael Meadowcroft’s . per cent in , when he took Conservative majorities of victory in Leeds West in  was lost the seat. that later more than  per cent: Kingston preceded by fifteen years of build- The next spectacular Liberal & Surbiton (. per cent), Sut- up in local elections. This was victory was one of the most stun- leaders of ton & Cheam (. per cent), clearly also a factor in a number of ning ever. Stephen Ross’s win in the party and Twickenham (. per cent). the  gains. the Isle of Wight in February  Sheffield Hallam (Conservative Liberal breakthroughs on any- was in the same league as Ashford – Jeremy majority  per cent) was cap- thing like a broad front have been in  and Orpington in . tured with a massive . per limited to landslide elections such With a swing of . per cent he Thorpe, cent swing, to become the first as ,  and  (but not overcame a deficit of more than  seat held by the Liberals in South ) when there has been a per cent from third place to win. Paddy Ash- Yorkshire since the early s. major collapse in the Conserva- The Liberal vote jumped from down and Other historically remarkable tive vote. Collapses in the Labour just under , (. per cent) gains in this group were Har- vote have not benefited the Lib- in  to nearly , (. per Charles rogate & Knaresborough, Win- eral cause. Even in , when cent) in . The involvement of chester, and Lewes – all almost the Alliance achieved its best gen- the Conservative incumbent in Kennedy unbrokenly Tory since the s. eral election performance and the a local development scandal was The five Lib Dem gains in south- Labour Party its worst since , believed to have influenced the – started west London were also a histori- only one spectacular gain (Leeds result, but Ross had increased his their Com- cal breakthrough in a area which West) was made from Labour. vote against the trend in  and had been securely Tory since the Indeed most Liberal gains of any  and clearly had a large per- mons s and where, until the s, kind have been made in elections sonal vote. the Liberals had always been very when the pendulum has swung The next crop of spectacular careers weak. Malcolm Bruce’s reten- away from the Conservatives. gains came at the general election tion of Gordon by nearly  Even in landslide elections of . The youthful Charles with spec- votes surprised some commen- the number of such results is not Kennedy defeated a Tory minister tacular tators, as boundary changes had great. At more normal general to gain Ross, Cromarty & Skye given the Tories an advantage elections there have only been a for the SDP, overturning a defi- gains. estimated at well over  per cent handful. Voting patterns in Britain

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 7 SPECTACULAR VICTORIES have been remarkably constant The most situation. Hence the Lib Dem . Kedward stood in  as a Liberal most of the time; it is very excep- dilemma. Should they focus on National, one of only three Liberal tional for seats with a majority of continuing to erode what remains National MPs to face Tory opposi- important tion. He later rejoined the Liberals and over  per cent to change hands. of Tory England, should they aim contested Ashford at a by-election in Large swings might become result for to break through into the Labour . He was president of the National more common if traditional party heartlands, or can they find a way Tithe-payers’ Association, –; see allegiances continue to weaken the Lib to advance on both fronts? Carol Twinch, Tithe War: – The and changes in turnout impact History warns that spectacular Countryside in Revolt (Media Associates Dems at Norwich ) differentially on the parties. Party wins are likely to play only a small  Edgar Granville (–): Liberal splits and pacts could also result the next part in resolving this dilemma. MP for Eye – (sat as National in big voting shifts. All these fac- The key to the advance of the Liberal/Independent –); tors were evident in the volatile election Lib Dems in the next decade joined Labour Party  and stood as elections of the interwar period. will be how far they can establish Labour candidate for Eye in  and will not , gathering most of ex-Liberal In  the Liberals undoubt- themselves as serious contenders vote; Labour peer . edly benefited from large-scale only be in a much broader range of con-  Alec Glassey (–): a leading abstention by the Tories and from stituencies, including in currently Congregationalist figure and active local alliances with Labour in how many Labour-held seats. The most West Country Liberal. some areas and the Tories in oth- important result for the Lib Dems  Frank Owen (–): journalist and biographer of Lloyd George; stood as ers. In  and  the Liber- seats they at the next election will not only anti-National (Lloyd George) Liberal als were devastated as the Tories be how many seats they gain, but ; narrowly defeated as Liberal voted in force and many Liberal gain, but how many marginals they cre- candidate in Hereford in mid-s. supporters voted tactically for the how many ate. It is in this way that they will  Colne Valley in  is a partial excep- Conservatives to keep Labour alter the electoral arithmetic and tion to this. E. L. Mallalieu gained the seat from Labour in a three-cornered out. It is conceivable that strong marginals start to win large numbers of seats contest with a swing of . per cent. performances at the next election without having to rely on spec- Mallalieu had been third in , . by fringe parties such as UKIP or they cre- tacular gains. per cent behind the Labour candidate, Respect might damage Conserv- Philip Snowden. However the result ate. in this constituency was complicated ative and Labour prospects, but as Dr Jaime Reynolds studied at the by Snowden�s rejection of the Labour the example of the Birmingham LSE and has worked for the UK Party and retirement as MP and a Hodge Hill by-election showed it government and the European Com- dispute over the succession between is far from clear that the Lib Dems mission on international environmen- a Conservative and National Labour would necessarily be the benefici- tal policy. candidate. Mallelieu emerged as the main beneficiary of the huge national ary. A big swing to the Lib Dems swing to the National Government.  They also lost thirty-eight, making a in seats with large numbers of  G. Tregida, The Liberal Party in South- net gain of forty-two. student or Moslem voters could west Britain since  (University of  In fact there was clearly a substantial Exeter Press Exeter ), p. ; also produce some unexpected latent Liberal vote in the constituency D. Brack (ed.), Dictionary of Liberal wins, but the numbers of such (the Liberal almost won in  as Biography () – ‘Peter Bessell’. seats are limited. well). See C. Cook, The Age of Align-  Alastair MacKenzie (–): farmer; ment: Electoral Politics in Britain – The lesson of history points member Ross-shire County Council (Macmillan London ), p. –. up the dilemma for the Liberal –; MP for Ross & Cromarty  The Liberals also gained Liverpool –. Democrats noted in much of West Derby from the Conservatives, a  Mackie was assisted in  by a split the comment on the Brent East seat they had not fought since before in the Conservative vote. In  he and Leicester South by-election  in a straight fight. Other remark- lost to a new Labour candidate, Rob- able straight-fight gains included results. They are in clear strik- ert Maclennan. Edinburgh North (swing . per ing distance of further gains in a  James Davidson (– ): farmer, Rus- cent), Stoke Newington (swing . sian interpreter, assistant naval attache relatively small number of seats, per cent), Hackney North (swing . Moscow and Helsinki –; retired the great majority of which are per cent), Nottingham East (swing as MP . . per cent), Manchester Exchange Conservative-held. It would take  D. Butler and D. Kavanagh, The British (swing . per cent) and Devizes a disintegration of the Tories’ General Election of February  (Mac- (swing . per cent). heartland to deliver many more millan London ), p. .  Charles Masterman (–):  Boundary changes between –. of these seats to the Lib Dems, writer and politician; an Anglo-Catho-  The last Liberal seat in Sheffield was and of course the Tory heartland lic; Financial Secretary to the Treasury lost in . Penistone was held from –, Chancellor of the Duchy of is already much eroded. –. Lancaster –. Labour will be defending  Winchester had been Tory since the  T. Wilson, The Downfall of the Lib- more than twice as many seats s, apart from a Labour win in eral Party – (Collins London . Harrogate also except for a sin- as the Conservatives at the next ), pp. –. gle Liberal win in . Part of Lewes, election and will be hard pressed  Rev. R. M. Kedward (–): a in the pre- Eastbourne constitu- to hold on to the sweeping gains Kent farmer and Wesleyan minister, ency, had gone Liberal in , but the superintendent of the South London they made in . Yet there are rest had been Tory since the s. Mission –; MP for West Ber- no historical precedents for the  Sutton & Cheam was Liberal from mondsey – and Ashford – Liberals prospering in such a –. Twickenham partly corre-

8 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 NEWS: GRIMOND PLAQUE UNVEILED

sponds to the pre- Brentford con- Thresher and Rallings split assumed. ism, of individual freedom and stituency won by the Liberals in . See further http://www.electiondata. empowerment, to name but Labour won Spelthorne, Wimbledon telegraph.co.uk/pcon.htm a few - earned him the well- and Mitcham in , including parts  M. Meadowcroft, ‘The Alliance: Parties of the modern Twickenham, Sutton & and Leaders’, Journal of Liberal Democrat deserved sobriquet of ‘Radical Cheam and Carshalton & Wallingford History , Spring , p. . Jo’. He succeeded in reviving the constituencies.  I recommend Martin Baxter’s general intellectual basis and the electoral  Local Liberal Democrats disputed the election predictor (http://www.finan- prospects of a much-weakened calculation by Thrasher and Rallings cialcalculus.co.uk/election/index. post-war Liberal Party. Attracted based on vote shares in council elec- html) for any readers who want to tions. Their ballot box tallies suggested explore the current electoral arithme- by the persuasive force of his that at least one ward provided more tic further. personality and arguments, very Lib Dem voters to Gordon than the many talented new supporters rallied to the cause of modern Liberalism. The Liberal Democrats and the country owe much to Jo Grimond, who sadly did not live to see the re-establishment of the NEWS Scottish Parliament for which he had campaigned for so long, and the return of his party to gov- ernment. The major shift in the Jo Grimond honoured in St Andrews party’s fortunes over recent years is down to the hard work and n  July , Jim Wal- As Jim Wallace said, ‘Jo Gri- commitment of the many, but lace MSP, Deputy First mond was the Leader of the no-one should doubt that the Minister and Leader of Liberal Party between  catalyst for the enduring revival O of the party’s fortunes was the the Scottish Liberal Democrats, and , a period of sweeping unveiled a memorial plaque at changes in British society and in energetic and inspiring leader- the birthplace of Jo Grimond, the world at large. Jo’s intelligent, ship of Jo Grimond.’ the former Liberal Party Leader eloquent and good-humoured From left: Iain The cost of the memorial and Mr Wallace’s predecessor as contributions to the big debates Smith MSP ; plaque was met by generous Jo Grimond’s MP for Orkney and Shetland, of these times earned him an donations from a number of Jo children,Magnus, Grimond’s friends, colleagues Jo Grimond was born at No.  immense public respect among Johnny and Abbotsford Crescent, St Andrews people of all political opinions. Grizelda; Dr Brian and contemporaries from across (now part of the University of His passionate advocacy of Lang, Principal the United Kingdom, and also St Andrews), almost ninety-one many progressive ideas – Scot- of St Andrews from a younger generation to University; and whom he remains an inspiration. years before, on  July . tish Home Rule, international- Jim Wallace MSP.

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 9 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM WILHELM VON HUMBOLDT AND EARLY GERMAN LIBERALISM

Dr Detmar Doering examines the thinking of Wilhelm von Humboldt, perhaps Germany’s most famous and quintessential liberal thinker, whose treatise The Limits of State Action is a radical defence of a minimal state. Humboldt combined his radicalism with pragmatic reformism – which is why today he is better known as the statesman who reformed the educational system of his native Prussia. What held his liberal radicalism and political pragmatism together was an elaborate theory of ‘self-education’, which later inspired John Stuart Mill and his book On Liberty.

10 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM WILHELM VON HUMBOLDT AND EARLY GERMAN LIBERALISM

t is difficult to say when lib- fication of the Public’s Judgment of the explorer and scientist Alexan- eralism as a genuine political French Revolution () predated der von Humboldt, in the toler- philosophy came into being. much of today’s anarcho-capital- ant environment of enlightened In England, one usually ist version of libertarianism. absolutism. In  he started thinks of John Locke and his As in most European countries, his study of law and classical lit- ITwo Treatises on Government () the French Revolution sparked a erature at Göttingen University. as the starting point. In Germany, heated debate between its radical Here he found favourable condi- however, the question cannot be advocates and its more conserva- tions for the further development answered so easily, although there tive critics, which influenced of his enlightened and liberal is one top candidate: Wilhelm much of nineteenth-century mind. Göttingen was part of the von Humboldt’s famous treatise political thought. Humboldt’s principality of Hanover, which The Limits of State Action, written Limits of State Action has a special was governed by the British King in  at the time of the French – perhaps the foremost – place George III (a Hanoverian) in per- Revolution, would unquestion- on the liberal side of this debate. sonal union. This meant that Göt- ably be considered by most Ger- Firstly, it is based on a very sober tingen University allowed very mans as the equivalent to Locke’s and non-polarising analysis. Sec- much the same degree of intel- Two Treatises. At the very least, it ondly, it became perhaps the lectual freedom that one could is difficult to find another work greatest classic from among the find in Britain. Politically, a mod- of such outstanding relevance and writings on political philosophy erate ‘Whiggism’ seemed to be quality within the German liberal of that age. Thirdly, it became so prevalent in most faculties. tradition. despite the fact that it was virtu- When, in , the French Of course, liberal ideas had ally unknown among his con- Revolution broke out, Humboldt already made some advance temporaries. The reason for this undertook a journey to Paris on within the various German prin- last was that Humboldt – expect- the invitation of Mirabeau. This cipalities, but the French Revo- ing problems with Prussian cen- he did, together with his tutor lution inspired the first wave of sorship, which had become more Joachim Heinrich Campe, in strict liberalism in the political rigorous during the Revolution order to watch the ‘funeral cer- world of the Old Empire. Ger- – published only a few sections of emony of French despotism’. man thinkers like Immanuel Kant the book in two journals, the Ber- He came back somewhat disil- (–) or Johann Gottlieb linische Monatsschrift and Friedrich lusioned, but from then on was Fichte (–) began to Schiller’s Neue Thalia. Only in captivated by the subject of the speak out for the rights of man  – sixteen years after Hum- French Revolution and its con- and for absolute freedom of opin- boldt’s death – was the complete sequences. ion and press. Fichte (who during book published. His first work, the Thoughts on the Napoleonic Wars changed his Constitutions, Suggested by the New views toward a nationalistic type French Constitution, published in of socialism) in particular radi- Conservative or liberal? , never became a classic like calised the then fashionable idea Wilhelm von Humboldt was The Limits of State Action, but was of a ‘social contract’ to a point born in Potsdam on  June  still quite original in its own way. where every citizen could nullify into a family of the lower aris- In this essay, Humboldt declared Wilhelm vin his obligation toward the state. Humboldt (1767– tocracy. He was brought up with some sympathy with the ideals His book Contribution to the Recti- 1835) his equally famous brother, the of the Revolution, but did not

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 11 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM believe that these ideals could be ‘Göttingen spirit’ was the Baron He felt – the basis for his theory of gov- sustained throughout its course. vom Stein (–) who, like ernment. This is what made the Thus he wrote: ‘Mankind had Humboldt, became politically strongly Treatises of Government a specifi- suffered under one extreme; it influential during the short-lived cally liberal classic. Humboldt, in had to seek deliverance in another Prussian reform era at the end of that revo- his Limits of State Action, further extreme. Will this constitution the Napoleonic Wars and who was gave this type of individualistic last? As far as analogy with his- the founding father of local self- lutionary approach its own distinct ‘flavour’. tory is concerned, no!’ The ahis- administration in Prussia. He, too, force In the most famous passage of the torical and inorganic approach considered himself a Burkean. For work, Humboldt writes: of the Revolution, Humboldt a while, the ‘Göttingen School’ impeded argued, could never work. A exercised, due to its pragmatic The true end of Man, or that more gradualist approach might reformism, an enormous influence individual which is prescribed by the eter- have produced a more harmoni- over Prussian politics. nal and immutable dictates of ous development. He felt strongly Immediately after Humboldt self-devel- reason and not suggested by that revolutionary force impeded had completed the Thoughts on opment, vague and transient desires, is individual self-development, Constitutions he began to write the highest and most harmoni- retarded natural social evolution, his Limits of State Action. Philo- retarded ous development of his powers and rewarded only conformity to sophically the book was not in to a complete and consistent the imposed order. line with the writings of the ‘Göt- natural whole. Freedom is the first and Many observers have noted tingen School’, as it did not base indispensable condition which that, in this, Humboldt echoed its arguments on the empiricism social evo- the possibility of such a develop- many of the ideas of Edmund and utilitarianism that prevailed lution, and ment presupposes; but there is, Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution among the members of that besides, another essential – inti- in France (), which became school. He should not, therefore, rewarded mately connected with freedom, the bible of all anti-revolutionary be counted as a representative of it is true – a variety of situa- writings in Europe. There is, how- that school in any strict sense. Yet, only con- tions. Even the most free and ever, absolutely no evidence that despite the fact that Humboldt’s self-reliant of men is hindered Humboldt had read Burke at the ideas about the state were fairly formity in his development when set in a time. The best explanation for the radical (especially in the Ger- to the monotonous situation. similarity with Burke could sim- man context), like most members ply be that Humboldt had studied of the ‘Göttingen School’ he still imposed This passage contains some very in Göttingen, where a moderate clung to the principle of reform complex and perhaps contra- reformist type of liberalism flour- as opposed to revolution. order. dictory philosophical assump- ished that was strongly influenced tions. Some scholars try to make by Burkean concepts. Humboldt look like a roman- In England there had been a German liberalism tic critic of the enlightenment debate from the very beginning More than previous German frame of thought. And, indeed, as to whether Burke – who had writings on political philosophy, there are elements of romanti- supported the American revo- Humboldt’s treatise on The Limits cism to be found in his thought. lutionaries in  – was more a of State Action was the embodi- But Humboldt tries to reconcile conservative or a liberal thinker. As ment of genuine liberalism. Oth- both strands. The passage makes it a consequence of this ambiguity ers may have inserted liberal clear that the ‘harmonious devel- in Burke’s work there were both elements in their thought, but opment’ of the individual should conservative and (moderate) liber- Humboldt’s book perhaps is the happen under the precondition als to be found among his philo- most quintessential work of Ger- of freedom – and that is what rea- sophical followers in Germany. man liberalism. son dictates. Both Georg Friedrich Brandes Of course, the old proponents This first assumption is almost (–) and August Wilhelm of natural law, such as Pufendorf certainly inspired by Kant, whom Rehberg (–) – two of and others, had always thought Humboldt had studied intensively the leading critics of the French about the political order – the in Göttingen, and of whom he Revolution, but ones who never state – as something that should writes, in The Limits of State Action, lapsed into an outright reaction- be restrained by law. But what that he ‘has never been surpassed ary direction like many others makes a liberal a liberal is that he in profundity’. Yet there is a clearly – came from Göttingen Univer- believes the individual and the non-Kantian streak in his thought sity and considered themselves to personal sphere to be the basic when he speaks about the ‘most be Burkeans. Rehberg became moral axiom from which the harmonious development of his famous mainly as a leading critic ideal social and political order is powers to a complete and consist- of Kant’s rigorous moral phi- deduced and out of which it is ent whole’. In modern (Kantian) losophy, which he found poten- legitimised. John Locke did this terms this would make Humboldt tially dangerous when applied to when he made life and property suspected of being an Aristotelian politics. Another example of the – the principle of self-ownership essentialist and metaphysician.

