4 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS ' Joseph Chamberlain : An Honest Biography ' Times : ' Shows narrative power, good taste, selection, and a real sense of style.' AtheneBum : ' Patient research and sound judgment : a volume which we can praise.' Spectator : The author ' shows himself capable of summing up a great career in the style of the historian.' Academy : ' It is from beginning to end as enthralling as any novel we have read.' Yorkshire Post : ' Such impartiality is the most piquant thing we have had in political memoirs for a long time.' Westminster Gazette : ' A thoroughly readable book which places an interesting Ufe in something Uke the just proportion of its various divisions.' Methodist Times : ' No one interested in contemporary politics can fail to be fascinated by the passionless picture of the great passion-exciter of our time.* Claudius Clear in British Weekly : ' It is a book so excellent and so sound that it must take a permanent place in the hterature of British pohtics, and no living politician who takes his work in earnest can afford to neglect it.' JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/chamberlainbioOOmackrich JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN AN HONEST BIOGRAPHY By ALEXANDER MACKINTOSH " Of the simplest character to his sworn admirers or sworn enemies, one of the most compUcated to those who are neither" (Lord Rosebery on a survey of Napolecn). " Une comite qui est entr6e dans I'auguste pI6iade et chemine avec elle sans avoir rien perdu de ses attributs de comite" (M. Boutmy, in preface to AchilleViallate's book on Mr. Chamberlain). HODDER AND STOUGHTON LONDON NEW YORK TORONTO First edition published in igo6. Second edition igi4' NOTE SCARCELY any person could trace the life of Mr. Chamberlain with equal sympathy for every portion of his varied career. The present writer, in describing the strange transformation of the Radical, the Libera- tionist, the Free Trader into the tariff advocate, the friend of Church schools and the colleague of Conservatives, admires at several stages, and dares to dissent at others ; he seeks to present a faithful account at all points. His qualification is that of an observer. From the Gallery of the House of Commons he watched Mr. Chamberlain for a quarter of a century, with never-failing, never- slackening interest. For the candour of his record he offers no apology. * It is,' as Horace Walpole said of Chatham, ' a man I am describing, and one whose great- ness will bear to have his blemishes fairly delivered to you — not from a love of censure, but of truth.* vu. 321986 PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION ALTHOUGH on its first appearance in 1906 the fairness of this biography was recognized by most of the reviewers, certain critics on each side were displeased by its candour. To them there was no riddle in Mr. Chamberlain's life, no complexity, no mixture of motive ; he was either saint or devil, a penitent who after sowing wild political acts reaped the harvest of a perfect patriotism, or a man of life-long selfish ambition who having failed in one course recklessly tried another. According to the extreme eulogists of Mr. Chamberlain the writer was stupid because he failed to detect in all his incon- sistencies ' a self-development proceeding in harmony with a par- ticular set of principles.' On the other hand, according to detractors, the narrative itself plainly showed that the Radical who became the champion of Conservatives was, as Mr. Goldwin Smith said, a political gambler, laying his stakes now on rouge, now on noir. It is, perhaps, a comfortable thing to be positive, and yet one is tempted to retort, with Cromwell, ' Brethren, believe that it is possible you may be mistaken.' If proof of the balance maintained in the book were needed the writer might supply it by setting the one critic against the other. Those who seek a partial view of Mr. Chamberlain will find it in many volumes. The ' claim to continuity ' is set forth, for instance, by Mr. H. C. Pedder in a study published in 1902. ' When we get' he says, ' a clear idea as to the meaning of Mr. Chamberlain's present Imperialism we soon discover that it rests primarily on the develop>- ment of those democratic principles