12 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM

This, of course, would be slightly thinkers, such as John Locke, who Education and reformism unfair and, above all, would lead still believed in the ‘external’ ends From this it follows that true Bil- to a severe misunderstanding of of education, namely the ideal of dung can never be revolutionary Humboldt’s achievement. Even a gentleman who was prepared to but, if properly understood, will assuming that Humboldt was an assume his public duties. In this always be evolutionary. In many essentialist, it cannot be denied respect, and more so than Locke, ways Humboldt here argues in a that his is a vastly different form Humboldt broke with Aristotle very modern, Hayekian way. One of essentialism from the Aristote- and his definition of the pur- must not forget that Humboldt’s lian one. In fact, the difference is pose of man as that of a ‘political academic interests beyond politi- revolutionary. animal’. Political engagement to cal philosophy all pointed in this While Aristotle and his philo- Humboldt was part of individual direction. Learning was about sophical descendants put the gen- development and subordinated to understanding and finding rules. eral before the individual – the it, but not a higher purpose above This idea is quite apparent in perfection of a given individual individuality. Potentially this pure Humboldt’s linguistic writings, entity was to be achieved by romanticist individualism could which contributed considerably approaching closer to its general have been as brutally revolution- to his lasting fame. He was one of ‘essence’ or a general definition ary as that of Rousseau himself, the foremost linguists of his age, – Humboldt never did so. The but Humboldt, who, as we saw, and not merely well acquainted ‘harmonious development’ is not was rather fearful of revolutions, – as his classical studies would one of man or mankind in gen- managed to escape these danger- have suggested – with ancient eral, but one of an individual as an ous consequences. European languages. In , for individual. It is all about individ- For Humboldt, Bildung aims instance, he wrote a book on The uality. Humboldt is clearly influ- at internal development and har- Languages of the South Sea Islands. enced here by the romanticism mony, but this end defies any clear His linguistic work is still revered of Rousseau, Goethe and, above definition. This is why Humboldt and often quoted by linguists, all, Friedrich Schiller, whose Let- in this sense is not an ‘essentialist’ – such as Noam Chomsky. Hum- ters Upon The Aesthetic Education an Aristotelian turned individualist boldt is credited with being the of Man of  were, conversely, – at all. What Humboldt is speaking first linguist to identify human inspired by Humboldt. about is an open process in time language as a rule-governed sys- The ‘harmonious develop- and space. As Clemens Menze, one tem, rather than just a collection ment’ is achieved by what Hum- of Germany’s leading scholars on of words and phrases paired with boldt calls Bildung. This German Humboldt, says: ‘Self-education meanings. In other words, it is a word is almost impossible to … does not pursue a specific goal process that is both like and inter- translate. In Humboldt’s context (Zweck), but a complete man’s own woven with education. ‘Man is it is usually rendered as ‘self-edu- peculiar goal-orientation without only man through his language’, cation’, but that – although it is any concrete goal (Zweckmäßigkeit he later said. Language, or bet- the best we have – does not fully The ‘har- ohne bestimmten Zweck).’ Bildung ter, the capacity for language, is capture all the connotations of monious can never, by its nature, be com- not an invention, but is given to the German word, especially pleted. It approaches an end that man by nature. The evolution of the aesthetic dimension. Hum- develop- will always remain undefined and a concrete language, however, is boldt took his very subjectivist unreachable. It therefore can only not entirely pre-determined by approach from Rousseau, whom ment’ is develop continuously in unity this, because it will always be the he admired as an educational with the existing state of the proc- product of tradition and individ- writer, but obviously disliked as not one ess and then try to proceed further. ual evolution intertwined. a political philosopher. Hence he of man or In interaction and inter-thinking Here it becomes apparent asked in his Limits of State Action: with the world, a person’s develop- why politically Humboldt is also mankind ment can find its concrete expres- a reformer rather than a revolu- When shall we learn, moreover, sion, whereas every utopian vision tionary. Just as mankind could to set less value on the outward in general, that radically transcends reality can not have invented or deliberately result of actions than on the only deliver empty abstractions. designed a highly cultivated lan- inner temper and disposition but one of On the other hand, this process guage out of nothing, i.e. without from which they flow? When an individ- must mean improvement beyond any cultural evolution in time, will the man arise to do for leg- the status quo, since surrender- so it could not have invented or islation what Rousseau did for ual as an ing oneself to the concrete world deliberately designed a civilised education, and draw our atten- without seeking to use the widest free society and polity. In both tion from mere external, physical individual. possible experience as material for cases, primitivism and over-sim- results to the internal self-educa- self-education will only lead to plification would prevail, what- tion of mankind? It is all self-alienation. This, for instance, is ever the highfalutin claims of the about indi- the case if education is reduced to designers were. All this sets Humboldt apart mere vocational training for one’s Such an evolutionism cer- from previous liberal educational viduality. job. tainly frustrates the revolutionary

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 13 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM

energies of the disciples of Rous- that allows self-education to its seau, but will it not lead to mere fullest extent. Ideally, the state conservatism? Humboldt’s recon- should not be involved in posi- ciliation of evolutionary reform- tive welfare, but leave it to natural ism with the radicalism of his and spontaneous benevolence. It views on the state may be surpris- should not meddle with educa- ing, but is the result of a consist- tion, because states love conform- ent theory. ity, which would be the death of Man, argues Humboldt, can- education. People should create not live alone. In order to main- their own institutions to organ- tain and develop his ‘self’ he has to ise themselves, whereas every engage himself with and within ‘top-down’ organisation is an evil. this world; his improvement can- Humboldt himself practised what not come out of nothing, but he preached. His own self-educa- from coming to terms with the tion after his studies in Göttingen world. On the other hand, the took place as he had advocated ‘purpose of mankind’, which is in The Limits of State Action – and individuality as an open process, as, according to him, all educa- presupposes the very possibility tion should take place – through of pursuing one’s self-education. a series of voluntary associations. This self-education or Bildung He became a regular member ought to end as a ‘harmonious of the ‘salon’ of Henriette Herz, development’. This per se means a leading Jewish intellectual. that it should be a process without Through his future wife Caro- force, and instead one of mutual line von Dacheroden, whom he voluntary self-organisation. married in , Humboldt met Humboldt was an individual- Friedrich Schiller, Goethe and ist, but by no means an ‘atomist’. other important authors of Ger- In the process of self-education man romanticism. one learns and rises to the level It cannot be left unremarked, where such cultivated voluntary however, that, although Hum- self-organisation is possible. To boldt agreed with Rousseau’s impose a new ‘free’ state-organ- view that education should be ised order on a people not cultur- aimed at the individual and their ally mature enough usually makes particular talents rather than things worse and thwarts further at rank and status, his concrete self-education. The enforcement description of the actual content of that cultural maturity by law of such an education (such as clas- necessarily means uniformity – sical language and educated con- the very thing Humboldt wants to versation) was very aristocratic avoid. Humboldt’s self-educated indeed. It was an education for a man has nothing to do with the wealthy man of leisure. ‘new man’ imagined by Marxists This, however, is not essential and other political utopians who to his work. The idea of voluntary believe that a perfectly designed self-education is universal and it revolutionary state is the necessary could – and should – begin where precondition for the enforcement it is most needed, that is with the of the perfectly self-educated uneducated classes. John Stuart human being. The state not only Mill, who was – as we shall see – has to preserve the precondition influenced by Humboldt, saw this of Bildung – the open process of with great clarity. In his classic On freedom – but also in itself develop Liberty, Mill argues that where in an open process corresponding there is no aristocracy, but where with the internal ‘harmonious public opinion rules instead, there development’ of the individuals of is a constant danger of ‘collective which it is composed. mediocrity’ becoming the domi- Essentially, Humboldt comes nant force – a force that must be to the conclusion that a mini- countered by education. mal state, that guarantees per- This plea for voluntary self- sonal freedom against aggression, organisation was successfully prac- is the only form of government tised and encouraged by German

14 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM liberals in the course of the nine- the more metaphysical aspects Humboldt of the Prussian bureaucracy tried teenth century – especially after of Humboldt’s neo-humanistic to introduce liberal and modern- the belated, but sensational publi- teleology. While Humboldt had was an ising reform ‘top-down’. Hum- cation of The Limits of State Action. somehow developed an aesthetic boldt was in charge of education The co-operative movement theory of politics, Mill did not. individual- and he began with reforms that (Genossenschaften) founded by the Nevertheless, it can be argued proved to be outstandingly effi- radical liberal Hermann Schulze- that Humboldt’s book enhanced ist, but by cient and durable. Delitzsch is a good example – just the tendency in Mill’s intellec- no means His approach to these reforms like the many ‘Working Men’s tual development to create a less could be considered as ‘organic’. Learning Societies’ that sprang up mechanistic type of utilitarianism an ‘atom- A multi-tiered system of educa- from the mid-nineteenth century than the one he had learned from tional institutions was introduced onwards. This is why it would be his father James Mill or from Jer- ist’. In the throughout the land. Each of the quite wrong to associate Hum- emy Bentham. tiers was designed to make it pos- boldt entirely with his activities process of sible for everyone, independent as a reformer in the state’s educa- self-educa- of status, to develop himself and tional system. Humboldt the reformer to come closer to the ideal of the Those who were around at After the discovery of his Limits tion one ‘highest and most harmonious the time of the first publication of State Action in , Humboldt development’. The system began of the book comprehended the was clearly perceived outside learns and with an elementary school for the radicalism of Humboldt. While it Germany as the country’s quin- basic schooling, and continued might have been expected that a tessential and most radical propo- rises to into the Gymnasium (the central book written roughly sixty years nent of early liberalism; however, the level element of the school system) before would not have been of his reputation within Germany that prepared for the university. much interest to the people of was somewhat different. There where such The university, finally, was con- , they were in fact excited by are probably two reasons for this: ceived of as allowing something it. One of the authors who was one has something to do with his cultivated close to human perfection. It most influenced was the English active role in politics; the other is was not supposed to be a kind of philosopher John Stuart Mill. His connected with his political writ- voluntary higher vocational training, but famous essay On Liberty () is ings themselves. self-organi- was meant to promote universal probably one of the best known It might be startling to some intellectual education beyond any classics of liberalism ever pub- to hear that the author of such sation is narrow subject. Essentially this lished. Mill’s defence of freedom an anti-statist treatise as The Lim- system remained intact until the of thought, speech, and action its of State Action actually spent possible. s, when much of it was dis- is widely acknowledged. Less most of his career in the serv- mantled by the ’ rebellion and known is that he constantly refers ice of the Prussian government. its aftermath. to Humboldt as his intellectual For instance, from  to  This – undoubtedly great precursor and inspiration. Humboldt was the chief Prus- – achievement almost completely Mill began On Liberty around sian diplomat in Vienna. He acted defined Humboldt’s reputa- , when Humboldt’s work was as a chief negotiator both before tion and posthumous fame in first published in English and had and after Napoleon’s defeat, and Germany. However, this narrow caused some sensation. The ques- served in London for the Prussian interpretation does not place tion of whether Humboldt stim- crown. In  he again became Humboldt in the context of his ulated Mill to write his famous a minister, this time for Estate early works. In fact, The Limits of essay is open to debate, yet Mill’s Affairs (Diet affairs). However, State Action has, in particular, often frequent references to Humboldt in Germany today he is better been interpreted as a youthful in the text suggest a very strong known for his brief engagement aberration. connection. In his autobiography as Minister of Public Instruction, Hence the question arises Mill writes: ‘The only author who a post he took over in . whether Humboldt changed had preceded me … of whom I Next to Stein, Humboldt was his mind over the time. In other thought it appropriate to say any- perhaps the leading representa- words, was the later Humboldt, thing, was Humboldt.’ Mill cites tive of the reform government the reformer of , still a clas- Humboldt as a formative influ- during the Napoleonic Wars. sical liberal? Many authors have ence, quoting him both directly Prussia’s failure to defeat Napo- denied Humboldt’s consist- and in paraphrase throughout leon made it necessary to carry ency. They may well be wrong. his books. To be sure, Mill inter- out long-needed and thorough- Much of his conduct within the preted Humboldt within his own going reform within the state. A bureaucracy and during his time utilitarian framework of thought peculiar brand of liberalism came as minister speaks of quite strong – individuality was an ‘element of into existence that was very typi- liberal convictions. He kept in well-being’ and was useful to the cal of Prussia: Beamten-Liberalis- contact with liberals – especially progress of society as diversity in mus (‘civil servant’s liberalism’). in France (which he visited again excellence. He did not embrace Enlightened persons from the top in  and ) – throughout

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 15 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM his life. The ‘Ideologues’, such as teen months, because he was not stant intervention of the King in Constant or Madame de Staël, allowed to carry out more drastic academic affairs, usually on behalf always remained politically close reforms. In  he finally quit of favoured religious or philo- to him. Although he never again public life (and remained outside sophical factions. In  Prussian engaged in purely philosophical politics until his death in ) universities were in a rotten state. works on politics, he launched in protest against Metternich’s Autonomy and decentralisation several memoranda in favour of a Karlsberg Decrees, which intro- were not the perfect solutions, new constitution for Prussia and duced more censorship of the but – even by the anti-statist logic Germany. Most noteworthy is his press. These are not the actions of The Limits of State Action – were Memorandum on the German Con- of a believer in the infallibility of certainly a huge step in the right stitution (Denkschrift über die Deut- state authority, but that of a liberal direction. The reforms also never sche Verfassung) of , in which critic of state authority. created and never were intended he tried to design safeguards Much of his reformism after to create a state monopoly in against both the arbitrariness of  was already anticipated in education. Home schooling was monarchical rule and the instabil- his Limits of State Action. As has still allowed (it was abolished ity of democracy, and which he been said, the anti-revolutionary only in the s), and Humboldt had discussed intensively with dimension of this otherwise very always maintained that most of his liberal friends, among them radical work is often overlooked. a person’s education should take the Abbé Sieyés and Baron vom Reform in accordance with the place outside the school system, Stein. In this memorandum he state of cultural development, in the private sphere and in vol- maintained that in a future united but with a clear liberal perspec- untary associations. Germany ‘freedom is the basis of tive in mind, was the strategy all the advantages which, for his recommended in the book, and individual existence, the Ger- this is exactly what Humboldt Individualism and man may draw out of an asso- did. One has to keep in mind nationalism ciation of Germany to a whole.’ the state of education before his All in all, the reforms of  can Freedom was still his top prior- reforms. When Humboldt joined hardly be held against his liberal ity and, again, it was embedded the liberal reform government creed or his consistency. However, in an evolutionary framework. in , he advocated the aboli- since they were so relevant to the The almost logical consequence tion of military schools (Kadetten- future of Germany, it is easy to was that a unified German state häuser) and the closing of schools understand why Humboldt in had to be decentralised as much reserved for the nobility, and he Germany was always seen as a as possible. Humboldt advocated opposed the creation of special state reformer and not as an anti- a confederation (as opposed to a middle schools for adolescents statist liberal. consolidated federal government) either uninterested or financially However, there might also be which could take into account unable to undertake university another reason for that, and one the cultural and political diver- studies. Humboldt wanted Ger- which is inherent to his work. sity of Germany. ‘Such a diversity man schools to be places where The Limits of State Action is not alone is not only harmless, but students would study together easy reading and the arguments is necessary in order to recon- free of state-imposed barriers. are both complex and balanced. If nect the constitution of each land Most of all, while he was not taken out of its complex context, (state) strictly with the peculiarity able to privatise universities, he The almost the basic axiom of The Limits of of its national character.’ at least managed to give them State Action is open to misuse and The project for the German academic autonomy and inde- logical con- was, indeed, quite often misused. constitution was rejected by the pendence. The state’s chief task, sequence In theory, Humboldt’s concept of conservative monarchists who had he wrote in , was to preserve self-realisation can be separated won the upper hand in Prussia the universities’ ‘freedom of activ- was that from freedom. Most neo-Marx- after , and consequently was ity’. He thus tried to find a way ist policies today interpret the never realised. The future struggle to ensure that, while government a unified concept as being connected with for unification was left to liberals may have some influence over ‘positive’ welfare rights. The state, of a far more centralist type. the establishment of universities, German it is argued, has to provide the As regards reform, Humboldt it could not control their cur- state material means for that very self- was able to tolerate slow and riculums or the direction of their realisation. incomplete success, but he never research activities. Therefore, in had to be The same is true with the sec- tolerated regress or any deviation  he could still write, very ond precondition for self-reali- from the ultimate liberal goal. For much in a similar tone to his ear- decentral- sation, the ‘variety of situations’, that reason his relationship with lier years, that ‘the state was not which can also be disconnected the governments he served in an institute for education, but one ised as from freedom. Cultural ‘diversity’ was always a strained one. Hum- of law’. One of the causes for the much as today has, as a consequence of boldt left his post as Minister for decline of the universities before the downfall of Soviet commu- Instruction in  after only six- Humboldt’s reforms was the con- possible. nism, taken the place once held

16 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 PHILOSOPHER OF FREEDOM by egalitarianism in most statists’ Humboldt than a voluntary association. This, the basic concepts had changed. thinking. The anti-globalisation however, was not as fantastically Liberty, once hailed as personal movement takes it as a battle- was Germa- unrealistic as one might suppose. freedom, became more and more cry against free trade. There is, Until the mid-nineteenth cen- identified with the collectiv- indeed, a legitimate question as to ny’s chief tury it was a common assump- ist notion of ‘national freedom’. whether the ‘variety of situations’ tion of constitutional lawyers in It has to be noted, however, that is really so ‘intimately connected’ representa- Germany that local communities Humboldt never went this way with freedom. Did not the dread- tive of early did not have the legal charac- and remained an individualist ful experience of slavery in the ter of a lower tier of the state. In throughout his life. In  he Gulag make a great writer out liberalism fact, lawyers like Johann Caspar could still write in a memoran- of Solzhenitsyn, while working Bluntschli, a Swiss-born liberal dum to vom Stein that it was the under free contract on an assem- and per- from south-west Germany, main- ultimate task of every constitu- bly line can drive all excellence tained that small country villages tion to protect ‘the individual from one’s brain? haps, as were no genuine subdivisions of personal security of being treated Humboldt here comes close to Friedrich the state. They were based, rather, according to the law, of property, views that could be quite fright- on the ‘principle of co-operative of the freedom of conscience, of ening. Although in his Limits of August von association’, as Bluntschli wrote the press’ – which was essentially State Action he does not in any in his book General Public Law what he had demanded in his way legitimise war (still less wars Hayek once (Allgemeines Statsrecht) of . Limits of State Action. of conquest!), he nevertheless This view was shared by many. is able to hold an astonishingly put it, even In the earlier world of the Old positive view of war as something Germany’s Empire, which still existed in Philosopher of freedom beneficial to his educational ideal,  when Humboldt wrote his In the context of the later percep- because, as he writes: ‘greatest Limits of State Action, local defence tion of Humboldt, his romantic was quite often self-organised by views on war – like his reform Now, regarded in this light, war philosopher the citizens. Therefore in  it of state education – could only seems to be one of the most sal- was still possible to consider the further distort and transform utary phenomena for the culture of free- necessary task of defence against his image within Germany. It of human nature; and it is not dom’. foreign aggressors as a matter of is therefore time to put things without regret that I see it disap- personal responsibility and, there- right. By stressing his consistency pearing more and more from the fore, as an essential element of and by placing the Humboldt of scene. It is the fearful extremity personal development. The Limits of State Action together through which all that active However, in an extended with the Humboldt of the great courage – all that endurance and national state with a centralised educational reforms of , one fortitude – are steeled and tested, army based on conscription, may reach a more fair and bal- which afterwards achieve such passages such as the one quoted anced view. Humboldt, then, can varied results in the ordinary above could only serve to support be clearly recognised as an author conduct of life, and which alone the militaristic tendencies within and a statesman whose basic ideas give it that strength and diversity, the state, which Humboldt would of political thought had been without which facility is weak- surely have rejected clearly and formed under the influence of ness, and unity is inanity. with vigour. Later, when during enlightenment humanism and the the ‘War of Liberation’ against debate on the French Revolution Put in its proper context, this quo- Napoleon an aggressive national- and who tried to put his ideas into tation loses much of its brutality. ism emerged in Germany, a bel- practice as much as possible. The Humboldt was against standing licose rhetoric like the one used later view of his work in Germany armies, because even in military by Humboldt here was misused should not blind us to the indis- affairs the educational ideal could and abused by many roman- putable fact that Humboldt was only be reached via volun- tic writers – such as by the poet Germany’s chief representative tary co-operation. It seems that Theodor Körner, who fell in bat- of early liberalism and perhaps, as Humboldt, when he wrote this, tle against Napoleon in , and Friedrich August von Hayek once had not the reality of a modern whose book Lyre and Sword was put it, even Germany’s ‘greatest national state’s army in mind, but published posthumously, or by philosopher of freedom’. was somewhat carried away by his Fichte in his Addresses to the Ger- enthusiasm for the ancient Greek man Nation of . Dr Detmar Doering is Director of world, where the polis ideally was In fact, around that time there the Liberal Institute of the Friedrich- a community of small elites with was a broad shift of opinion Naumann-Stiftung in Potsdam. This little separation between the pub- within the romantic movement article was originally a lecture given at lic and private sphere, and with from individualism to national- a seminar of the CREPHE (ESCP- little distinction between civil and istic collectivism. The enthusias- EAP) and the CREA (Ecole Poly- military affairs. In this idealised tic language of romanticism was technique), delivered in Paris on  view, such a polis was less a state still retained, but the meaning of January ..

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 17 How close were the Liberals to backing the SIR ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR, King’s cause during the abdication crisis in December ? Dr THE LIBERAL PARTY Martin Pugh assesses the role of Liberal Leader Sir Archibald AND THE Sinclair, in his attempt to develop a distinctive and radical Liberal position by giving a lead to the popular support for the King.

18 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 ABDICATION OF EDWARD VIII

take the same, proper view of his form a government in the event ell before the duties as the old King had done. of the King insisting on remain- death of King The accepted wisdom is that ing on the throne and marry- George V in Baldwin handled the subsequent ing Mrs Simpson. The Labour January  the crisis most skilfully, manoeuvring leaders took the view that the accession of his Edward into abdication and get- royal marriage was a public and Weldest son was viewed with dis- ting the replacement he wanted. political matter, not a personal may by the leaders of the National However, this is essentially a one; the monarch must therefore Government. The immediate propagandist view, narrowly based accept the advice of his ministers. explanation for this centred on on Baldwinian sources. The facts that there was support the new King’s relationship with What is clear is that the Prime for the King within the Labour Mrs Wallis Simpson and in partic- Minister prepared the ground for movement, and that the break- ular his determination to marry the crisis carefully by trying to down between Edward VIII and her. However, ministers also rec- ensure that it would be impos- Baldwin offered Attlee his best ognised an important underlying sible for the King to reject the chance of dislodging the National problem: Edward VIII showed advice of his ministers on the Government from power, were himself congenitally incapable subject of his marriage. On  irrelevant. of sticking to his constitutional November  he arranged a Despite this, Baldwin had role. In particular, he had made consultation with a group of sen- miscalculated. For one thing it clear before succeeding to the ior figures, including the former he got a shock when the crisis throne that he intended to pro- Liberal Leader, Herbert Samuel. finally became public knowledge mote improved relations between In the course of an hour’s discus- on  December, immediately Britain and Nazi Germany with- sion they agreed not to ask parlia- provoking strong expressions of out reference to his ministers. He ment to enact legislation to allow popular support for the King. had also developed an embar- the King a morganatic marriage. Even the Conservatives were rassing habit of visiting areas of The next step, on  November, more divided than is usually rec- high unemployment where he was a meeting with Clement ognised. On  December an all- expressed sympathy with the Attlee, Winston Churchill and party group of MPs wrote to the workers and, by implication, Sir Archibald Sinclair. Baldwin King offering support, while on criticised the government for had certainly judged Attlee cor-  December forty Tory members not doing enough. Not surpris- rectly. His generation of Labour met to announce their resistance ingly, the Prime Minister, Stanley leaders were highly conservative to abdication. Lord Lymington, Baldwin, looked appreciatively in constitutional matters and anx- the former MP for Basingstoke, Sir Archibald at Edward’s brother, the Duke Sinclair; King ious to conform. Attlee assured told the King he could raise of York, who, he thought, would Edward VIII Baldwin that he would refuse to north Hampshire on his behalf,

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 19 SIR ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR, THE LIBERAL PARTY AND THE ABDICATION OF EDWARD VIII while the ‘Imperial Group’ of He went on December Sinclair had appeared was in the process of shifting his MPs reportedly offered to take on the platform at the Albert position, and had not, presum- up arms. to praise Hall with Churchill, Walter Cit- ably, consulted his colleagues in Above all, Baldwin had rine and eighteen MPs for an the Liberal Party; but the overall included Churchill in his con- the King ‘Arms and the Covenant’ rally. message of detachment from the sultation. This was odd since he Unfortunately for the organis- government was clear enough. was not the leader of a party; and urged: ers, this coincided with the first Part of the explanation for but Baldwin presumably hoped ‘Let no public revelations about the King this lay in the fact that during to silence him by securing his and Mrs Simpson, which mar- the abdication crisis Sinclair was acceptance of Cabinet policy. This man sum- ginalised their campaign, at least actually staying with Churchill. was obviously risky and the tac- temporarily. But the importance The two men had been close tic backfired. Churchill became mon him of the meeting should not be since the First World War when rather angry; he sympathised overlooked. The ,-strong Sinclair had served as Church- with the King and believed that to make audience began to sing ‘God ill’s second-in-command in the the Prime Minister was trying to so great a Save the King’ spontaneously, and th Battalion, the Royal Fusiliers. stampede him into abdicating. ‘I they cheered when a lady on the Churchill took a fond and protec- will defend him. I think it is my renuncia- platform called out ‘Long Live tive attitude towards Sinclair and duty,’ he insisted. The cabinet the King’. This proved to be an had encouraged him to enter par- did not yet realise that a ‘King’s tion as he early symptom of the upsurge liament. During the s they Party’ was already forming in late in popular support for the King found themselves on the same November based around Church- was asked and hostility towards the govern- side as critics of appeasement. It ill, Lord Rothermere and Lord to make ment over the next few days. But, would not therefore be surpris- Beaverbrook. Subsequently sev- although it derailed the rally, it ing if Sinclair was influenced by eral ministers realised that Bald- unless that may have left an impression on Churchill, who doubtless talked win had made another mistake Sinclair. continuously about the royal mar- in agreeing to allow the King to man him- At all events, when he spoke to riage while they were together. see Churchill, who gave the King Liberals at Surbiton the following On Sunday  December Sinclair shrewd advice; consequently they self was day he referred to ‘an unfortunate was present at Chartwell when urged the Prime Minister to insist prepared difference of opinion which has Churchill convened a meeting of on an immediate decision from occurred between the King and King’s supporters including Rob- the King. for any his ministers’, an unhelpful way of ert Boothby, to concert plans. Of course, Churchill, Rother- putting it from Baldwin’s point of Their tactics were to advise the mere and Beaverbrook were renuncia- view. Sir Archibald contended that King that, as Mrs Simpson would regarded as the usual suspects there was no serious objection to not be free to marry until next – troublemakers who were per- tion which the King marrying an American April, he should postpone any ennially trying to destabilise the might be or a commoner: ‘I do not believe decision about abdication; mean- National Government. But Sir that in these days anybody would while tempers would subside, the Archibald Sinclair was not in the neces- feel anything but happiness and King could proceed to his coro- same camp; and he was, moreo- joy if the King’s choice fell upon nation and his position would be ver, the leader of a political party, sary in the a commoner’. He insisted that much stronger by . A letter albeit a small one. Although Sin- the only issue to be resolved was to this effect was sent to the King clair was understood to have interests ‘whether an Act can be passed carrying Sinclair’s name, thereby adopted the same position as of this to give the lady whom the King implicating him publicly with the Attlee when they were originally desires to marry status other than King’s Party. consulted, he had said little. How- country.’ that of a Queen.’ Noting that The importance of the Lib- ever, when the cabinet met on  Baldwin had rejected this, Sin- eral Leader’s action can hardly be December they found the Prime clair pointedly failed to express overstated. If, as appeared likely at Minister’s strategy unravelling. any support for him. this point, the King had resisted Baldwin, understandably miffed, He went on to praise the King the pressure from Baldwin a little admitted it looked as though the and urged: ‘Let no man summon longer, the Prime Minister would Liberal Leader had changed his him to make so great a renun- have felt obliged to resign. The mind. When asked whether Sin- ciation as he was asked to make King’s only option would then clair agreed with the ‘News Chron- unless that man himself was pre- have been to invite Churchill icle view’, he commented that he pared for any renunciation which to form a minority government was ‘not a person who made very might be necessary in the interests which would have included Sin- definite statements and he did not of this country.’ This sounds like clair and, presumably, the Liberal know the exact position. He had a veiled invitation to Baldwin to Party itself. In the absence of seemed to agree with the Prime resign. In his speech Sir Archibald evidence about consultation, the Minister when they talked.’ did not spell out his views on the party’s response must be uncer- What had happened in royal marriage in great detail, but tain, though it would probably the intervening period? On  this was hardly surprising if he have been divided; Samuel, for

20 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 SIR ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR, THE LIBERAL PARTY AND THE ABDICATION OF EDWARD VIII example, had aligned himself opinion as vigorously expressed that his role in the crisis dam- with Baldwin. His biographer in the pages of the News Chroni- aged him, though there seems to records Samuel’s ‘lifelong horror cle. Editorially the paper pointed be little to substantiate this. No of sexual deviation’, which sug- out how far the moral and con- doubt Sinclair’s association with gests that he probably shared the stitutional notions upheld by Churchill, whose reputation cer- upper-class disapproval of the lax Baldwin and the upper-middle tainly suffered, offended some conduct of the Prince of Wales class had become anachronistic. It people. It is also clear that if he and Mrs Simpson and saw her as argued that: had joined a Churchill adminis- an immoral influence. tration he would have been part Some colleagues doubtless The King is a bachelor. A true of an ill-assorted group includ- thought that by associating with love match – and a democratic ing some extreme right-wing Rothermere and Beaverbrook, one at that – would be popular. elements that had backed the Sinclair had put himself in dubi- Now that Kingship is no longer King out of contempt for par- ous company for a Liberal. On the endowed with the qualities of liamentary democracy. Edward other hand, in the ensuing general semi-divinity, but has in effect VIII’s own Nazi sympathies were election Liberal candidates would become a hereditary Presidency, scarcely consistent with the hos- presumably have enjoyed the the public is little disposed to tility of both Churchill and Sin- backing of the Daily Mail, Daily interfere with the King’s per- clair towards appeasement and Express, and Daily Mirror as well as sonal affairs. Hitler. the News Chronicle, a novel expe- Above all, the whole epi- rience to say the least. Among The News Chronicle therefore sode throws an interesting light prominent Liberals, Lord Lothian made a distinction between the on Sinclair’s approach to the reportedly favoured a morganatic King’s free choice of wife and leadership of the party, which marriage. More significantly, Parliament’s right to determine he had assumed after the  Lloyd George, who was in Jamaica who should be Queen. Over suc- election. Under his predeces- during the crisis, adopted the cessive days the paper urged Bald- sor, Herbert Samuel, the Liberal same view as Churchill on tac- win to modify the law to allow Party had been made ridiculous, tics. He told Megan: ‘if he wished marriage with Wallis Simpson becoming for a time an adjunct to marry her it could have been without her becoming Queen. to Conservatism. Samuel had arranged quietly after the Coro- This view elicited many sup- inspired the idea of a National nation … If the King wants to portive letters from readers show- Government in and took marry his American friend – why ing marked resentment towards the Liberal Party in and out of not?’ Characteristically, Lloyd the Prime Minister for trying to it in a short space of time. Sin- George saw the issue in populist impose his ideas without con- clair showed himself willing to terms rather than constitutional sulting the people. The News take some risks with the party in ones: ‘I cannot help thinking the Chronicle attributed popular reac- order to put it back at the cen- Govt. would not have dealt so tions partly to the King’s earlier tre of radical politics. This was to brusquely with him had it not record of service and partly to the become clearer during – been for his popular sympathies. honesty he had shown in want- when he gave his backing to The Tories never cared for the ing to marry Mrs Simpson, in Sinclair the Popular Front strategy even little man. Labour have as usual contrast to the hypocrisy shown though this involved withdraw- played a cowardly part.’ From by the government and the upper showed ing some Liberal candidates. this one may conclude that Lloyd class who preferred him to keep a His instincts in the abdication George would have been another mistress but be discreet about it. himself crisis were similar. Samuel, who powerful voice in the King’s Party In the event Sinclair found willing to had started out as an outsider in an election. his strategy collapsing beneath in politics and worked his way It is also important to rec- him when the King suddenly take some into the heart of the Establish- ognise that Sinclair’s position gave way. By  December he ment, emerged as a supporter was much less eccentric than had decided to quit and on  risks with of Baldwin during the abdica- it appears in the context of the December he signed the Dec- tion crisis and of Chamberlain traditional view of the abdica- laration of Abdication. This the party over appeasement. By contrast, tion. Contrary to the assump- left the King’s Party in a rather in order Sinclair was securely within the tion that Baldwin enjoyed public exposed position. In the debate system and thus felt less inhib- backing, he became the target of in the Commons on  Decem- to put it ited about rebelling against it by angry crowds and his policy was ber, Sinclair beat a hasty retreat; giving a lead to populist causes. attacked by the newspapers that referring to the morganatic mar- back at With the National Liberals now commanded a large majority of riage he declared, ‘it is only right blurring the distinction between press circulation: the Daily Mail, to tell the House that I could not the centre Liberalism and Conservatism, it Daily Express, Daily Mirror and have supported it’, which seems of radical was all the more important to News Chronicle. Sinclair was in inconsistent with his earlier com- recreate the party’s distinctive tune with rank-and-file Liberal ments. His biographer suggests politics. radical credentials. In this respect

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 21 SIR ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR, THE LIBERAL PARTY AND THE ABDICATION OF EDWARD VIII

Sinclair’s instincts were sound, Papers F; Philip Murphy, Alan in February  he was inter- even if he never quite succeeded Lennox-Boyd: A Biography (London: I. viewed in the House of Lords by in imposing his strategy. B. Tauris, ), p. . Dr Russell Deacon. . Martin Gilbert, Winston Churchill Vol. V – (London: Heinemann, Martin Pugh was Professor of Modern ), pp. –. How did you come to fight Cardi- British History at Newcastle Univer- . PRO CAB//-, ‘King gan? sity until  and Research Professor Edward VIII Notes by Sir Horace I had been a Cardiganshire Lib- at Liverpool John Moores University Wilson’. eral for a long time before I went . PRO PREM /, Cabinet meet- –. His latest book is The ing Notes,  and  December . into national politics. I’d won Pankhursts (Allen Lane, ) and . PRO PREM /, Cabinet meet- a council seat in  and got he is currently completing a book on ing Notes,  December . really active with the Welsh Lib- fascism in Britain between the wars. . Daily Express,  December . erals in the mid-s. In  . Times,  December . Roderic Bowen lost the seat and . Times,  December ; Daily . See Keith Middlemas and John Express,  December . so I stood in the selection contest Barnes, Baldwin: A Biography (Lon- . PRO CAB/. to become the next Liberal can- don: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, . Gerrard De Groot, Liberal Crusader: ); Philip Ziegler, King Edward didate. I only received four votes; The Life of Sir Archibald Sinclair (Lon- VIII (London: Collins, ); Frances the executive who voted for don: Hurst and Company, ), pp. Donaldson, Edward VIII ( London: Huw Lloyd Williams was also full –. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, ); a . Gilbert, Winston Churchill, pp. –; of his friends and relatives. Later revisionist approach is Susan Wil- Michael Bloch, The Reign and Abdi- on I also went for the Meirion- liams, The People’s King: the True Story cation of Edward VIII ( London: Cape, of the Abdication (London: Allen Lane, nydd seat, which was then a ), p. . ). Labour–Liberal marginal. Once . Bernard Wasserstein, Herbert Samuel: . For some indiscretions see Cam- again I lost. This was a real pity as A Political Life (Oxford: Clarendon bridge University Library: Temple- Press, ), pp. , , –. I felt that I could have won that wood Papers RF, p. ; Ziegler, King . Bloch, The Reign and Abdication of seat back for the Liberals. Instead Edward VIII, p. ; Barnes and Mid- Edward VIII, p. . dlemas, Baldwin, p. . they chose I. E. Thomas who put . Lloyd George to Megan Lloyd . Churchill College Cambridge: Duff us into third position behind the George,  December , in Cooper Papers /, Abdication K. O. Morgan ed., Lloyd George: Fam- Nationalists. I ended up fight- Diary,  November . ily Letters, – (Cardiff: Univer- ing Brecon & Radnor. The seat . House of Lords Record Office: Sam- sity of Wales Press, ), p. . was almost derelict in terms of uel Papers A/, Lord Salisbury to . News Chronicle,  December . Herbert Samuel,  November ; Liberal supporters: they hadn�t . News Chronicle,  December . Samuel to Salisbury,  September had a candidate there for twenty . News Chronicle,  December . . . News Chronicle, editorial  December years. It was there that I helped . Kenneth Harris, Attlee (London: Wei- . build up the constituency and denfeld and Nicolson, ), –. . Hansard, House of Commons won almost  per cent of the . Daily Worker,  December ; Los Debates, ,  December , Angeles Times,  November . vote. This planted the seeds for c.–. . Daily Mail, , ,  December ; Richard Livsey’s victory fifteen . De Groot, Liberal Crusader, . Daily Express, ,  December . years later. . Notably in December  at the . Times,  December ; Barnes and Duchess of Atholl’s by-election in Huw Lloyd Williams lost Car- Midlemass, Baldwin, p. ; Lyming- West Perth and Kinross. digan for the Liberals in , ton to the King (draft),  December , Hampshire CRO, Lymington and in  I stood again for I was a selection and was not opposed. I made sure that time that my Welsh friends were on the executive to national- support me. I was determined to rebuilt Cardigan as a Liberal ist and a seat. In  I persuaded a large number of Independents to stand Liberal as Liberals. They took nine seats. INTERVIEW Although the Independents as well. still had the largest majority the There was Liberals were by far the largest Lord Geraint of Ponterwyd political group in the county. no need to They were the largest Liberal Interview by Russell Deacon group in Wales at the time. We join Plaid remained the largest political group on the council until I was eraint Howells (– Ceredigion & Pembrokeshire Cymru with defeated in  – perhaps also ) was Liberal and North (–) from February those cre- the largest Liberal group in Wales GLiberal Democrat MP  to . Ennobled as Lord for that period. for Cardiganshire (–) and Geraint of Ponterwyd in , dentials.