which he advocated at the begin- ning of his political career.' A similarly complacent idea was ex- pressed by the ' Owd Poskitt ' of Mr. J. S. Fletcher when he remarked that there was ' noa wobblin' and ramblin' about Joaziph ' because Joaziph said in 1903 what he himself had been saying for years ! The opposite view, held by men of the type of Mr. Henry Labouchere, has been put into pimgent language by Mr. J. M. Robertson, who writes that after 1887 Mr. Chamberlain's back was turned on all good ideals. ' To the normal malice of Conservatism he brought the abnormal ix PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION malice of the renegade, and in so far as Conservatism adopted him it became visibly worse, substituting for the older temper of honest repugnance to change a new chicajie of official strategy directed by no higher aim than the frustration of the aims of the other side.' In an estimate of Mr, Chamberlain, much turns on consistency. It is true, as Lowell has remarked, that ' the foolish and the dead alone never change their opinion. ' Such a dictum, however, is not a sufficient guide. The circumstances must be considered. ' Alteration of opinion, ' said Mr, Gladstone, ' is not always to be blamed, but it is always to be watched with vigilance ; always to be challenged and put upon its trial.' This was his own fate in the affair of Home Rule, and it was Sir Robert Peel's fate with regard to the com duty. All political leaders change their opinions, but the present volume shows that the changes in Mr. Chamberlain's case were unusually numerous and violent, that they affected nearly every great secular subject discussed in his time, and that they occurred not only in the judgments of his youth, but in those of his mature and ripe manhood ; he renounced, indeed, during the last two decades of his career, not merely his view of one great subject, but most of the beliefs which he had professed till the age of fifty. Yet the writer, instead of pronouncing a verdict upon his motives, submits the whole case to the jury. He tries to describe what Mr. Chamberlain said and did, and how he looked and spoke ; to describe the scenes amid which he moved and the contem- poraries among whom he mingled, and the impression which he pro- duced upon Parliament and people. But why ' honest,' asks a censor. ' What has " honest " to do with biography ? ' Let Queen Katharine answer — After my death, I wish no other herald, No other speaker of my living actions, To keep mine honour from corruption, But such an honest chronicler as Griffith. CONTENTS PAGB PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION ix NOTABLE DATES IN MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S LIFE . . . xix I.— ANCESTRY AND YOUTH Ancestry — Schools — Father's Business — Reading — Helping , . . x II.— LIFE IN BIRMINGHAM Screw Manufacturer — Debating Society — Marriages — Business Rivals — Interests of Workmen — Personal Glimpses — ^Town Council — Civic Reform — Early Friends and Associates ...... 7 III.— RADICAL DISSENTERS National Education League — Education Act — Mr. Forster and Noncon- formists — Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Miall — ^Mr. Morley and Mr, Glad- stone — Revolt of Dissenters — ^The New Leader . . . . x6 IV.— EARLY POLITICAL CAREER First Speech — Liberal Association — Protests against Peers — Fortnightly Article on ' The Liberal Party and its Leaders ' — First Programme — Lord John Russell's Comment — Democratic Leader — Candidate for SheflReld — Advanced Views — Champion of Working Men and Dissenters — Defeat — General Election and Mr. Forster — Attack on Mr. Gladstone — ' The Next Page '....... v.— REPUBLICANISM AND ROYALTY Republican Sentiments — Reform Congress — A Loyal Toast and a Strange Speech — Visit of Prince and Princess of Wales to Birmingham — ' The Republican Mayor ' — A Courtier — The Times and Punch . . 33 xi xii CONTENTS VI.— RADICAL MEMBER PAGE First Election — ' Our Joseph ' — Attack on Disraeli — Apology — Strictures of London Press — Introduction to Parliament — Maiden Speech — Favourable Impression — Gothenburg System — Eastern Question — Radicals and Leadership — Mr. Gladstone's Visit — ' Tyranny of Turks ' — Action in Parliament — ' Vulgar Patriotism ' . . . .38 VII.