22 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 INTERVIEW: LORD GERAINT OF PONTERWYD

How did you defeat Labour in the again, because we had supported seat? Labour, they changed their mind Cardigan is naturally a Liberal in time for the  general elec- seat. It has an Independent tradi- tion, when I kept the seat with a tion which means that the peo- smaller majority. In that election ple there don’t readily support Emlyn Thomas, the Conserva- either Labour or the Tories. In tive candidate, came second with  Elystan Morgan (the sit- almost  per cent of the vote. ting Labour MP) was unpopular: Thomas had been general sec- he was seen as a traitor because retary of the Welsh Liberals in he had moved away from Plaid , based in Aberystwyth, and Cymru (he’d left them in ). was someone who I’d known He was also against the Welsh well. He operated an office with School in Aberystwyth. I there- a staff of two. The office flopped fore got the Plaid Cymru sup- and Thomas lost his enthusiasm porters to back me in order to get after a year. The result was that he him out. This pushed down the later defected to the Conserva- vote of the Plaid Cymru candi- tives and fought against me in date, Clifford Davies, but gave me . enough support to win the seat. Also in  we fought the The Cardigan Liberal campaign devolution referendum. We team also worked very hard to worked very hard but knew that bring a Liberal back into the seat. it was lost as the Conservatives had been using it to attack the Why were you a Liberal and not a government and we couldn’t Geraint Howells it the Social and Liberal Demo- Welsh Nationalist? fight against that. We were too (Lord Geraint crats. I was proved right, however, I was a Welsh nationalist and a closely linked to them. of Ponterwyd) when the following year, , (1925–2004) Liberal as well. There was no need we changed our name again to to join Plaid Cymru with those What happened in the s? Liberal Democrats. credentials. Liberalism was in my In , as a result of the fall- blood and that of my family. My out from the Lib–Lab Pact and Why did you lose Cardigan? grandmother was nearly thrown the referendum result, Emlyn I knew I had lost my seat, off her farm for voting Liberal [Hooson] lost his seat. I was then because my campaign team in the s by the Conservative the sole Liberal MP in Wales. I was weak. They thought that landlord. I never thought of being was both the leader of the Welsh they’d win but I knew that in in any other party. party and agriculture spokesman. my heart that this wasn’t going It was very hard: you ended up to be the case. Everyone seemed What happened after you were speaking everywhere. I was glad, convinced we’d win except me. elected, in the s? therefore, when Alex [Carlile] Cynog Dafis (Plaid Cymru) was In October  Elsytan Morgan won Montgomeryshire back in able to more than double his vote tried to regain his seat but failed, . It got even better in  from the previous election. My and I increased my percentage when Richard [Livsey] won Bre- key supporters who had won the of the vote. I could then con- con & Radnor and there were seat for me in  had by then centrate on being an MP. One of then three Liberal MPs in Wales. died off. The seat is winnable the best things of the s was After the election had ended again for us though. Mark Wil- the  Lib–Lab Pact. I always I pushed for the establishment liams has brought the vote back supported the Pact, even though of SC (Welsh Channel ). The up; we’ll get the seat back again. Emlyn [Hooson] was later in Conservatives had gone back on favour of ending it. I took up an earlier promise to set it up. What did you do then? the agricultural spokesmanship We put a lot of political pressure After going into the Lords I partnering Labour’s John Silkin, on them but it was Cledwyn became Lord-in-Waiting to Her whom I got on really well with. Hughes (former Labour Welsh Majesty the Queen – the first I was able to persuade him to get Secretary) who had the most Liberal to hold the position for the government to recognise the influence. a century. I am the Queen’s rep- Farmers Union of Wales (FUW), The s saw the arrival of resentative for foreign heads of which I had been a founder of. the SDP in Wales. I was always state. I have met President Moi of Roderic Bowen had always been a Liberal and I was keen that Nigeria and the Sultan of Brunei. against this idea – something that SDP members became Liberals. helped him lose the seat in . I therefore wanted the merged Dr Russell Deacon is a lecturer at the Although many in Ceredigion party to be called after its Liberal Centre for Humanities at the Univer- said they wouldn’t vote Liberal name but I lost when they called sity of Wales Institute, Cardiff.

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 23 KEEPER OF SECRETS

Dr J. Graham Jones looks at the life and career of Albert James Sylvester CBE (–), the champion shorthand typist who became Principal Private Secretary to David Lloyd George from  until his death in March . The first ever shorthand- writer to take notes of the proceedings of a Cabinet committee, Sylvester gained the trust of Lloyd George and served him for over two decades, running his private office, acting as his eyes and ears at Westminster and playing the role of go-between him and his mistress, Frances Stevenson.

24 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 KEEPER OF SECRETS

lbert James Sylvester tary to the Committee of Imperial few others then shared the secret. was born at Harlaston, Defence, and was in December It was during this year –  Staffordshire, on   the first ever shorthand- – that Sylvester found himself November , the writer to take notes of the pro- privy to the intricate and highly son of a tenant farmer ceedings of a Cabinet committee. confidential negotiations that Aof relatively modest means. He This was a truly pioneering task eventually led to the celebrated attended Guild Street School, as previously no written record Anglo-Irish treaty. Burton-on-Trent, where he of discussions taken at Cabinet The following autumn Lloyd became conversant with the basic level had been kept. When Lloyd George fell from power (perma- elements of Pitman’s shorthand, George succeeded Asquith as nently as it so happened), and and then, compelled to abandon Prime Minister in December initially Sylvester remained at  his full-time education at the age , the secretariat to the Com- Downing Street as a member of of fourteen, secured employment mittee of Imperial Defence at the secretariat of his successor as as a clerk at Charrington’s brew- once became the War Cabinet prime minister, the Conservative ery. During this period, aided secretariat. (There had previously leader Andrew Bonar Law. Dur- by the unstinting support of his been no Cabinet secretariat at all.) ing this brief interlude he retained two sisters, he attained champion Rejected for military service on his responsibility for matters speeds in both shorthand and typ- account of his official position, relating to church patronage. In ing and gained qualifications as a Sylvester now became Hankey’s the autumn of , however, as teacher of these subjects. private secretary. When hostilities Lloyd George prepared to depart In , like so many of his ceased, he at once became a high- on a potentially lengthy speak- generation, Sylvester moved to grade career civil servant sharing ing tour of the United States and London to seek his fortune, and the status of university graduates Canada, to be accompanied by held a variety of jobs including who had entered the civil service Dame Margaret and their daugh- a position as the compiler of the through competitive examination. ter Megan, the need for a respon- official record of the proceedings Lloyd George by now knew him sible, devoted and hard-working of the House of Lords. He was well and had grown to trust him. personal secretary was pressing. a member of the British ‘speed- In  Sylvester was awarded Frances Stevenson could not writing’ (fast typewriting) team the OBE and in  the CBE. now possibly accompany Lloyd that competed at Olympia in In  he left Hankey to serve George as she had done in his  and  and, having spent a as Lloyd George’s private secre- days of power. At a stroke Syl- short period in India and Burma, tary, based at  Downing Street. vester was enlisted from the Cab- established his own business as a He had by then long experience inet secretariat and became Lloyd freelance shorthand-writer based of working alongside the Prime George’s private secretary for the at Chancery Lane in the heart of Minister’s personal staff, which rest of his days. the metropolis. included Thomas Jones and Sylvester was probably glad The outbreak of the First World J. T. Davies, both Welshmen and to rejoin his old chief. As the War saw Sylvester undertake some both established civil servants. sole member of Lloyd George’s temporary work for the Admiralty. All three knew of the continuing entourage to have remained, he He soon became a stenographer in Sylvester and secret relationship between Lloyd would have felt out of place at  Lloyd George the office of M. P. A. Hankey (later at the Genoa George and Frances Stevenson Downing Street under Bonar Law Lord Hankey), at the time Secre- Conference, 1922 which had existed since , but and Baldwin. His background was

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 25 KEEPER OF SECRETS highly unorthodox and he shared Sylvester amongst original sources in following autumn – September little rapport with the ex-pub- preparation for the writing of the  – he was one of the small lic school, Oxbridge-educated acted War Memoirs and for interview- party that accompanied Lloyd élite which then dominated the ing many former ministers of the George (the other members were higher ranks of the civil service. increas- crown and public servants. Many his two politician children Gwilym He insisted that LG pay him a of these tasks were much facili- and Megan, Thomas Jones CH, his one-off lump sum of £, ingly as his tated by his fluent shorthand. doctor Lord Dawson of Penn, and as compensation for forfeited ‘eyes and Sylvester was also responsible the interpreter Dr T. P. Conwell- civil service pension rights and for making the arrangements for Evans) on his famous visit to Hit- demanded the substantial annual ears’ in the a large number of trips and voy- ler at Berchtesgaden. The course of salary of £,. In  this ages abroad during the s and the visit and the discussions have was further increased to £,, House of s. There was regular motor- been chronicled many times over. although in the exceptionally dif- ing across Europe, there were ‘L. G.’, wrote Sylvester, ‘returned to ficult economic circumstances Commons, cruises in the Mediterranean in the Grand Hotel in a state of great of the summer of  he had to even occu- a hired yacht, there were visits elation. It was clear to us all that he accept a pay cut of  per cent. to Ceylon in  and to South had been tremendously impressed From the outset Sylvester’s pying his America. Lloyd George invaria- by Hitler and to me, at all events, duties were onerous and wide- bly insisted on luxurious arrange- it seemed that he was spell-bound ranging. First and foremost he own seat ments for himself, his family, his by Hitler’s astonishing personal- was responsible for the day-to- guests and his servants. Poor Syl- ity and manner. “He is indeed a day running of Lloyd George’s in the offi- vester was always on the receiving great man”, were his first words in London office, which at one time cials’ box end of his imperious employer’s describing Hitler. “Fuehrer is the had a staff of more than twenty, demands, at a mere whim, for a proper name for him, for he is a including numerous researchers, beneath sudden departure, for a lightning born leader … yes, a statesman”.’ shorthand typists and messengers. reversal of well-laid plans (to go It was on this occasion that He also dealt, often on his own the public perhaps east rather than west), and Sylvester took the famous film initiative, with his employer’s mas- to receive detailed news reports at which underlined the cordial- sive postbag at a time when Lloyd gallery. every stage of the journey. These ity of Hitler’s welcome to Lloyd George probably received more were the demands of an ageing George, with the latter posi- letters and telegrams than any autocrat whose whim was his tively revelling in the warmth other British politician. He acted, command. of the reception accorded him. too, as LG’s press officer and often Although the relationship Much of the film is also devoted handled many of the cases that between Sylvester and Frances to the extensive miles of motor- came from Lloyd George’s con- Stevenson was inevitably fraught way and other public works at stituency, Caernarfon Boroughs. with tension and unease from the time under construction He made the practical arrange- the outset, when Lloyd George in Hitler’s Germany. Sylvester ments for Lloyd George’s numer- was struck down by serious ill- also took a number of fascinat- ous trips both within the United ness at the height of the politi- ing photographs, and a further Kingdom and overseas. cal and constitutional crisis of film, probably taken by Major As the s ran their course, the summer of , it was he Gwilym Lloyd-George, showed a and his employer grew less and who was charged to telephone totally uninhibited Sylvester tak- less inclined to make the tiring Frances with news of LG’s condi- ing close-up shots of Hitler and return journey from his Churt tion whenever possible. He even Ribbentrop, placing his personal home to Westminster, Sylvester succeeded in arranging a secret camera almost in their faces. For acted increasingly as his ‘eyes meeting between the two lovers the duration of this historic trip, and ears’ in the House of Com- on  August, only six days after Sylvester, a committed photogra- mons, even occupying his own Lloyd George’s major surgery. In pher, had been entrusted with the seat in the officials’ box beneath November he accompanied his custody of Lloyd George’s new the public gallery. When politi- employer on a recuperative voy- toy, a home movie camera. Syl- cal and diplomatic crises arose, age to Ceylon, when he was again vester was no respecter of persons, he furnished Lloyd George with entrusted with posting LG’s let- and the film taken by Gwilym notably detailed memoranda that ters to Frances and secretly buy- shows him moving Hitler about outlined the course of events as ing presents for her and her little from place to place, barking they unfolded. (These analy- daughter Jennifer, who had been orders at him (to the utter amaze- ses, preserved among the Lloyd born in October . ment of SS guards and ministers George Papers at the House of Sylvester inevitably became alike) as he methodically shot his Lords, are a valuable resource for fully involved in Lloyd George’s sequences to produce a striking students of the inter-war years.) ‘New Deal’ campaign, launched in film which had the added novelty At the same time Sylvester was January , and its propaganda of colour. personally responsible for under- body, the Council of Action for During November  Syl- taking much of the research Peace and Reconstruction. The vester again accompanied Lloyd

26 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 KEEPER OF SECRETS

George on a vacation to Jamaica, Together with another secretary married Frances Stevenson at a and in January  he went to Malcolm Thomson (who years civil ceremony at Guildford Reg- Antibes for the celebration of later was to write the ‘official istry Office in October . Lloyd George and Dame Marga- biography’ of Lloyd George, in Sylvester had even pleaded with ret’s golden wedding anniversary. collaboration with Frances), Syl- Lloyd George’s youngest daughter He remained a first-hand witness vester, with extraordinary dili- Megan to accept the union for the to the strange, highly ambivalent, gence and patience, located the sake of her father’s happiness in his triangular relationship between necessary source materials, facts twilight years, but to no avail. Loy- Lloyd George, Frances and Dame and figures demanded constantly ally, he remained in LG’s employ Margaret. It is probably true that by Lloyd George. He person- until the end, long after it was to by this time Dame Margaret gen- ally saw to it that the substantial his personal advantage to do so. erally felt some relief at being archive of official papers retained He accompanied Lloyd saved from the onerous task of (unofficially) by Lloyd George George and Frances on their supporting and caring for a highly was competently collated and return to Criccieth in September demanding, increasingly difficult, indexed by two clerks in the , and, having failed to secure a rapidly ageing seventy-five year- employ of the Cabinet Office. As ‘walkover’ for his employer in the old man. the Second World War loomed, Caernarfon Boroughs at the next By the late s Lloyd George he provided Lloyd George with general election (widely expected had become ever more reluctant detailed memoranda outlining the to take place at the conclusion of to leave his Churt estate. Sylvester diplomatic moves of the summer hostilities), he set in motion the provided him with a steady stream and early autumn of . Once chain of events which eventually of reliable information on the war had broken out in September, led to Lloyd George’s acceptance course of political life and often Sylvester remained LG’s eyes and of an earldom on  January . prepared detailed memoranda or ears at Westminster and White- So well known was he in the reports on key issues and events. hall, regularly preparing detailed constituency that some local Lib- Both Gwilym and Megan Lloyd reports on the course of political eral activists pressed for Sylvester’s George remained in the House life in the face of his employer’s nomination for the impending of Commons representing Welsh reluctance to venture far from his vacancy in the Boroughs, but he constituencies, and also acted as home. As Lloyd George, panic- was not adopted. It is very likely sources of inside information for stricken by the activities of the that his lack of Welsh roots and their father. Nazi bombers, retreated to his associations militated against his Sylvester’s supporting role second home at Criccieth in prospects of selection. was of immense importance in north Wales, Sylvester bombarded Sylvester’s When Lloyd George died on the relationship between LG and him with a regular avalanche of  March , Sylvester, now Frances. He knew all the lead- alarmist reports designed delib- supporting fifty-five years of age, suddenly ing actors in the drama and kept erately to exaggerate the array of found himself unemployed for their secrets. It was he who was difficulties facing Churchill’s gov- role was of the first time in his life. His first responsible for co-ordinating ernment, in the hope that they immense subsequent employment was on the arrival of Dame Margaret might persuade LG to return to the staff of Lord Beaverbrook at and the Lloyd George children London to participate actively importance the Daily Express on a three-year through the front door of their in the course of political debate. contract. During – he Surrey home – Bron-y-de, Churt But to no avail: Lloyd George in the rela- served as an unpaid assistant to the – and the simultaneous depar- preferred to devote his now rap- then Liberal Party leader Clem- ture of Frances through the back idly dwindling energies to the tionship ent Davies, whilst actively seeking entrance. A similar bizarre course construction of air-raid shelters between another post. During the immedi- of events had happened at  and at Criccieth. Westminster politics ate post-war period he also made later  Downing Street almost held but little appeal. LG and use of his copious diary material a generation earlier. Sylvester It was again Sylvester who was to piece together the semi-bio- was indeed the only individual responsible for informing Lloyd Frances. graphical volume The Real Lloyd who spanned both sides of Lloyd George of the deterioration in the George, published by Cassell and George’s complex personal and health of his wife Dame Marga- He knew all Co. during the autumn of . family life. It is to his credit that ret in the early days of , and the lead- The book’s rather sensational title he remained on good terms with he, too, accompanied by Lord was not reflected in its contents. each member of Lloyd George’s Dawson of Penn, made the long ing actors Much of it consisted of trivia. The immediate family while at the journey to Criccieth in appalling main feature of historical inter- same time generally preserving weather to attend the funeral. He in the est was the revealing account of the peace with Frances – at least was fully sensitive to the mani- Lloyd George’s second meeting until after Lloyd George’s death. fold tensions and frictions within drama and with Hitler in . Otherwise, He was also to play a vital role the Lloyd George family, even- kept their some observers were nonplussed in the preparation and writing tually serving as Lloyd George’s at the picture of Lloyd George of the mammoth War Memoirs. best man when, at long last, he secrets. that emerged compellingly from

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 27 KEEPER OF SECRETS

ered unemployable. Thus he and his wife Evelyn sold their home at Putney, London and moved to Chippenham in Wiltshire. His new role as a farmer pleased Sylvester and his wife Evelyn enormously. They began to grow extensive crops and to sell eggs on a substantial scale. They spent much of  constructing modest farm buildings and grew to savour the delights of rural life. But Sylvester retained his interest in Lloyd George and in contem- porary political developments. In February  his wife Eve- lyn, whom he had married in , died after a long period of ill health and several lengthy stays in hospital. Although he felt her loss deeply, he bravely soldiered on alone. Within a month of her death he himself suffered a major heart attack, but made a remark- ably good recovery. In January , when he was seventy-six years of age, a suspected seizure the book’s pages. In his old age, farming. This he continued to do Sylvester in old deprived him of the use of his left age, as pictured Sylvester’s employer had become for the four decades of life which arm. Re-learning to make full a soured, autocratic and rather still remained to him, although on the cover of Life with Lloyd use of his beloved manual type- peevish old man. The proposal during the s advancing old George writer proved an uphill struggle, at about this time that Sylvester age and its attendant infirmities but he displayed a remarkable should be knighted in recogni- compelled him to let the major resilience. Surgery followed twice tion of his distinguished role as farm at Chippenham to a tenant, in . ‘I live a very busy life’, Lloyd George’s principal private while still, however, continuing to he wrote to a friend three years secretary came to nothing, appar- run his own smallholding almost later, ‘alone with my memories of ently squashed by Prime Minister until the end. the one I loved dearly: I appreci- Clement Attlee. Material considerations had ate solitude: work is my middle At this time Sylvester was compelled Sylvester to follow name: I have to work, I have no rather licking his wounds at the this path. He certainly savoured pension.’ By this time advancing somewhat abrupt, perhaps unex- political life and felt a heart- years had compelled him to stand pected, end of his three-year con- felt commitment to the Liberal down as a JP for Wiltshire; he had tract, in the previous September, Party. Hence his unpaid stint as been appointed in  and then with Express Newspapers and his assistant to Clement Davies in elected by his fellow magistrates to old ally Lord Beaverbrook, who – and his subsequent wish be their chairman in . These now spent most of his time in to continue serving the party in positions had involved him in an Canada and the West Indies and some paid capacity. But, although array of judicial and administrative who seemed to have given up Clement Davies and the party’s tasks throughout the county. on his British interests. Many of chief whip Frank Byers struggled In May  there appeared Beaverbrook’s old associates were valiantly to create a paid posi- Life with Lloyd George: the Diary thus compelled to seek new out- tion for Sylvester, their efforts of A. J. Sylvester, –, meticu- lets for their time and abilities. In floundered on the party’s abysmal lously edited by Sylvester’s friend preparation for such an eventuality lack of resources. Sylvester, sorely Colin Cross. The book was cer- Sylvester had purchased, during dejected that the Liberal Party tainly much more revealing than the Second World War, a substan- appeared either unwilling or The Real Lloyd George back in tial piece of agricultural land in unable to make use of his admin- , but was not in any sense Wiltshire. (He never told Lloyd istrative acumen, approached an sensational or likely to cause George of his purchase, fearing a array of contacts in political and offence. Members of the Lloyd jealous backlash.) In  he then public life, even within Buck- George family greeted with relief made a conscious decision to leave ingham Palace, but to no avail. At what they regarded as a much- political life and turn to active sixty years of age, he was consid- needed corrective to the view

28 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 KEEPER OF SECRETS of Lloyd George propounded cups and medals which he had  NLW, A. J. Sylvester Papers file C, by Frances in her memoirs pub- won, and eventually, at the grand Sylvester to Guy [ ],  January  lished in  and in her diaries old age of eighty-six, he secured (copy). which had seen the light of day, a place in the Guinness Book of edited by A. J. P. Taylor, in . Records as the oldest competitive A note on sources Both of these works, they felt, ballroom dancer in the world. At Much of the material on which had presented a somewhat sugary, the age of eighty-seven, in , this article is based is derived from romanticised, idealised view of the he won with his partner the top the A. J. Sylvester Papers pur- author’s relationship with Lloyd amateur award for ballroom danc- chased by the National Library George and had shied away from ing, the ‘Alex Moore’. All these of Wales in . Useful, too, is discussing the many skeletons in achievements bore witness to a the smaller group of Frances Ste- the family cupboard, not least the quite extraordinary intellectual venson Family papers purchased affairs in which both actors had and physical energy and vitality. by the National Library in  engaged. With the publication of At the same time he continued and the massive archive of Lloyd Sylvester’s volume, Dame Marga- his farming and other outdoor George Papers in the custody of ret Lloyd George, they felt con- pursuits as far as his health and the Parliamentary Archive at the vinced, had now been restored to energy allowed. Record Office at the House of her rightful place in history. Declining health and loneli- Lords. The seven Lloyd George Sylvester survived for another ness, together with an element archives at the Welsh Political fourteen years. His plan to pub- of hypochondria and self-pity, to Archive at the NLW are con- lish a full-length autobiogra- some extent marred his last years veniently described in J. Graham phy, upon which he was actively when he was prone to exagger- Jones, Lloyd George Papers at the engaged almost to the end of his ate his health problems. Yet on National Library of Wales and Other long life, sadly never came to fru- good days he was still capable Repositories (Aberystwyth: the ition. During the last years of his of writing long, cheerful let- National Library of Wales, ). life he still typed on the same old ters and entertaining guests on a Sylvester’s own books The Real upright Underwood typewriter fairly lavish scale. He could still Lloyd George (London, ) and which he had used in the Cabinet cook impressive meals and was Colin Cross (ed.), Life with Lloyd Office back in , more than an unfailingly engaging conver- George: the Diary of A. J. Sylvester, seventy years earlier. His interest sationalist with sparkling remi- – (London, ) are essen- in Lloyd George never dimin- niscences. He eventually lived to During the tial reading. Also helpful are Tho- ished, and he derived a particular within a month of his hundredth mas Jones, Lloyd George (London, pleasure from the three volumes birthday. Only in his last weeks last years ); Frances Lloyd George, The of biography written by his friend did his positive attitude abandon Years that are Past (London, ); the late John Grigg. He delighted, of his life him; hospital visitors were gen- Peter Rowland, Lloyd George too, in his ‘appearance’ in the erally warmly greeted. His death (London, ), probably the notable television series The Life he still on  October  robbed stu- best single-volume biography of and Times of Lloyd George, broad- dents of Lloyd George and his typed on Lloyd George; A. J. P. Taylor (ed.), cast by the BBC in , a drama times of a wholly unique source My Darling Pussy: the Letters of which attracted a huge audience of dependable information and the same Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson, and was highly acclaimed – as anecdotal evidence. – (London, ); Mervyn indeed had been the television old upright Jones, A Radical Life: the Biography film The Very Private Secretary, Dr J. Graham Jones is Senior Archi- of Megan Lloyd George, – shown by the BBC in . Syl- Underwood vist and Head of the Welsh Political (London, ); Ruth Longford, vester, in extreme old age, had Archive at the National Library of typewriter Frances, Countess Lloyd George: indeed become something of a Wales, Aberystwyth More than a Mistress (London, celebrity and a household name which he ); and W. R. P. George,  throughout the land. In Decem-  National Library of Wales (NLW), A. J. Not Out: an Autobiography (Peny- ber , now aged ninety-three, had used in Sylvester Papers C, William Lloyd- George to Sylvester,  March . groes, ). A characteristically he participated extensively in a  See J. Graham Jones, ‘A Lloyd George stimulating essay is Kenneth O. BBC Radio  profile of his life the Cabinet letter’, National Library of Wales Jour- Morgan, ‘Lloyd George and the and career, Principal Private Secre- nal, vol. XXXII, no.  (Summer ), Office back historians’, Transactions of the Hon- tary. Other broadcasts followed. -; A. J. P. Taylor (ed.), My Darling ourable Society of Cymmrodorion In other ways, too, Sylvester in 1914, Pussy: the Letters of Lloyd George and Frances Stevenson, - (London, , pp. –. Obituaries to came to prominence. Forced to ), –. A. J. Sylvester were published in retire from the bench upon attain- more than  On this theme, see J. Graham Jones, The Times,  October , the ing the mandatory retirement age ‘The Earl Lloyd-George of Dwyfor, Daily Telegraph,  October , of seventy-five at the end of , seventy A. J. Sylvester and the Caernarfon The Guardian,  October , he turned to ballroom dancing as Boroughs vacancy of ’, Transac- years ear- tions of the Caernarfonshire Historical and The Independent,  October a new hobby and challenge. His Society  (), -. . home soon sported an array of lier.

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 29 Dr James Taylor explores the origins of the corporate economy and assesses the implications for government policy in the twenty-first PUBLIC OR PRIVATE? century.

n recent years, we have their case for reorganising the become used to the idea way the state operated. that politicians should look Central to their argument was to the private sector for the introduction of ‘business prin- inspiration for their policies. ciples’ into the conduct of public IUnderpinning much government affairs. Businessmen, they rea- behaviour in the past twenty-five soned, possessed a superior grasp years has been the profound belief of the organisational skills needed in the superiority of business over to manage government business. state, of private over public. The Such skills, though lacking in the Thatcher-Reagan mission of roll- public sphere, abounded in the ing back the frontiers of the state, business world. While the nation’s and its continuation in barely commerce had gone from altered form under more recent strength to strength, the govern- leaders, has been informed by this ment, with the power to select ideology. Streamlining govern- the best men, and with practically ment through private involve- unlimited means, had carried on ment in the provision of public the war effort in a disgracefully services and encouraging partici- inept manner. The Daily News, a pation by businessmen in the for- Liberal newspaper prominent in mation of policy are key means the campaign for administrative by which politicians have sought reform, asserted: ‘every English- to infuse government with the man knows well enough that in dynamism and efficiency of the most things which it undertakes private sector. Government is beaten by private Yet this objective is not of enterprise.’ modern origin. Looking back The movement had its suc-  years, there is a striking par- cesses: the government began to allel with the Liberal movement rely upon the contract system for for administrative reform. The aspects of the war effort, culmi- disastrous management of the nating in the employment of the Crimean War (–) by Lord contractor Samuel Morton Peto Aberdeen’s coalition govern- to construct the Balaklava railway. ment, devastatingly exposed by Sir Charles Wood, First Lord of William Russell’s reports in The the Admiralty, seemed sympa- Times, fostered a massive outburst thetic to the reformist ideology, of public criticism of aristocratic conceding that ‘You cannot find Samuel Smiles government. Fresh from their tri- any adequate substitutes for the (1812–1904); umph against the landowners in stimulus of private and individual Robert Lowe the  repeal of the Corn Laws, interest.’ (1811–92); Herbert Spencer Liberal reformers capitalised on But of more interest than the (1820–1903) public sentiment to put forward immediate impact of the move-

30 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 PUBLIC OR PRIVATE?

ment is the insight it gives us into – crucial elements in fostering – made into corporations with a Victorian perceptions of private Britain’s competitive advantage – legal identity distinct from their enterprise. For Victorians, it was were formed not as partnerships members – permitting them to sue the heroic entrepreneur, the noble but as joint stock companies. The in the courts, to limit the liability industrialist, who symbolised capital of hundreds, sometimes of their shareholders, and to exist British commerce. Illustrative of thousands, of investors was drawn in perpetuity. The most typical these attitudes was Samuel Smiles’ together into powerful agglom- early incorporations were of large famous work, Self-Help, first pub- erations, under the control of trading companies such as the East lished in , which offered the elected boards of directors. The India Company () and the public inspiring pen portraits of story was the same in other sec- Hudson’s Bay Company (). giants of commerce, including tors: gas, water, insurance, banking, But the eighteenth and nineteenth Richard Arkwright, Josiah Wedg- shipping, the telegraph. Wherever centuries saw the incorporation of wood, and Robert Peel, father of large sums of capital were needed, many domestic schemes. the Conservative Prime Minister companies began to appear. Prior to the mid-nineteenth of the s and s. Such men But this was not a process that century, these powers were combined energy, perseverance, occurred in isolation from the granted on a case-by-case basis. and thrift, and these were the public sphere. For companies Companies wishing to be incor- qualities that it was thought nec- were not wholly private enter- porated would apply either to essary to import into public life. prises. Without the state’s granting Parliament or to the Board of When Victorians thought of of a number of legal privileges, it Trade. The privileges of incor- businessmen, they thought of was impossible in law to establish poration were not thought to be men of this sort: rugged individu- a body distinct from its members, natural or inherent; rather, they alists achieving greatness through such as a company. If a company were an artificial creation, and strength of character. These were wished to sue in the courts, it politicians, Liberal and Conserva- the men who could teach the could not do so as an organisation, For Victori- tive alike, were wary of distribut- government a thing or two about but only as a mass of individuals, ans, it was ing them too freely. In this, they organisational competence. Yet making legal action practically were simply following Adam such a view was already in dan- impossible. Additionally, a com- the heroic Smith’s line, as set out in his ger of becoming anachronistic, pany’s shareholders were subject Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes for British commerce was under- to unlimited liability: as the law entre- of the Wealth of Nations, first pub- going a dramatic institutional did not recognise the company as lished in , but a set text for transformation. The intensive a separate entity, its debts were its preneur, nineteenth-century statesmen. capital requirements of modern members’ debts, so shareholders the noble Smith had warned that ‘to industrial enterprise were forc- in a bankrupt concern could be exempt a particular set of deal- ing a radical change in the way sued by creditors for every penny industrial- ers from some of the general in which business was organised. they possessed. laws which take place with While the Industrial Revolution In view of these problems, ist, who regard to all their neighbours’ had been spearheaded by small the state agreed to delegate pub- was unreasonable, and could partnerships and sole traders, the lic powers to companies whose symbolised ‘scarce ever do more harm than business corporation was begin- existence was judged to be in the British good’. Smith made exceptions for ning to take on an added signifi- public interest. These favoured sectors where private capital was cance. First canals, then railways companies were incorporated commerce. inadequate, or where the level

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 31 PUBLIC OR PRIVATE? of risk deterred private inves- To try to secure popular accept- ‘the characteristic vices of our tors, citing canals, water works, ance, companies sought to ape political state’ were reproduced insurance, and banking as exam- the characteristics and behaviour in every business corporation. ples. But wherever private capi- of public institutions. Company Directors overstepped their pow- tal was sufficient, companies had boards were usually made up of ers and ruled their companies no business, for they would only men with a high local profile: undemocratically: shareholders promote monopoly. Records of members of the local municipal were cowed, and boards became parliamentary debates in the early corporation, local magistrates, closed bodies, completely out nineteenth century are littered and other office-holders. These of touch with the opinions and with condemnations of applica- men were well placed to ensure needs of their constituents. Com- tions by joint stock companies for that their companies were incor- pany meetings were a sham: corporate privileges: to accede to porated into local communi- directors were adept at manufac- such demands would ‘destroy all ties. Company offices, often very turing consent for their motions competition’, establishing ‘bane- grand structures, would be built by a mixture of dissimulation and ful’ monopolies, leaving consum- in prominent positions in the stealth, and once these motions ers at their mercy. high street. Shareholder meetings were passed, the shareholders It was also widely feared that would be held in local munici- had no remedy, ‘for in railway companies were displacing char- pal halls or taverns. The official government there is no “second acter from its central position in emblems of the town or county reading”, much less a third.’ But the world of commerce. Before would be worked into company whatever views were expressed the corporate age, firms were letterheads and seals. on companies’ claims to embody perceived as an outgrowth of the Furthermore, it was widely a form of direct democracy, all individual businessman’s person- accepted that, in their operation, were agreed in viewing compa- ality, while the system of partner- companies functioned as public nies as public bodies, which faced ship placed entrepreneurs in such bodies – ‘little republics’ in the the same issues of representation a position of mutual trust and words of Robert Lowe, a Liberal and accountability as were faced interdependence that partner- minister. Directors, elected by by governments. ships were frequently likened to their shareholders just as politi- Furthermore, by mid-cen- families. ‘Partners were in some cians were elected by the public, tury, the public utility of joint senses brothers who represented described their shareholders as stock companies was coming to each other,’ believed Sir William their ‘constituents’. Boards were be more widely accepted. While Holdsworth, the eminent legal ‘executives’, appointed to carry monopolies were still conten- historian. Companies, however, out the wishes of their constitu- tious (indeed, nineteenth-century were entirely different: they were, ents. Some went further still, governments toyed with the idea according to The Times, ‘societies arguing that companies were of nationalising railway compa- in which friendship, ability, knowl- models of direct representation, nies), many came to argue that edge, education, character, credit, a more democratic system than companies promoted rather than even monied worth is in a great the virtual representation which restricted competition. Received measure disregarded, and money, characterised the unreformed wisdom was turned on its head: the mere amount and value of With the British state. Accountability and whereas the granting of corpo- the shares standing in the name of transparency would be ensured rate privileges had been viewed each, is the sole bond of connex- dilution of by face-to-face relations between as an interference with trade, now ion between the proprietors.’ directors and shareholders, and the withholding of these privi- With the dilution of the the impor- the vigilance of shareholders in leges came to be seen as the inter- importance of character in busi- tance of monitoring the actions of their ference. The process by which ness came a deterioration of the directors. In this sense, joint stock companies applied to the state for standards of commercial behav- character companies resembled the volun- incorporation was condemned iour. Direction by boards dimin- tary associations that were such as corrupt: vested interests could ished the sense of individual in business an important feature of eight- exert sufficient leverage with MPs responsibility for decision-mak- eenth- and nineteenth-century to throw out a bill, or to persuade ing. The result, admitted one came a middle-class life. ministers to refuse incorporation. merchant, was that ‘actions from deteriora- But many were sceptical about Few considered politicians to be which men would shrink as indi- the democratic claims of joint sound and impartial judges of the viduals, they will practise with tion of the stock companies, among them worth of commercial enterprises. impunity, when combined with Herbert Spencer, the influential Consequently, an Act of  others in a corporate capacity.’ standards liberal philosopher. Spencer, who passed during Peel’s second For these reasons, companies had an insider’s knowledge of administration, and devised by generated a degree of controversy of commer- corporate culture, having worked William Gladstone at the Board which is difficult to appreci- cial behav- as a railway engineer during the of Trade, allowed companies to ate today, when the existence of investment boom, or ‘railway obtain incorporation on registra- companies is taken for granted. iour. mania’, of the s, argued that tion with the government. The