— CONSERVATIVE BOGEY ' Chamberlain's Plans ' — The Caucus — Alarm of Timid PoUticians — Flog- ging in the Army — Obstruction — Irish Friends — Attack on Lord Hart- ington — Abuse of Tories — ' This Kind of BilUngsgate ' — Sir WilUam Harcourt's Visit . . . . . . . . . . 47 VIII.— LIBERAL MINISTER AND ' PRO-BOER ' Liberal Cabinet — The Radicals — Sir Charles Dilke — Mr. Chamberlain's Appointment — Colleagues — The Transvaal : Annexation ; Retroces- sion — Spokesman for the Government ...... 53 IX.— IRELAND AND EGYPT Impression of Mr. Parnell — Coercion — Mr. Morley and the Pall Mall Gazette — Kilmainham Treaty — Mr. Forster again — The Missing Para- graph — Tory Charges of Intrigue — Personal Rancour — Mr. Cham- berlain and Chief Secretaryship — Phoenix Park Murders — Egyptian Policy — The Only Jingo — A New Note. ..... 59 X.— REFORMER AND FREE TRADER Board of Trade — Fiscal Policy — Trenchant Speeches — Bankruptcy Re- form — ^Merchant Shipping Bill — ' The Cherub ' — Hostility of Ship- owners and Conservatives — Ofifer to Resign ..... 69 XL— TWO DEMOCRATS ' That Birmingham Demagogue ' — ' They Toil not, neither do they Spin ' — Murmurs and Protests — ' The Daring DuckUng ' — ^The Fourth Party — Lord Randolph Churchill — Personal Attacks . . , . .74 XII.— LORDS AND RIOTS Battle of the Franchise — Agricultural Labourers — ' Robbed of their Land ' — Mr. Chamberlain's Impatience — Controversy with Lord SaUsbury — Broken Heads — Attacks on Peers — ^Their Doom — ' The Cup is Nearly Full ' — Aston Park Riots — The Badger and Lord Randolph Churchill — Famous Encounter — Sans Rancune .... '79 CONTENTS xui XIII.— UNAUTHORIZED PROGRAMME PAGE Radical Popularity — Praise of Mr. Gladstone — ^Moderate Liberals — Doc- trine of Ransom — Alarm of Propertied Classes — Naboth's Vine3rard — Torrents of Abuse — Complaints of Colleagues — Dissension in the Cabinet — Case of Ireland — Defeat of Government . . . . Sy XIV.— THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP Who was to Lead ? — Attacks on the Conservative ' Care-takers ' — The Radical Programme — Socialistic Sentiments — Eloquent Speeches — Dr. Dale's Praise — Cartoons — The Old Moon and the New Moon — Melodramatic Announcement — ' Jack Cade ' — ' Rip Van Winkle ' — ' The Skeleton at the Feast ' — Gospel of Political Humanity — Con- servative Overtures to Lord Harrington — ^The Rivals ... 94 XV.— HOME RULE Mr. Chamberlain's Record — A Home Ruler before Mr. Gladstone — A Poland — ^National Councils — Proposed Visit to Ireland — A Sudden Coldness — Mr. Gladstone and Home Rule — His Consultations — Indifference to Mr. Chamberlain 106 XVI.— THE CROSS ROADS The Short Parliament — ^Three Acres and a Cow — ^Liberal Government — Mr. Chamberlain's Office — Was he disappointed ? — ^Terms of Accept- ance — An Old Friend and a New Rival — A Curious Interview — Home Rule Bill — Resignation. . .114 XVII —THE QUARREL Jealousy ? — Lord Randolph Churchill and ' my Friend Joe ' — ^Meeting with Lord Salisbury — Claim to Consistency — Birmingham Liberals — Dr. Dale's Testimony — Diamond cut Diamond — National Liberal Federa- tion — Chamberlain Group — John Bright's Letter — Attack on Home Rule Bill — Radical Appeal — Defeat of Government — ' The Envious Casca ' — General Election ........ 120 XVIII.— THE ROUND TABLE Conservative Government — Liberal Combatants — Lord Randolph Church- ill's Resignation — Mr. Chamberlain's Overtures to Liberal Leaders — ' Extraordinary Gyrations ' — Round Table Conference — ^Letter to the Baptist — Offer to Retire — Quarrel Revived — Coercionist Radicals — Liberal Union — 'A National Party' . . . . . • I33 xiv CONTENTS XIX.— AN INTERLUDE PAGE Mission to United States — Irish and Radical Strictures — Rumour of a Title — ^The Private Treaty — ^Third Marriage — Ceremony in Wash- ington — Reception in Birmingham — ' Thy People shall be my People ' 1 42 XX.— TRANSFORMATION Front Opposition Bench — Friendship with Lord Harrington — Irish Hatred — ' Judas ! ' — Charges against Mr. Parnell — The Divorce Case — Mr. Chamberlain's New Friends — Effects of the Liberal Rupture — ^The Lost Leader — Recrimination. . . . . . . .146 XXL— RECANTATION Royal Grants — Old Radicalism — Cant and Recant — ' Mr. Bung ' — Repu- diation of Ransom — A New Reform Bill not Wanted — Voluntary Schools : a Contrast — Irish Land Legislation — ^Mr. Morley's Censure — No Desire for Liberal Reunion — Mr. Gladstone's Sarcasm . , 154 XXII.— NEW LEADERS AND NEW CRIES Leadership of Liberal Unionists — Other Leaders — Attacks on the Old Chief — Tories the Reformers — Baits to Voters — Election of 1892 — Personal Impressions . . . . . . . , .163 XXIII.— LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE Titanic Strife — ^The Leading Figures — ^New Home Rule Bill — Mr. Cham- berlain and Irish Members — His Son's Maiden Speech — Dramatic Debates — Encounter with Mr. Dillon — Personal Hostility — ' The Devil's Advocate ' — ' The Voice of a God ' — ^The Melee in the House — Per- sonal Rancour — ^Mr. Gladstone Baffled ...... 169 XXIV.— OLD RADICAL AND NEW CONSERVATIVE Attacks on Liberal Measures — Employers' Liability Bill and Parish Coun- cils Bill — Plural Voting — ^Death Duties — Scottish Grand Committee . 182 XXV.— PUBLICAN, PARSON AND PEER Change of Mr. Chamberlain's Attitude — Record on Drink Question ; Oppo- sition to Local Veto Bill — Life-long Views and New Tactics on Dis- estabUshment — Champion of the House of Lords . . . .187 CONTENTS XV XXVI.— NEW MAN AND NEW IDEALS PAGE Social Programme — Material Reforms — Distrust of Timid Tories — Co- operation of Leaders — ' Ploughing the Sand ' — Defeat of Lord Rose- bery's Administration ......... 197 XXVII.— LORD SALISBURY'S COLLEAGUE In Coalition Government — A Great Experiment — ^Mr. Morley's Sigh — Appeal to the Country — Promise of Social Legislation — Parliament of 1895 — Its Potent Personalities ....... 202 XXVIII.— TRANSVAAL RAID AND INQUIRY Dr. Jameson's Raid into the Transvaal — Mr. Chamberlain's Action — Protest against German Emperor's Telegram — Popularity — New Dip- lomacy — Support of the Uitlanders — Alarm of Peace Party — Inquiry into the Raid — Complicity of the Colonial Office Denied — Mysterious Cablegrams — Dissatisfaction of Radicals — Mr. Rhodes as a Man of Honour — Moral Prestige ........ 206 XXIX.— THE NEW IMPERIALIST Passion of Empire — Mr. Chamberlain not Afraid of its Expansion — Inter- vention in Foreign Affairs — Russia and ' a Long Spoon ' — Touting for AUies — Fashoda — The French and their Manners — Suggested Triple Alliance — Humanitarian Action in Colonies — Relations with Colonial Statesmen . . . . . . . . .216 XXX.—' THE HAND OF JOAB ' Compromises with Conservatives — New Grant to Voluntary Schools — ' The Hand of Joab ' in Social Legislation — Compensation for Acci- dents Bill — Lord Londonderry's Attack — ^The Real Reformers — Jack Cade Misunderstood — Small Houses Bill — American and French Impressions .......... 222 XXXI.— STRUGGLE WITH KRUGER Lord Milner's Appointment — Pressing for Redress of Grievances — Racial 111 Feeling — ' Helots ' — Bloemfontein Conference — Strange Interview with Leader of the Opposition — ' A Game of Bluff ' — Darkening Pros- pect — Picnic at Highbury — ' The Sands Running Down ' — Boer Ultimatum — War — Party Recrimination — Mr. Chamberlain's Never Again — ' Mafficking ' 228 xvi CONTENTS XXXII.— THE KHAKI ELECTION PAGE Issues of the Election in igoo — Publication of Private Letters — A Famous Telegram — Mr. Chamberlain's Repudiation of Former Policy — Sir Anthony Absolute — Acrimony in New Parliament — ' Pro-Boer ' — Slanders on Mr. Chamberlain — A Stupid Story . . . .239 XXXIII.— MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S ASCENDENCY • You Should be King ' — Quarrel with German Chancellor — ' What I have said, I have said ' — Popularity in City — Prestige in Parliament — ' The First Gentleman in Birmingham ' — A Good Judge of Recantation — • Surrender of the Boers . . . . . , . .244 XXXIV.— A NEW CHIEF Cab Accident — Lord SaUsbury's Resignation — Mr. Balfour, Prime Minister — Mr. Chamberlain Promises Assistance — His Own Position — Hint of Retirement — Rate Aid to Voluntary Schools — Mr. Chamberlain's Silence in the House ......... 249 XXXV.— THE ILLIMITABLE VELD ' A little Ute montSe ' — ^Visit to South Africa — Enthusiasm of British Colon- ists — Appeals to the Boers — A Banquet and an Interview at Pretoria — Financial Negotiations at Johannesburg — Promised War Contri- bution — A Weary Trek — Irreconcilable Boers at Bloemfontein — Coldness of the Dutch — ^Mr. Chamberlain's Assiduity at Cape Town — Optimism — Honours on Return. . . . . . -254 XXXVI.