32 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 PUBLIC OR PRIVATE? grant was now automatic and was self-acting, and that the power The ideal- ric insisting upon the primacy no longer relied on the favour of incorporation did not belong and distinctiveness of business of parliament or individual min- to the Board of Trade.’ The ised entre- remained constant, and the pub- isters. But the Act excluded lim- result was an Act of , drafted lic origins of ‘private’ enterprise ited liability: if companies wished by Palmerston’s administration, preneur, as were entirely lost sight of. to trade with this privilege, they which had replaced Aberdeen’s Which leads us to the irony would have to go through par- discredited coalition, allowing glorified that today many are calling for liament or the Board of Trade as companies to obtain limited lia- by Smiles, the state to be modelled on insti- before. bility on registration. tutions which themselves were When company law reap- In hindsight, the Act is best became originally modelled on the state. peared on the political agenda viewed as a significant step along A lesson, perhaps, in the perils in the s, this issue divided the road to what can be termed less and of forming policy in a historical Liberal opinion. Some, includ- the conceptual privatisation of vacuum. ing Gladstone, thought that the company. Corporate powers less typi- limited liability would encour- had traditionally been viewed as cal of the Dr James Taylor is Research Associate age immoral and irresponsible privileges, granted only to those on the ESRC-funded project ‘Share- speculation and would destabi- enterprises which could dem- British holder Democracies? Corporate Gov- lise the economy. The economist onstrate that their contribution ernance in Britain, –’. He is J. R. McCulloch insisted that to the public interest warranted economy, author of several articles on commerce limited liability was an unnatural excusing them from the normal and politics in nineteenth-century privilege which ran counter to rules of commerce. The compa- and was Britain. sound rules of political economy. nies so privileged did their best to replaced Others disagreed, arguing that the present themselves as semi-public  G. R. Searle, Entrepreneurial Politics in concession of limited liability was institutions. But, as the numbers Mid-Victorian Britain (Oxford: Oxford by a differ- University Press, ), p. . consistent with the recent course of companies receiving these  Olive Anderson, A Liberal State at War of commercial legislation towards powers grew, and their impor- ent kind of (London: Macmillan, ), p. . non-interference. Lord Palmer- tance to the economy increased,  James Taylor, ‘“Wealth Makes Wor- ston, with typical forthrightness, so the powers previously granted capitalist. ship”: Attitudes to Joint Stock Enter- declared it was a simple ‘question as privileges became taken for prise in British Law, Politics, and  Culture, c.  – c. ’ (unpub- of free trade against monopoly’. granted and expected as rights lished Ph.D. thesis, University of What decided the argument which it was unnatural and unjus- Kent, ), pp. –. was the widespread enthusiasm tifiable for the state to withhold.  Leonore Davidoff and Catherine in the s for downsizing the As companies grew in confi- Hall, Family Fortunes: Men and Women role of the state, which was given dence, they were more inclined of the English Middle Class, – (London: Routledge,  []), p. a further boost by the exposure to present themselves as private . of the government’s inept con- entities with no responsibilities  The Times,  Oct. . duct of the Crimean War. The to the public. Company directors  Anon. [‘A Merchant’], Letter to John press, largely in favour of limited entered both Houses of Parlia- Taylor, Esq. Respecting the Con- liability, exploited the revelation ment in ever increasing numbers, duct of the Directors of the Real del Monte Company Relative to of administrative shortcomings and did their best to thwart the Mines of Tlalpuxahua (London: to argue that the state should be attempts at state intervention in Hurst, Robinson, and Co, ), p. . stripped of its power to decide their companies’ affairs, painting  Robin Pearson, ‘Shareholder Democ- which businesses should be this as an interference in private racies? English Stock Companies and incorporated. The Daily News enterprise. the Politics of Corporate Governance during the Industrial Revolution’, stated that it was wrong for the There was thus an increasing English Historical Review,  (), grant of corporate privileges to divergence between the rhetoric pp. –. be ‘dependent on the caprice of of commerce and the realities of  For more on this, see Timothy L. Government officials’, a view modern enterprise. The ideal- Alborn, Conceiving Companies: Joint- endorsed by prominent business- ised entrepreneur, as glorified by Stock Politics in Victorian England (London: Routledge, ). men before a royal commission Smiles, became less and less typi-  Herbert Spencer, Essays: Scientific,  on mercantile law. cal of the British economy, and Political, and Speculative ( vols, Lon- Opponents of limited liability was replaced by a different kind don: Williams and Norgate, –), had no answer. Even the President of capitalist, who, in dealing with ii, p. . of the Board of Trade, Edward administrative tasks of great com-  Ibid., p. .  Parliamentary Debates, rd series,  Cardwell, who had grave doubts plexity, and with large, sometimes ( July ), col. . as to the propriety of limited lia- unruly bodies of constituents,  Daily News,  July ; Royal bility, thought the power invested faced challenges more familiar to Commission on the Assimilation of in him to accept or refuse appli- politicians than the entrepreneurs Mercantile Laws in the UK, Parlia- cations for incorporation ‘invidi- of the industrial revolution. The mentary Papers,  (), pp. , .  Edward Cardwell, ‘Limited Liability’, ous’. He confessed to the Cabinet dividing line between public and Confidential Memorandum,  Jan. that ‘I heartily wish that the law private was blurred. Yet the rheto-

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 33 PUBLIC OR PRIVATE?

, Gladstone Papers, British Library, Large Industrial Corporation in America aged , to Home Secretary. In Add. Ms , ff. –, p. . (Princeton: Princeton University , as First Lord of the Admi-  For an excellent study of this process Press, ). ralty, he took charge of the larg- in the United States, see William G. Roy, Socializing Capital: The Rise of the est navy in the world. Nonetheless, Addison argued, in the long term Churchill’s defection came with a severe penalty: the suspicion that he was motivated by personal ambi- tion, that he was a cad and an unprincipled careerist. According REPORT to Addison the allegation that he was only in politics for his own ambition dogged and hobbled Winston Churchill – Liberal politician him until the Second World War. As Churchill himself asked Evening meeting, February 2004, with Keith Robbins and ‘what makes one do things?’, Addison felt that the limits of Paul Addison a historian’s ability to explain Report by David Cloke anyone’s motives, let alone a politician’s, had to be recog- nised. Indeed, do politicians he centenary of Church- ham in the khaki election of themselves know why they do ill crossing the floor to . Almost from the start, Dr things? Nonetheless, Addison Tjoin the Liberal Party was Addison maintained, Churchill declared that Churchill was par- commemorated at the History criticised his own government. ticularly transparent: he had told Group’s meeting in February. And when in May , Joseph his mother of his ambition. He Chaired by the Group’s Chair, Chamberlain started his cam- had also stated in  that, apart Tony Little, the meeting saw paign for tariff reform Churchill from the stumbling block of consideration given to Winston attacked not only him but also Home Rule, ‘I am a Liberal in all Churchill as a Liberal politician. the Prime Minister, Balfour, for in the but name’. In answer to questions The discussion was led by Paul failing to get to grips with the from the floor, Professor Robbins Addison, the Director of the issue and for proposing feeble long term indicated that Home Rule con- Centre for Second World War compromises. In Addison’s view, tinued to be a stumbling block Studies and author of Churchill Churchill essentially talked him- Churchill’s for Churchill as he felt that it was on the Home Front – and self out of the Conservative Party a betrayal of his father. He flirted Keith Robbins, former Vice- and on  May , on enter- defection with ‘Home Rule all round’ as Chancellor of the University of ing the Commons, he sat next came with a solution but did not follow it Wales at Lampeter and author of to David Lloyd George on the through. Addison added that he Churchill. Liberal benches. a severe tried to resolve the problem by Dr Addison outlined the rea- Churchill’s defection brought coming out in favour of special sons for Churchill joining the with it handsome rewards in the penalty: treatment for Ulster. Liberal Party and his subsequent following few years. Whilst, in Addison reported that role as a minister and his rela- Addison’s view, the Liberals were the suspi- Churchill referred to himself tionships with fellow ministers. never convinced that he was cion that as a Tory Democrat, thus draw- Professor Robbins continued really one of them, they recog- ing attention to the legacy with a consideration of Church- nised his value and treated him he was of his father. He also showed ill’s experience during the First generously: Campbell-Banner- independence from Tory party World War and the reasons he left man gave him his first ministe- motivated orthodoxy, veered from the the Liberals. Before the speakers rial post as Under-Secretary at party line and expressed sym- began Tony Little asked both of the Colonial Office and Asquith by personal pathy for the Liberal opposi- then also to give their view as subsequently brought him into ambition, tion. The Liberal journalist, to whether Churchill was ever the Cabinet as President of the Massingham, said that he hoped a Liberal or whether he never Board of Trade, making him the that he was Churchill would be Prime Min- ceased to be a Liberal. youngest cabinet minister since ister and a Liberal one at that. Dr Addison began by noting . Asquith was impressed by a cad and Churchill was one of a group of that Churchill was the son and Churchill, had faith in his politi- young fractious Tory MPs led by heir of the maverick Tory politi- cal abilities and also genuinely an unprin- Hugh Cecil. They maintained cian Lord Randolph Churchill. liked him. Perhaps not surpris- cipled cordial relations with Liberals He was elected the Unionist ingly, therefore, in January  and Churchill particularly stayed (Conservative) MP for Old- he promoted Churchill, then careerist. in touch with Rosebery (an old

34 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 REPORT: WINSTON CHURCHILL AS A LIBERAL friend of his father’s) and Lloyd Churchill not decisive and were compatible leading, for example during the George. Addison argued that it with his ambition. Agadir crisis of . was clear by the end of  that was never Professor Robbins added that Nonetheless, even in this Churchill and Lloyd George he felt that it was worth reinforc- radical phase Addison pointed were close. bound in ing the point that in – out that Churchill expressed his Dr Addison also felt that it looked as if the Conservative attachment to social order and Churchill’s attitude to the party his own Party was falling apart and one capitalism both in speeches and system was significant. He had mind to could have supposed that it was in private with Lloyd George strong reservations about it unlikely that the Tories would and Masterman. He disapproved and said that it gave too much party poli- regain power at the next general of socialism even more than he power to extremists. At this time election. Hence, if Churchill was did of protectionism. Professor Churchill aspired to some sort tics: he was as ambitious as was supposed, and Robbins added that in his view of coalition of Liberal and Tory it looked likely that there would Churchill put forward the radi- forces which he hoped Rose- more inter- not be a Tory government for cal solutions seen in this phase bery would bring about. When esting than a decade, then this would be a in order to avoid socialism – but Chamberlain came out in favour good reason for leaving the party. that this strategy declined, or of protection, this encouraged that. Dr Addison then turned to even ceased, as the Labour Party him to believe that there would what he described as Church- grew in strength. be a realignment of politics, as ill’s radical phase, the period The  elections raised the had happened in . In the between  and . Addison possibility of coalition govern- end, however, only he and a few described him as an outstand- ment and Churchill seemed of his closest parliamentary allies ingly successful radical politician to begin to move towards an changed sides. In answer to a and an enthusiastic and energetic accommodation with the Con- question from the floor, Professor social reformer. In alliance with servatives. Addison reported Robbins added that he almost Lloyd George he was a leader that the Conservatives said that certainly did not bring with him of the radical wing of the Lib- Churchill was moving to the to the Liberal Party any activists eral Party. Indeed, his radicalism right at this time and putting out or sections of the electorate. eclipsed that of the Labour Party. feelers to them. However, they Despite his contemporar- However, Addison noted that this had scores to settle and their new ies’ doubts about him, Addison stance lasted for a relatively brief leader, Bonar Law, had no time argued that there was no doubt period and was in sharp relief to for Churchill. that Churchill was convinced of the rest of his career. This deep There did not seem to be a the merits of free trade. It was engagement with Liberal ideol- simple explanation for Churchill’s not only the Treasury orthodoxy ogy was never repeated after he move to the right. His relations but the position of all his clos- moved to the Admiralty. It has, with Labour were deteriorating, est political allies. He attacked therefore, been argued that this partly because of his use of the protectionism because it would period was merely an accidental police in a number of labour dis- raise the cost of living for the phase in the career of a political putes. He also seemed to have had poor and increase corruption as opportunist. an awakening sense of his military people lobbied for tariffs. None- Addison felt, however, that destiny. He had initially been theless, Addison felt that this this underestimated the impor- sceptical of the idea that there was not a sufficient reason for tance of Churchill’s relationship would be a European war, but Churchill to defect. After all, his with Lloyd George. They were his connections with the intelli- closest political ally, Hugh Cecil, in constant contact, usually in gence services persuaded him that subordinated his belief in free agreement and delighted in each Germany was a threat and Agadir trade to party loyalty. Although other’s company. Lloyd George confirmed this. Once he became there was no reason why he was the dominant power and immersed at the Admiralty in the could not both continue to sup- psychologically the master; preparations for war, party politics port free trade and the Tory party, indeed, Churchill described receded and the idea of coalition Churchill used the argument himself as Lloyd George’s left government grew. to justify his departure. Addison hand. Despite this, in Addison’s In summary, Addison argued also pointed out that Cecil was a view, Churchill’s role should that Churchill was never bound High Anglican whereas Church- not be under-estimated. He was in his own mind to party politics: ill had no such attachment. In often ahead of Lloyd George in he was more interesting than that. Addison’s view the driving force articulating the New Liberalism, There were ‘tough’ and ‘tender’ was Churchill’s ambition and for example over unemployment elements to his personality. Whilst free trade merely enabled him to insurance, labour exchanges, his militaristic side perhaps veered clothe his ambition in respect- minimum wage legislation and towards the Tories, his compas- ability. However, Addison did not penal reform. Sometimes they sion for the underdog and belief believe that he lacked convic- were working so closely that it in a moral force in domestic and tions, but simply that they were is not possible to tell who was international affairs was congenial

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 35 REPORT: WINSTON CHURCHILL AS A LIBERAL

was a particularly strong sense questioned how much Churchill of this at the time of the Agadir was culpable but, nonetheless, crisis and he became more closely it was a disaster for his political aligned with the Foreign Secre- career. Many supposed that he tary Sir Edward Grey. Robbins had had his come-uppance. argued that Churchill seemed to His close relationship with have a facility for getting on with Lloyd George revived his career; people and he was keen for his after an interval, Lloyd George relations with Grey to be good; reappointed him to the Cabinet Grey eventually became the god- and in a context that Churchill father to his son. was happy with. Coalition gov- Churchill assumed the post of ernment and the Asquith – Lloyd First Lord of the Admiralty with George rupture in the Liberal these issues in the background. Party had established a new con- For the Liberals his appointment text for political calculation. was something of a double-edged Robbins also argued that an sword. It caused about a third of additional factor in the chang- the party (the nonconformist/ ing political landscape was the pacifist wing) some anxiety. With Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. Liberal Imperialists at the helm This gave added impetus to a and Churchill at the Admiralty Liberal/Conservative coalition as Robbins argued that this wing of a way of preserving social order. the party feared that their leaders Churchill had a pivotal role at were taking the Liberals to places the close of the war and after it they did not want to go. became Secretary of State for the to Liberalism. He was not, how- Liberal allies: Robbins argued that Church- Colonies. Amongst his responsi- David Lloyd ever, in Addison’s view a Liberal. ill’s drive and determination were bilities was sorting out the fron- He was a hybrid, perhaps achiev- George and Winston Churchill clear. He would bully people and tiers in the Middle East. ing a balance between the errors sack them if they were not up to However, the political but- of the two parties. Nonetheless his standards. But what did he tresses supporting Churchill were he was married to a Liberal and know? In fact, Robbins argued, collapsing and the election defeat maintained a life-long affection he knew a great deal and had in  made it unclear where he for his Liberal friends. the capacity to absorb detail and should turn. Could the Liberal Professor Robbins argued master topics. Amongst the issues divide be healed? Could he turn it was important to consider a he had to consider were the to the Conservatives whilst tariffs number of aspects of Churchill’s Dreadnought crisis, the challenge remained on their agenda? He political character. As a ‘democrat’ from Germany and the main- could not contemplate a move his was the liberalism of a lim- tenance of naval supremacy at to Labour and, consequently, if ited male franchise. (Dr Addison almost any cost. He responded by Labour emerged as the coming added that Churchill continued seeking technical improvements, party Churchill would have to to oppose the extension of the such as the use of oil for fuel. move to the right. franchise whilst in Baldwin’s Robbins noted that many of the Robbins stated that he felt government.) He had no first- characteristics seen in World War that if the Liberal divide could hand experience of poverty, and Two were revealed at this time: have been healed in –, consequently his commitment to prodigal talents spread widely. Churchill might have stayed in land reform did not match that of His career, therefore, went well, the party. When it seemed that Lloyd George. He had a vision of though it distanced him from the this was not going to happen, if himself as a great military thinker. radical wing of the party. he wanted to regain high office Robbins also argued that his By the summer of  he would have to go back to the concept of what Britain and Churchill believed that a Euro- Tories. In Robbins’ view this did its Empire was and its relations pean war was bound to happen not mean for Churchill a rejec- with Europe were also signifi- and that Britain had to take part. tion of what he had said in the cant. Churchill did not probe the As Robbins noted, one would decade from . However, the nature of continental relationships expect a war to be something situation had changed radically – few cabinet ministers pursued that Churchill would do best after the First World War, and the this issue – and he had no sen- and that he would emerge as Tories simply represented the saf- timental attachment to Europe the consummate war leader. In est and most plausible ticket for or to parts of it. However, he did fact, that was not to be the case, Churchill’s own purposes. see the rivalry between states as a and Churchill suffered a major given and was aware of the strug- political catastrophe over the David Cloke is the Treasurer of the gle for mastery in Europe. There Dardanelles in . Robbins Liberal Democrat History Group.