— FISCAL VOLTE-FACE Coup de Theatre — Dreams — Corn Tax and the Cabinet — Announcement at Birmingham — Colonial Preference and Tariffs on Foreign Products — Sensation in Country — Mr. Chamberlain's Free Trade Record — Suggested Motives for Change ....... 264 XXXVII.— STORY OF OLD AGE PENSIONS 270 XXXVIII.— SECOND RESIGNATION Bold Advocacy of New Policy — ' You Must Put a Tax on Food ' — Unionist Dissension — Cabinet Inquiry — Lord Goschen on ' a Gamble ' — New Leagues — Constitutional Club Luncheon — Lord James Appeals to the Duke of Devonshire — Mr. Balfour's Pamphlet — Mr. Chamberlain and His Adversaries Resign — A Strange Correspondence — The Prime Minister's Policy — The Duke and Mr. Chamberlain — Second Severance 275 CONTENTS xvii XXXIX.— PILGRIMAGE OF PASSION PAGB Tariff Reform Propaganda in the Country — Old Faith and New Doctrines — Notoriety — Attitude of Press — Opposition of Liberals and of Union- ist Free Traders — Gamedy of the Loaves — The Whole Hog — Irritation of Old Colleagues — The Duke of Devonshire, ' a drag on the wheel ' — Appointment of TarifE Reform Commission — ' Learn to think Im- perially '........... 286 XL.— MANOEUVRES IN PARLIAMENT Mr. Chamberlain as Private Member — Disclosure of ' Bluff ' Interview — Government Mark Time — Sir Michael Hicks-Beach — Words and Deeds — A Taunt of Cowardice — Capture of Liberal Unionist Organization — Chinese Labour — Licensing Bill — Pure Protection — Fiscal Twins — Methods of Vulgarity — Amazing Tactics — The Rand Bargain . . 296 XLI.— DISRUPTION AND DISASTER Conservative Free Traders — Mr. Churchill and Lord Hugh Cecil — Anti- pathy for Mr. Chamberlain — A Private Room — Decline of Mr. Bal- four's Charm — His View of a Pledge — Mr. Chamberlain Interprets the Oracle — Demands a Dissolution — Conservative Organisation Supports Tariff Reform — Mr. Balfour's Appeal for Union Disregarded — Resig- nation of his Government — Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman Takes Office — Rout of Unionists ........ 306 XLII.— COLLEAGUES. FRIENDS AND ENEMIES Question of Loyalty — Mr. Gladstone — Duke of Devonshire — Lord Salis- bury — Sir William Harcourt — Mr. Balfour — Sir Henry Campbell- Bannerman — Sir George Trevelyan — Enemies — Personal DisUkes — Friendships — Mr. Morley — Sir Charles Dilke — Mr. Jesse Collings . 313 XLIIL— PERSONAL LIFE A Soft Side — Father and Son — Birmingham — ' Our Joseph ' — Local Ser- vices — ^Tamed Shrew — Home Life — Mrs. Chamberlain — Family — Clubs — Neglect of Exercise — Tastes and Hobbies — ReUgion . .321 XLIV.— CHARACTERISTICS Versatility — Ambition — Intrigue — Business of Life — Confessions of Change — Administrator — Devotion to House of Commons — Fighter — De- bater — Platform Orator — Literary Quotations — Phrases — Appearance — Some Personal Qualities . . . . . . . • 33^ xviii CONTENTS XLV.— THE FINAL YEARS PAGE Dramatic Events — Courage after Defeat — Curious Negotiations — Mr. Bal- four's Undertaking — Mr. Chamberlain on Old Age Pensions Again — Final Speeches and Vote — Birthday Celebrations — Illness — Seclusion — Physical DisabiUty — Messages of Invalid — Encouragement to Peers — Finance Bill — A Pathetic Spectacle : Takes the Oath — Constitutional Struggle — ^Mr. Balfour's Resignation of Leadership — ^The Two Parties — Final Years — Decision to Retire — Death ..... 345 XLVL— A SUGGESTED EPITAPH 359 CHAMBERLAINIANA : A COLLECTION OF SUPPLEMENTARY DETAILS Books and Pamphlets on Mr. Chamberlain ...... 365 A Study in Contradictions : Mr. Chamberlain's Opinions at Different Stages 370 ' What I have said, I have said ' : The Old Radicalism of Mr. Chamber- lain's Speeches .......... 393 Index ............ 408 NOTABLE DATES IN MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S LIFE Born July 8, 1836 Enters Business .......... 1852 Moves to Birmingham ......... 1854 First Marriage ........... 1861 Second Marriage .......... 1868 Chairman, Executive : National Education League .... 1869 Enters Town Qjuncil ......... 1869 Mayor and Chairman of School Board . . . . . .1873 Candidate for Sheffield ' . . . .1874 Retires from Business ......... 1874 Elected for Birmingham ......... 1876 Founds National Liberal Federation ....... 1877 Member of Liberal Cabinet . . . . . . . .1880 Unauthorized Radical Programme ....... 1885 Opposes Home Rule Bill 1886 Ally of Conservative Ministers ........ 1887 Third Marriage 1888 Leader of Liberal Unionists in House of Commons . . . .1892 Colonial Secretary in Unionist Government . . . . .1895 Boer War ........... 1899 Advocates Tarifi Reform and Resigns Office ..... 1903 Illness ............ 1906 Death 1914 XIX ANCESTRY AND YOUTH THREE men of political genius played a role as conspicuous as a Prime Minister's on the Parliamentary stage for a number of years after Mr. Gladstone's final overthrow of Lord Beaconsfield. Their talents gave to that stage extraordinary force and interest. Two of them passed away prematurely in the gloom of thwarted ambi- tion, Mr. Pamell's public career being shattered by his private conduct and Lord Randolph Churchill learning the painful lesson that no man in this world is indispensable. Life gave a much longer and fuller trial to Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, who resembled the Irish leader and the Tory democrat in the possession of bold, disturbing qualities. Some of the other Parliamentarians who, in their day, filled great places are fading into shadows in the memory, but these three remain distinct and vivid among the figures that crossed Mr. Gladstone's later career, and the most picturesque as well as most tantalizing of the three is the subject of this biography. In birth, education and environment Mr. Chamberlain differed from the class which was accustomed to govern Great Britain. The records of our statesmen, as a rule, have begun with the houses of ancient families, with the University, with hunting and shooting, with private secretaryships at home and visits to ambassadors abroad. It was in the tough world of business, in the local debating society, in municipal service that one of the ablest, most daring, politicians who ever convulsed or dominated the country received his equipment for the front bench and Whitehall. He entered the conspicuous arena not to pass the time, but to satisfy a lofty ambition, to let loose a strong will and, perchance, to leave the world a little better than he found it ; and to understand the man who agitated Parliament for thirty years, and who after leaving one great party broke up the other, some knowledge is necessary of his youth and early labour. His crowded life was sharply divided into two stages, that of the manu- facturer and town councillor, and that of the parliamentary and poli- tical leader, but although he abandoned the minor occupations when he assiuned the greater, his training influenced his whole career. He 1 I i" JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN ■claimed to be and was regarded with pride as the business man in politics. Although efforts have been made by others to trace a long pedigree for Mr. Chamberlain and to show that his ancestors were in business in London at the time of the Great Fire, he did not claim descent irom an ancient aristocracy. He boasted of No urns, no dusty monuments. No broken images of ancestors. It is from Daniel Chamberlain, malster of Lacock, in Wiltshire, who died in 1760, that the male lineage of the family is clearly proved. Daniel's son, William, the great-grandfather of the man who raised the name to celebrity, moved to London, and he and his descendents carried on business in the City as wholesale boot and shoe merchants. At the time of the statesman's birth — although subsequently they took additional premises in Wood Street — the family warehouse was where it had been for a century, in Milk Street, Cheapside. ' I was,' said Mr. Chamberlain, ' the fourth generation of cordwainers, who had practised their occupation in the same house and under the same name for 120 years.' The older members lived over the warehouse. It is recorded under the date October 5, 1769, in the vestry book of St. Lawrence, Jewry, that ' Mr. Chamberlain attended and proposed to give the rent of ;£42 for 21 years for the house he now lives in, situ- ated in Milk Street, clear of all taxes, and to lay out the sum of £183 los. 3^. Ordered accordingly.' The lease was renewed in 1790 to William and Joseph Chamberlain, and at subsequent periods, although at increased rents, to the successive generations, the sum fixed