36 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 THROUGH THE MAGNIFYING GLASS

Margaret Stacey, Banbury and the decline of the Liberal Party by Robert Ingham

he death, in April , Banbury Cross Banbury been influenced by the politics of of the eminent soci- Rather than tackle this question the great men of the town. From ologist, Margaret Stacey, head on, Stacey asked what had  to  it was represented in offers an opportunity been the impact on the Oxford- Parliament by Sir Bernhard Samu- to draw attention to shire town of Banbury of the elson, a Liberal and, interestingly in Tthe lessons for political histori- establishment of a large alumin- the light of Stacey’s analysis of the ans in her seminal work Tradition ium plant there in . Prior later period, an immigrant to the and Change: A Study of Banbury to the arrival of heavy industry, town whose agricultural machin- (OUP, ). This book, writ- Banbury had been a sleepy mar- ery works had caused the town’s ten while Stacey was working as ket town which, like the agricul- population to double in the s. a full-time mother, without the tural sector in general, was slowly After Samuelson’s retirement, the benefit of an academic appoint- declining. Now, a period of rapid North Oxfordshire constituency ment, provided new insights into expansion began: Banbury’s pop- in which Banbury now lay turned the dramatic changes within the ulation grew by  per cent from Tory, under the influence of the UK’s party system in the first half  to , with newcomers powerful local Brassey family. It of the twentieth century. Per- flooding into the new housing swung Liberal in  but was haps because it is shelved in the estates built on the outskirts of considered by Pelling to have Tory sociology section of university the town. inclinations by . libraries, it has not received due Stacey focused on the contrast In traditional Banbury, every- credit from students of politics for between the traditional social one had their place in the social its approach to the central ques- structure of pre- Banbury and structure, and knew what it was. tion of that period: how did the the values of the immigrants to the The local gentry and business- Liberal Party come to lose its town, and on how the interaction men were clearly at the pinna- central place in British politics to of the two affected political con- cle of the town’s hierarchy, after Labour? tests in the area. Banbury had long which came the artisans and the

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 37 THOUGH THE MAGNIFYING GLASS rest. Political affiliation depended The value Liberal supporters in the town. of parliamentary government primarily on religious factors: Her conclusion was that, by the on which it was based. Electoral Anglicans tended to be Conserv- of Stacey’s s, a core of mostly older choice in Banbury, and else- ative, and Methodists, of whom Conservatives and Liberals, who where, boiled down to being for the town had a significant and work to mixed socially via the Rotary or against one particular, over- active community, were Liberal. Club and Inner Wheel, consti- riding factor. With the influx of Personal relationships, for exam- students tuted the remnants of Banbury’s aluminium workers to the town, ple connections to particular of politics traditional social structure, and the key factor changed from the civic leaders, were also important. that they stood opposed to a established religion to the town’s Trade unions were barely repre- lies in its younger, socially isolated but traditional social structure. In sented in the town, where firms more dynamic, body of Labour making this choice, little room were mostly small and family- emphasis supporters, based in the non- was afforded for nuances, and run, and Labour could not gain a traditional industries and the third parties were squeezed. foothold. on local housing estates around the town. Of course, this leaves many The new entrants to the town factors, The main battleground was the questions unanswered. What hap- from  had different val- borough council, on which the pened where the Liberals were ues and customs to the existing and the Liberals were no longer repre- the main party and the Con- inhabitants and were difficult to sented and therefore looked to servatives the junior partner in place in Banbury’s social struc- importance the Conservatives to defend their the traditional social structure? ture. Nor did they necessarily interests. (Does Birch’s survey of Glos- want to ‘know their place’ in the of detailed sop help answer this question?) town’s pecking order. Most sig- local What happened in areas where nificantly, many newcomers were, Support for Stacey? the traditional structure was not or became, trade unionists, which research, The post-war period spawned a overhauled so quickly or where enabled the Labour Party to make host of books analysing the politi- trade unionism did not have such inroads into Banbury’s politics for if a full cal make-up of particular constit- an impact? Could the Liberals the first time. uencies. Most were based purely have done more to hold on to the The political contest in Ban- under- on surveys of the electorate and support of trade unionists, or did bury soon came to reflect the standing of drew few conclusions about how the link between the trade union upheaval in the town’s social the position they described had movement and the Labour Party structure. Traditional Banburi- the behav- been arrived at. make it inevitable that union ans reacted to the emergence of Birch’s account of Glossop, votes would switch away from the a strong Labour presence in the iour of the however, offers some support for Liberals? And what was the social town, especially on the borough Stacey’s argument. Glossop was basis for the Liberal revival, Stacey council, by rallying behind the electorate one of the towns in which Lib- offering no ground for optimism Conservatives, and thus the Lib- is to be eral support remained significant in this direction? erals, already the smaller party in into the s. Unlike the situ- The value of Stacey’s work the town, were squeezed. obtained. ation in Banbury, Birch found a to students of politics lies in its By , politics in Banbury stable community, in which  emphasis on local factors, and was oriented firmly along class per cent of electors had been the importance of detailed local lines, although with undercur- born in the town, and evidence research, if a full understanding rents of the previous alignment that the hierarchical social struc- of the behaviour of the elector- still visible. Of the Labour voters, ture of the nineteenth century, ate is to be obtained. While the  per cent were manual work- although in decline, was still actions of political leaders may be ers, and  per cent of manual relevant. The Liberals there too, more exciting subjects of study, workers voted Labour; but over although more numerous, were and it may be seductive to think half of the working-class heads predominantly middle-class in terms of a national swing, local of households surveyed by Stacey Nonconformists, uneasy with factors are the mainspring of were Conservative. The Tories working with Labour. our constituency-based political were strongest in the town’s tra- system. Only with the magnify- ditional industries and especially ing glass can we truly discern the with older voters. Conclusion meaning of the bigger picture, Only  per cent of Stacey’s Stacey’s account of Banbury and Margaret Stacey was both an survey sample were Liberals, half offers a convincing analysis of expert student of political culture of them being Nonconform- how social changes between at the micro-level, and a talented ists. Four members of the Liberal the wars drove the upheaval in communicator of her findings. Association’s executive commit- the British party system. Cen- tee also held lay positions in the tral, although not mentioned Robert Ingham is a historical writer, Nonconformist churches. This by Stacey, was the impact of and Biographies Editor of the Jour- was the only factor Stacey found the first-past-the-post elec- nal of Liberal History. to distinguish Conservative and toral system and the tradition

38 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 In a concluding chapter on ‘The Nature of Gladstonian REVIEWS Liberalism’, Bebbington offers a summary depiction of Glad- stone’s conservative liberalism, Politics and theology noting the ways in which the central marker of his Liberal- David W. Bebbington, The Mind of Gladstone: Religion, ism – his ‘sublime faith in free- dom’ and his willingness to use Homer, and Politics (Oxford University Press, 2004) the language of rights among Reviewed by Peter C. Erb other Liberal principles – was mediated by an emphasis on ‘loyalty, obedience, order, and n the early twenty-first cen- (usually with reference to Glad- tradition’. Likewise, Gladstone’s tury, when political theory stone’s use of the scourge or his language of equality was bal- Iis increasingly understood as attention to rescuing prostitutes) anced by a strong sense of com- the art of compromise or – per- or in a slightly more sophisti- munity, as reflected in the family, haps, more often – of power cated fashion place the Prime municipal politics, the Church, brokerage, politicians such as Minister’s long-decayed corpse the nation, and attention to a Gladstone are deemed, at best, in a therapeutic session, certain peaceful balance of the various oddities or, at worst, dangerous they can reintegrate his broken sectors within society as well as to public life. ‘Theories of politi- personality. between nations. Interests were cal economy, well and good,’ Bebbington’s study is, as a to be tested by duties, selfishness one might say. ‘Practical risk result, exceptional, attempting to controlled, justice practised in assessments regarding this or that meet the criterion of Gladstone’s law and general life. right-of-way, legitimate – as long Anglo-Catholic contemporary Alongside community, Beb- as decisions remain uncontami- and fellow-believer, Henry Parry bington points to the concomi- nated by private matters: above Liddon, that ‘when a “literary tant principle of ‘humanity’ in all by religious or philosophi- statesman” with applied skills Gladstone’s Liberalism. This cal pre-judgements.’ In such a of government does arise, “it is latter he interprets as shaped setting Gladstone must appear reasonable to combine the book initially by the politician’s enigmatic. Even the least cynical with the policy of … the minis- appropriation of the Tractarian among us recognises that politi- ter, on the grounds that both are cal leaders will be inconsistent products of a single mind”.’ and sometimes lie (or at least pre- To achieve this, Bebbington varicate); the only difficulty we leads his reader through a close, have is with their rationalisations. gracious, and clearly written Thus possibly the most remem- analysis of Gladstone’s major bered comment regarding Mr writing on political theory as Gladstone is Henry Labouchere’s: an undergraduate, the young he had no objection to Glad- Conservative parliamentarian’s stone’s habit of concealing an ace bulky volumes on Church–State up his sleeve, but he did object relations and ‘Church Prin- to the politician’s claim that the ciples’, the growing and vital Almighty had put it there. importance for him of Tractar- The problem inherent in ian views on the Incarnation, Labouchere’s commonplace the development of his sympa- – how to separate a political ace thy for Broad Church ‘liberality’ from theological explanation from the mid-s, the Prime – has troubled biographers of the Minister as a student of Homer Grand Old Man from John Mor- and Olympian religion, and his ley, at the beginning of the twen- late-life battles with unbelief. tieth century – who handled it Although he seldom draws by deliberately omitting refer- direct conclusions to explain ence to Gladstone’s theological any particular political deci- and cultural analyses – to more sion, Bebbington does provide recent writers who, with much the reader with a firm sense of of the rest of the century, tend to Gladstone’s life-long developing reduce religious life to psychol- theoretical concerns and their ogy and either raise it in some implication for his political life. salacious and elusive manner

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 39 [sic] theology of the Incarnation In a volume attempting to with that of late twentieth cen- (particularly as manifested in the outline the work of so energetic tury ‘catholic’ communitarians work of Robert Wilberforce), and wide-ranging a reader and – above all, Alastair MacIntyre and developed in Gladstone’s writer as Gladstone, readers with – with whom he associates, per- shifting perspective on Homer different specialisations will haps too closely, Charles Taylor. from the mid-s on. Beb- inevitably offer readjustments to The argument will be especially bington’s point here is striking: Bebbington’s overall narrative. interesting for readers of this in his early work on Homer Thus, one might have wished journal for whom the commu- through his Studies on Homer for a more nuanced distinc- nitarian/liberal debate continues and the Homeric Age ( vols., tion between Gladstone (and in its ‘post-liberal’ form among ) Gladstone, enunciating Wilberforce), as an Old High British political theologians such divine grace over nature, pressed Churchman, and the Tractarians as Oliver and Joan O’Donovan, a traditional and conservative and Pusey, and for a fuller expli- John Milbank and the Radical doctrine of primitive revelation cation of Gladstone’s ‘catholic’ Orthodoxy programme, and the as manifested among all cultures (not only Tractarian) doctrines of American Stanley Hauerwas with from which they later declined, the Incarnation and of nature and his revival of interest in the work and opposed the argument that grace (against a strictly Protes- of John Howard Yoder. (For a the non-Jewish religions arose tant nature against grace), which brief review see Daniel M. Bell, ‘naturally,’ that is as extensions will provide an additional and Jr., ‘State and Civil Society,’ in of reverence for major heroes or ‘conservative’ explanation for The Blackwell Companion to Politi- nature worship. A decade later, Gladstone’s ‘liberal’ change of cal Theology, ed. Peter Scott and however, with Juventus Mundi: emphasis on human potential in William T. Cavanaugh [Oxford: The Gods and Men of the Heroic Juventus Mundi. Blackwell, ], –.) What Age () the first-time Liberal At the conclusion of his Bebbington demonstrates in these Prime Minister had partially study Bebbington offers some final reflections is the significance reversed himself, acknowledging stimulating reflections, associat- of his work not only for a fuller human potential and allowing ing Gladstone’s political (and by understanding of Gladstone, but the possibility of progress. implication, religious) theory for the challenges faced in the

40 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 REVIEWS deracinated and increasing multi- versity, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada Simon and Grimond. Neither ethnic and multi-cultural liberal and is presently completing a three- Aneurin Bevan nor Jennie Lee democracies of our own day. volume critical edition of the correp- are included. Some are included sondence of Henry Edward Manning who made their main contribu- Peter C. Erb is Professor of Religion and William E. Gladstone, –. tion outside parliament, among and Culture at Wilfrid Laurier Uni- them highly distinguished histo- rian and writer Robert Rhodes James, NCB boss Lord Robens (both also former MPs) and trades union leader Moss Evans. Former politicians remembered Oliver Baldwin is here, but not Stanley. The Welsh are certainly Iain Dale (ed.): The Politico’s Book of the Dead under-represented: only the two (Politico’s, 2003) entries by the present reviewer relate to Welsh people. Reviewed by Dr J. Graham Jones One feature of particular inter- est is the inclusion of the fictional characters Prime Minister Jim ur debt to Politico’s over Others were originally penned Hacker and his top civil servant recent years is enormous. as newspaper obituaries and sidekick Sir Humphrey Appleby Since its foundation tributes. Some were written spe- O – their obituaries skilfully crafted in the late s, the press has cifically for the present volume. by their creators in Yes, Minister. published a steady stream of Inevitably, they contain several There is an entry, too, for fictional political analyses, biographies and factual errors, misjudgements and Labour Prime Minister Harry volumes of memoirs and remi- minor misprints. Perkins, most engagingly written niscences. Now that the com- Equally inevitably, they vary by Chris Mullin, author of A Very pany has recently joined forces considerably in style, slant, length British Coup. with Methuen, it is to be hoped and detail. By far the longest Strangely, some of the politi- that this astonishing publication entry (over ten pages) is reserved cians listed as entries in the pub- record will long continue. This for Labour Prime Minister lishers’ information sheet are not recent offering, The Politico’s Harold Wilson (–). The featured in the book itself! These Book of the Dead, is the work of volume also has a conspicuous include Jo Grimond (hailed as the company’s guiding light, Iain up-to-date air. Several of the ‘maverick Liberal leader’), Sir Dale, who has edited this work entries are on individuals who Gerald Nabarro (‘bon viveur and with his customary accuracy and died during the first half of , distinction. He has previously among them prominent former edited a number of political Liberal MP Richard Wainwright, works (many concerning Baron- former Labour Cabinet minister ess Thatcher), is well known as Mrs Renée Short and prime a political commentator and is ministerial consort Sir Denis currently Director of the recently Thatcher. The most recent of all formed Conservative History is former Conservative MP Sir Group. Gerald Vaughan, who died on In this work no fewer than  July . The first entry in forty-one writers have contrib- the book is devoted to the little- uted to the hundred entries on known Dadabhai Naoroji (– a motley assortment of politi- ), the black MP for the cal figures. Some are eminent Finsbury Central division dur- national figures; others are ing the – parliament and relative unknowns. About three- the first ever non-white to sit quarters of the book is devoted in the Commons – long before to people who have died since the much publicised election of . Many of the entries have four coloured Labour MPs in the appeared in print before, some in  general election. the highly acclaimed Dictionary of It would be easy to cavil at Liberal Biography () (includ- the editor’s choice of worthies ing the two entries by the present for inclusion. Former Prime reviewer: E. Clement Davies and Ministers like Churchill, Attlee Lady Megan Lloyd George) or in and Eden do not feature in this its companion volume the Dic- book. Nor do Liberal leaders tionary of Labour Biography (). from a bygone age like Samuel,

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 41 REVIEWS multiple Rolls Royce owner’) editor had, of course, to make his rural areas, as the qualifications and David Penhaligon (‘eccen- choice. for voting were harmonised with tric Liberal MP’). Doubtless, The volume has an especially those that already existed for the last-minute editorial revision led eye-catching dustjacket, but has urban boroughs. Large numbers to their being excluded from the no illustrations or cartoons. Their of agricultural labourers now had final published text. inclusion would undoubtedly the vote for the first time. How Women figures are generally have added to the appeal of the would they use it? well represented. These include book. But this impressive tome colourful individuals like Margot will certainly interest, amuse, Asquith and her equally dynamic enthral and entertain a large ‘Why should we be beggars stepdaughter Lady Violet Bon- number of readers, young and with a ballot in our hand?’ ham Carter. As noted, Lady old alike. A wide readership is In , Liberals won  per Megan is here (but not her father, assured. One anticipates eagerly cent of the  constituencies or her brother Gwilym, Viscount the appearance of further works that Lynch defines as ‘rural and Tenby). Strangely, there is no from this enterprising publishing semi-rural’. In , they won  entry for former cabinet minis- house. per cent. But these were the only ters like Eirene White (–) elections at which Liberals won a or her lifelong bête noir, Labour’s Dr J. Graham Jones is Senior Archi- rural majority. In  they sank famous ‘Red Queen’ Barbara vist and Head of the Welsh Political as low as  per cent. The trend Castle, later the Baroness Castle Archive at the National Library of of the rural Liberal vote reflected of Blackburn (–). The Wales, Aberystwyth the national trend and, obviously, national issues, whether home rule in  or the Boer War in , had a significant impact. But were there other factors that ‘God made the land for the people’ had a peculiar influence on rural seats – and could Liberals have Patricia Lynch: The Liberal Party in Rural England 1885– exploited them better? These 1910: Radicalism and Community (Clarendon Press, are the questions at the heart of Lynch’s analysis. 2003) Her solu- The major problem she Reviewed by Tony Little faced is that Liberal Party his- tion has tory has focused on leadership activities and on the limited, n the first half of the twenti- a parody of a broadly accepted been to mostly urban, archives. Her solu- eth century the Liberal Party view, it is one that has not been draw on tion has been to draw on local Imoved from winning its great- adequately challenged. And while newspapers, combined in places est victory to near-extinction. Patricia Lynch does not pretend local news- with the census and directory In the same period the Labour to offer an alternative thesis for data usually exploited by social Party moved from insignificance the twentieth century – her book papers, rather than political historians. to the creation of a semi-socialist does not venture even as far as Victorian journalists thought state in Britain. Predictably, his- the Great War – she does chal- combined nothing of taking a full page to torians have brought these two lenge the seeds from which the record a meeting that political things together and constructed determinist view grows. in places activists would struggle to con- theories about their inevitability: The general election of  with the vince the local paper to report the Liberal Party was doomed was fought under new and today. A comprehensive analysis once large numbers of the work- unprecedented conditions. Most census of the  constituencies by this ing class were added to the elec- constituencies now returned a method would occupy a life- toral roll and, if not then, once single member, and this feature and direc- time rather than the ten years the country had become adjusted has been very carefully analysed taken from a ‘vague proposal to the mass mobilisation and state for the benefits that it conferred tory data for a doctoral thesis’ (p. v) to direction of industry required on one party over another. The usually Lynch’s published monograph. to win the Great War. Naturally, other, and more important, fea- Her sample has been limited to Liberals made matters worse for ture was the two-thirds growth exploited three constituencies in North themselves by their misguided in the electorate in England and Essex, South Oxfordshire and policies from Gladstone and Wales, which had been enfran- by social Holmfirth in the West Riding of home rule onwards, and by chised by the Third Reform Yorkshire, but this is sufficient engaging in fratricidal quarrels, Act (– per cent growth in rather than to secure different agricultural but … and here clichés about Ireland and Scotland). But this political and religious circumstances as beach equipment and ocean increase was not spread evenly; well as to include a semi-rural liners begin to occur. If this is rather, it was concentrated in historians. area with mining and industry.

42 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 REVIEWS

It has allowed her to construct a the party suffered more from cohesive narrative and to argue the self-imposed rural disci- that the factors discovered in the pline of community harmony. analysis of these seats are sugges- Liberal propaganda against the tive of general Liberal strengths local aristocracy, whether from and weaknesses which have hith- democratic, class or land-reform erto been neglected in the twin motives, disturbed this natural assumptions that rural seats were neighbourliness and was both a Tory seats while urban politics valuable party weapon and con- became dominated by class. fusingly counterproductive, par- Her technique is particularly ticularly during local elections. useful in analysing the social The disharmony represented by and occupational structure of the relatively rare general elec- the party’s membership by fol- tion was tolerated and ritualised. lowing the names on testimo- Rowdy meetings and the chair- nials or petitions through to ing, in torchlight procession local directories and the census. round the towns and villages, Unfortunately the analysis is of the victorious candidate in a more static than dynamic, both hand-drawn carriage draped in because it relies on inevitably party colours, had allowed the limited sources of membership participation of the poorer sec- data and because she had access tions of the community before to nothing later than the  they had the vote – and this census data when she carried out persisted after . But in local the analysis. Naturally, the con- elections candidates generally felt stituency parties show an influx obliged to adopt a different party of new working-class members, label, such as Progressive, or to but it seems that such members abandon party labels altogether. were unable to gain a propor- Even well-recognised party tionate share of official positions, activists stood as independents. ‘Why should we work hard which were largely retained by Liberal earnestness was an and let the landlords take the middle classes. She is also able even bigger drawback. Liberals the best?’ to demonstrate that the more saw party activity primarily as Lynch argues that, in the elec- densely populated constituencies a means of education and pros- tion of , Liberals had the found it easier to establish flour- elytising – a common failing advantage of a rural radical ishing party branches. While this to this day – with lectures on tradition dating back to the might be expected – the bigger home rule or temperance and time of the Chartists and could the catchment group the more a horse-drawn van touring the draw on long-standing rural scope for recruiting enough countryside, manned ‘by several discontent over the control members to form a viable group young men from Oxford Uni- exercised over village lives and – the proof is in itself valuable, as versity’. The Conservatives, by livelihoods by the landowner are the arguments she advances contrast, relied heavily on the and the Anglican clergy. Liber- to explain the competitive Primrose League, whose activi- als raised the prospect of more advantages that Conservatives ties were apparently social and extensive peasant proprietor- had over the Liberals. inclusive even of supporters of ship through proposals for another party. Conservatives allotments – the famous ‘three were also quicker than Liberals acres and a cow’ – and attacked ‘Liberals will not falter from to recruit female activists. Even- the local elite and tithes, which, the fight’ tually, Liberals learnt the ben- though not paid by agricultural Lynch argues that these advan- efits of fêtes and ‘programmes of labourers, were seen as a factor tages were as much cultural as interesting and amusing sports’. behind low agricultural wages. political. One of the great fears I particularly liked the Gretna Irish home rule dominated the of the Liberal leadership was Green cycle race in which ‘pairs elections of  to  and that the agricultural labour- of ladies and gentlemen were the reduced focus on domestic ers and the small tenants would required to ride hand-in-hand policy held the party back in vote for their Tory landlords out to a table “where both must sign both rural and urban areas. But of deference or fear. Although name, address, and occupation, the impact was more acute in some active party workers were and re-mount and ride hand- rural areas, which were suf- evicted and a few clerics refused in-hand to [the] winning post”.’ fering from an agricultural traditional handouts to rural Such fêtes could attract several depression and a decline in radicals, particularly in , thousand visitors. population.

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 43 REVIEWS Within this overall picture, Her the fear of higher food prices and Independent Labour Party from Lynch draws some interesting low wages was a greater worry to Bradford to seek a working-class distinctions between the diverse achieve- rural voters and their wives. The candidate. While this proved experiences of her three constit- prospect of land reform looked impossible in the  and  uencies with different crop and ments more attractive, and Liberal general elections, where policy pasture dependencies: the Liberal speakers were able to draw on differences between Labour Party’s promotion of temperance represent a the folk memories of the poor and Liberal were slight, activists was never going to be a success challenge, conditions before the abolition were determined to try again. among barley-growing farmers of the Corn Laws in the ‘hungry By the  election, not only and their labourers in Essex, for which I forties’. had Wilson and the Liberal gov- example. She is also able to draw ernment alienated a section of attention to instances where local hope will the more socialist workers but activists took their own initia- ‘Make them pay their taxes union members had grown to tive in promoting radical cam- be taken on the land just like the represent nearly half the elec- paigns more relevant to the local up, to build rest’ torate – seemingly a good base populace. However, while she The People’s Budget of  for a new Labour candidate. recognises the existence of Lib- a broader offered rural Liberal campaign- The Liberals concentrated on eral Unionists, it is disappointing ers two apparently popular ral- traditional radical policies and that she did not directly explore picture lying cries – an attack on rich not the politics of class. Wilson the impact on local Liberal activ- aristocrats anxious to overthrow retained the seat, losing support ity of the disruption caused to of Liberal the will of the Commons just among the textile workers but the party by home rule and how activity at to avoid higher income tax, and holding on to the mining vote. it was reflected in the social the prospect of a new tax which After Wilson retired in , composition of her local parties. a constitu- might encourage the renting of Labour put up a mineworker but Almost certainly a factor in the uncultivated land. So why did despite an improved poll lost to  election, the split probably ency level the Liberals lose half their rural an unknown Liberal stockbroker still worked against the party in seats in the two elections of from Manchester. . in this cru- ? Apart from intimidation, Patricia Lynch has used her The ‘khaki election’ of  cial period Lynch suggests that the rising sources well and provides sub- marked a Conservative high cost of living was a major factor stantial evidence for the local point. Rural areas were as patri- and into militating against Liberal argu- arguments she advances. While otic as any city, and Liberal ments for free trade and also that this is clearly an academic work, preaching against the Boer War the second the Conservatives, with more to which demands some familiarity did not go down well in the lose, were better motivated to with the period under consid- countryside, which had con- decade of mobilise their forces and attract eration, it is well recommended tributed disproportionately to the twen- previous abstainers. to the attention of the general the armed forces. Thereafter, But what about the Labour reader. Within the evidence, however, the Tories slowly lost tieth cen- challenge? Of Lynch’s three her work is persuasive: neither control of rural affections. The constituencies only one pro- a class-based politics nor a Tory use of Chinese indentured labour tury. vided the right background for countryside was inevitable. The on the Rand tarnished the vic- a detailed analysis. While in the unanswered question is whether tory in South Africa; poorly paid most rural areas agricultural her small sample is representa- agricultural workers could read- unions had gained and lost a tive of rural voters more gener- ily identify with their wretched foothold, only Holmfirth con- ally. Her achievements represent conditions. The Tory  tained the textile factories and a challenge, which I hope will Education Act was very damag- coal mines that provided a sound be taken up, to build a broader ing in sparsely populated areas, basis for union survival. Holm- picture of Liberal activity at a where a government-funded firth’s Labour movement origi- constituency level in this cru- Anglican village school would nated among the miners, who cial period and into the second preclude the possibility of any had traditionally been strong decade of the twentieth century. non-denominational education. Liberals. Difficulties for the Lib- She has set a standard well worth The Act also made education erals began towards  when emulating. a county council responsibil- coal prices and wages were ity, whereas women had a vote under pressure. Unionised work- Tony Little is Chair of the Liberal only at the district council level. ers tried to make support for Democrat History Group. The head- Joseph Chamberlain’s tariff an Eight Hours Bill a condition ing and sub-headings are from ‘The reform campaign was not an of their support but the Liberal Land’, a song championed by the pro- immediate Conservative vote- candidate, H. J. Wilson, resisted. ponents of Henry George’s land value loser – it offered the superficially A short-term reconciliation was tax policy and adopted by Liberals in attractive prospect of protection followed by a break in which the  elections (source: Liberator to agriculture – but over time the miners teamed up with the Song Book,  edition).

44 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 REVIEWS Things that never happened whilst considering the possible outcomes of the Liberal Party Duncan Brack and Iain Dale Book (eds.): Prime Minister disappearing totally in the s, throws out one of the best. He Portillo and other things that never happened: A points out how thirty-four collection of political counterfactuals (Politico’s, 2003) Liberal candidates missed by only , votes or less in  Reviewed by Mark Pack before moving on to the grim tale of the Liberal Party’s his- tory over the next decade. But hat if’ histories are often “sealed” train had not reached it leaves hanging the thought of disdained by those who Petrograd in ?’ in particular how close the Liberals came to see themselves as seri- highlight the benefits of this W coming out of the  elec- ‘ous historians, but this intriguing approach – which makes the tion with a vote share of  per collection – edited by the eclec- book a useful primer on many cent in the seats it contested and tic combination of the Liberal major events, in addition to the with around fifty MPs, including Democrats’ former Director of stimulating plots of the counter- Grimond, Sinclair and Beveridge. Policy and the Conservatives’ factuals themselves. Would the Liberals have ended prospective candidate for North As Szamuely suggests, without up with the balance of power Norfolk – does much to give Lenin’s arrival it is difficult to see in ? Given the ideological counterfactuals a good name. Russian history taking a course and personal tensions within the The range of contributions anything nearly as bloody as it party, this alternative history is covers most of the main events did in the s, yet it is also dif- unlikely to have ended happily. of British high politics in the ficult to see how anything other But it would have been rather twentieth century, with a couple than some alternative form of more spectacular than the dismal of foreign episodes – Lenin and authoritarian government would march to near-death that actually JFK – thrown in. This plays to have taken power. Whilst chang- followed for the Liberals. the editors’ strengths, as the list of ing the names amongst the dicta- One of the other most contributors is impressive, with tors may be a relatively minor intriguing morsels is that pro- nearly every chapter being either matter of detail in the larger pic- duced by Dianne Hayter in from a recognised academic ture, even a tiny change in policy her chapter, ‘What if Benn expert in the field or from a over agriculture or purges could had defeated Healey in ?’ practitioner with inside experi- have resulted in a huge difference ence of the events. to the lives of millions. Economic and social events Similarly, in Britain, Grays- generally feature only as a back- on’s alternative history results ground to the political stories. in much the same overall out- There is, for example, no ‘what come by  – how much if’ on OPEC’s decision to hike difference would it really have oil prices in the s, despite made if Churchill had been in the oil price increase being one a different party for some years of the defining features of British in the inter-war period? But, politics in the s. The range again, even a small change in is also firmly twentieth century economic policy after the Wall – there is no speculation over Street Crash of  could have close nineteenth-century politi- made a big difference to the cal events, such as the one-vote day-to-day lives of millions. majority in the Commons for The underlying question the Great Reform Bill in . of the extent to which big Indeed, the book is a collec- personalities can shape history tion of political histories in the is a constant one for histori- traditional story-telling sense. ans. Although it is implicitly Most chapters include a clear touched on by many of the exposition of the actual events chapters in the book, it is leading up to the historical twist. slightly disappointing that the Richard Grayson’s counterfac- issue is rarely covered explicitly. tual, ‘What if the Liberal Party Nevertheless, the clarity had emerged united from the of the contributions provides First World War? and Helen many other interesting morsels Szamuely’s on ‘What if Lenin’s to ponder. Michael McManus,

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 45 REVIEWS She points out that had there The collec- – with the exception of Greg them in the mouths of others been a subtle difference in Rosen – believe their own twists with their opposite meaning in a the way in which abstentions tion tries could wipe away the long-term rather groan-inducing sequence were counted, Benn would economic problems facing the of too-clever plays on words. indeed have won the contest for to steer country, and in particular the But it is an all the more enjoy- Labour’s deputy leader. poisonous hostility of much of able read for that. As to be expected in a col- a careful industrial relations, is as striking lection of twenty-one alterna- course as it is surprising. Mark Pack works in the Liberal tive histories, there are varying The collection tries to steer a Democrats’ Campaigns & Elections degrees of plausibility. Anne between careful course between academic Department, mainly on IT and Perkin’s account of Gaitskell respectability, with the serious legal matters. He has a doctorate in rather than Bevan dying in  academic list of contributors and defensive nineteenth-century Yorkshire elections results in a remarkably harmo- introduction, and playful market- from the University of York. nious outcome for the Labour respect- ability, illustrated by the quote Party overall, which, given the ability, with from Chairman Mao on the  To complete the set, one of the con- many vituperative personalities cover (when asked what would tributors is the chair of the Labour History Group. of the time, is a little difficult the serious have happened if Khrushchev  Though the insiders are just occa- to believe. Probably the most rather than Kennedy had been sionally not as knowledgeable as disappointing chapter is Bernard list of con- assassinated, he said: ‘Well, I’ll tell perhaps they should be – as with Ingham’s on Westland, which you one thing, Aristotle Onas- Iain Dale’s implausible account is more a justification of him- tributors sis wouldn’t have married Mrs of Michael Portillo not knowing his election result until the public self and of Mrs Thatcher than a Khrushchev’). and defen- announcement from the Returning counterfactual. An entertaining Some of the contributors Officer. In reality, candidates and read, but not really the right sive intro- occasionally fall prey to this agents are told the figures before chapter for this book. lure of tweeness, as with John being put on public parade for the Several other chapters high- duction, Charmley’s reworking of the formal announcement. light one of the conundrums of succession to Chamberlain. His s British politics. In many and playful account of Halifax as Prime The paperback edition of Prime different ways Labour might Minister takes some of Church- Minister Portillo will be available market- from late September 2004. have done better in the short ill’s most famous quotes and puts term (e.g. if Scargill had called ability, and won a strike ballot amongst the NUM) or have done worse illustrated (e.g. if the Alliance had squeaked past it in terms of vote share in by the ). But doing worse in the quote from short run was arguably better LETTERS for Labour in the long run, by Chairman providing the necessary shock behind Kinnock’s modernisation Mao on the Sir Clement Freud programme. The counter-factuals As someone who was consider- peerage when Stephen Ross, MP that have Labour doing better in cover. ably involved in Sir Clement for the Isle of Wight until , the short run largely also paint Freud’s successful by-election lobbied to be given priority and a worse longer-term picture for campaign, I would like to com- was given it by the powers that the party. ment on Daniel Crewe’s obser- be. Subsequently he slipped off This fundamental pessimism vation that ‘although he was the list completely as others were about Labour in the s con- knighted in , Freud did not given more priority. trasts with the optimism about get a peerage’ (‘One of nature’s It might be suggested that British politics in the counter- Liberals’, biography of Freud, Cle was a little lightweight in factuals of the s and s, Journal of Liberal History ). national policy matters, but he where the twists usually results in I regard this as a shameful blot was considerably less lightweight, events turning out for the better on the party’s record. Cle well and a great deal more reliable, rather than for the worse, from deserved a peerage, having held than Stephen who, I remember the perspective of the chapter’s his seat for eighteen years and when I was Director of Policy author. For this period, the coun- having displayed conspicuous Promotion, for his infuriating terfactuals are extremely positive loyalty to the leaders of the party. indecisiveness and futile attacks – imagining that a few changes He would have been an asset to of conscience. Cle has also lived in events could have heralded the party and to the House if he considerably longer! a happy moderate government had joined us. Lord Beaumont of Whitley without serious economic crises. As I understand it, Cle was top That several different authors of the list to be nominated for a

46 Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 and a committee meeting • Web: www.cityoflondon. attendance register –. gov.uk/lma ARCHIVES The deposit also included • Details of how to get to minutes of the Holborn the record office are on Liberal Association –, our website. Coventry archives minutes of the Peckham and • Opening hours: . – Camberwell Liberal Associa- . Monday, Wednesday by M.J. Hinman tion – and an account and Friday; . – . book of the Willesden Liberal Tuesday and Thursday Association –. A cata- We are also open . – . oventry Archives’ col- are also magazines for logue of these records is avail- on selected Saturdays during lection area covers Foleshill and North-East able at London Metropolitan the year. These are usually the Cthe present city, so Warwickshire Liberals, – Archives under reference second and fourth Saturdays includes suburbs which have  (PA ); and lecture- number ACC/, and the in the month, but it is best had their own local party notes and correspondence records themselves are open either to check the website or and ward organisations, as in of Alderman W.H. Grant, for consultation. phone in advance of a Satur- Foleshill and Earlsdon. – (PA). An additional deposit was day visit to confirm that we The Liberal Party was All the above collections received on  September are open. stronger in the city than were are open for immediate , consisting of further A reader’s card is not the Conservatives during the inspection except those of minute books, account books required to visit the record nineteenth century, but it the Earlsdon branch, permis- and administration and cor- office. declined during the s to sion to view which must be respondence files dating from Catalogued material can the extent that an informal obtained until  December  to . This deposit be accessed via the catalogues electoral pact was made with , inclusive, from the sec- has not yet been catalogued, which are all on open access them, formalised as the Pro- retary of Coventry Liberal however, and is therefore in our public rooms. Original gressive Party in , which Democrats. available for consultation documents can be ordered lasted until . • Address: Mandela House, only with  hours notice. from these catalogues and Records held relate to the Bayley Lane, Coventry • London Metropolitan will be produced from our Coventry Liberal Association, CV RG Archives is based in strongrooms approximately – (PA); Coven- • Tel:    Fax: Islington, at  North-  minutes later. try Liberal Club, –    ampton Road, London, At present there is no and – (liquidation) • Email: ECR HB. web access to our catalogues (PA , ); Coventry [email protected]. • Tel:    so remote ordering is not Progressive Party, – uk • email: ask.lma@ possible. (PA, ); Foleshill Liberal • Web: www.coventry- corpoflondon.gov.uk Club, – (PA); Lib- city.co.uk/archives/ eral Party, Earlsdon branch, home.htm – (PA); and Social • Open Monday . – ; Democratic Party, – Tuesday – Friday . (PA, , ). There – . Email mailing list If you would like to receive up-to-date information on the Liberal Democrat History Group’s activities, including advance notice of meetings, and new History Group publications, you can sign up to our email mailing list: visit the History Group’s website (www. The London Liberal Foundation and liberalhistory.org.uk) and fill in the details on the ‘Contact’ page. London Liberal Party records held at London Metropolitan Archives Media update: volunteer wanted by Nicola Avery One of the services we aim to provide via the website is a guiide to media sources, including: • A bibliography of articles on the Liberal Democrats in the main he London Liberal reorganisation in October newspapers and magazines Foundation was . • Articles in academic journals on the Liberal Democrats formed in  to Records of the London • Articles of historical interest in the main Liberal Democrat jour- T nals (Liberal Democrat News, Liberator, Reformer) assist in maintaining Liberal Liberal Foundation were Associations in the London deposited at London Met- Unfortunately the individuals who first collected this data for us are area, to secure candidates, ropolitan Archives on long- no longer available, and the listings exist only for 1988–96 (for the and to further political term loan on  February first two) and 1995–98 (for the third). education. Its name was . These consist of council Anyone who would like to volunteer to update and maintain any of changed to the London Lib- and committee minutes these listings would be very welcome: please contact the Editor at eral Party during a general –, accounts – [email protected].

Journal of Liberal History 44 Autumn 2004 47 A Liberal Democrat History Group fringe meeting ROY JENKINS – REFORMER, VISIONARY, STATESMAN Reforming Home Secretary, successful Chancellor of the Exchequer, principled European, groundbreaking President of the European Commission and distinguished man of letters, Roy Jenkins had a deep impact on British politics and inspired generations of liberals. This meeting marks the publication of Roy Jenkins: A Retrospective (Oxford University Press), a collection of essays by friends and associates from every stage of his life, edited by Andrew Adonis and Keith Thomas.

Speakers: Shirley Williams (Leader of the Liberal Democrat peers), Peter Riddell (The Times) and Dick Taverne (former Home Office and Treasury minister). Chair: Bill Rodgers.

8.00pm Sunday 19th September 2004 Shaftesbury Room, Highcliff Marriott Hotel, Bournemouth

A Liberal Democrat History Group special event Journal online subscriptions TOUR OF THE REFORM CLUB now available The Liberal Democrat History The Reform Club, in London’s Pall Mall, was founded in 1836 and its Group is pleased to announce the availability of a new Grade I listed Clubhouse, designed by Sir Charles Barry, opened in subscription service: online 1841. For much of the nineteenth century it housed the headquarters subscriptions. of the Liberal Party election organisation. Every Whig and Liberal In addition to printed copies, Prime Minister from Melbourne to Lloyd George was a member and online subscribers will be able to access pdf files of several Prime Ministers were elected Liberal Party leader in the Club current and past Journals via library. the Group’s website, www. liberalhistory.org.uk. Online subscribers will be sent a The Liberal Democrat History Group offers Journal of Liberal History password (changed each year) for access to the protected readers the opportunity to participate in a guided tour of the Reform area of the site. Club. The tour is limited to the first 18 applicants who request places Online subscriptions cost from the History Group’s Secretary, Graham Lippiatt, at: £35.00 per year. Overseas [email protected]; or (non-UK) online subscriptions are available for £40.00 per 24 Balmoral Road, South Harrow, Middlesex, HA2 8TD year, or £100 for three years. Older copies of the Journal 5.15pm Wednesday 27th October 2004 will continue to be available to all visitors to the site. Issues The tour will be followed (at 6.30) by a History Group meeting, open 1–24 are currently available as to all – further details to follow pfd files.