finally in 1853 being £140. Bloomfield, the poet, author of 'The Farmer's Boy,' worked as a journeyman for the first Joseph, who died in 1837. With the Cordwainers Company the family have been associated since they came from Wiltshire. Mr. Chamberlain mentioned \vith the pride of a business race that his great-grandfather, his great- uncle, his grandfather, his father and his uncle were all in turn Masters of the guild. He himself joined it at the age of twenty-one ; four brothers followed, and his son Austen was admitted in due time. * My family,' he said in the House of Commons, ' can boast nothing of distinguished birth and they have not inherited wealth or anything of that kind. But we have a record — an unbroken record — of nearly two centuries, of unstained commercial integrity and honour.' The respect in which they were held is indicated by the fact that, although Unitarians, several of them were chosen churchwardens in their parish. Not only was Mr. Chamberlain proud of the commercial record of his family, but he was proud also of his inheritance as a dissenter. Through his father's mother, he was descended, as he boasted to ANCESTRY AND YOUTH 3 Welsh Nonconformists, from one of the ' ejected ministers who in the time of the Stuarts left home and work and profit rather than accept the State-made creed which it was sought to force upon them.' This was Richard Baxter's friend, Richard Serjeant, of Kidderminster, who refused to take the tests imposed by the Act of Uniformity in 1662.* Serjeant's eldest daughter, Sarah, married Francis Witton, of The Lye, near Stourbridge, and had fifteen children ; and among her descendants are the Chamberlains and Nettlefolds. The statesman's grandfather was married to two sisters, Sarah Serjeant's great-grand- daughters, and his father was one of the offspring of the second wife. From his father, who, like his grandfather, was named Joseph, he inherited certain notable qualities and interests. Portraits of the father reveal a firm mouth in a rather precise face ; and although he was of retiring habits, he was, according to an obituary notice, keenly interested in political, charitable and educational movements. A memorial tablet in Unity Church, Islington, bears witness that he was for more than fifty years ' a consistent worshipper ' there and in Carter Lane Chapel, and a generous supporter of their institutions. Mr. Chamberlain's mother, who ' thought much about duty,' was Caroline Harben, daughter of a provision merchant, and aunt of Sir Henry Harben, who at the age of eighty-two became chairman of the Prudential Assurance Company. Thus on both sides a future favourite of the landed aristocracy sprang from people in trade. Joseph, the statesman, was the eldest of nine children. Four out of his five brothers, and his three sisters lived to see him famous. The only brother who entered Parliament was Richard. He was in business as a brass-founder in Birmingham, and was twice mayor of the town, but it was as member for West Islington that at a transition period in Joseph's career he sat in the House of Commons. Arthur Chamberlain was conspicuous as a licensing reformer and an opponent of the tariff reform propaganda, but Herbert and Walter were never prominently concerned in politics. Sprung from a race of merchants and political dissenters, the future autocrat of Birmingham was bom a Londoner, and from the point of view of smart society his existence began on the wrong side of the Thames. A middle-class southern suburb, and not Mayfair nor Belgravia, was the place of his birth. ' I never know'd a respect- able coachman,' said the elder Mr. Weller, ' as wrote poetry, 'cept one > Mr. Chamberlain's expression of pride induced the descendants of Richard Serjeant to subscribe for a mural tablet of brass which was placed in the Memorial Hall, Farringdon Street, London. When Serjeant was ousted from the vicarage of Stone, two miles from Kidderminster, which had been formerly held by his father-in-law, the living went to his brother-in-law, William Spicer, and he re- tired to a small estate which he had bought. He had, as his biographer Mr. Thomas Gill records, an adequate income. JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN _o^-i: bo h P 3 2 ti u ^ d 6 to t/j l-H 1— 1 6 3 "S "^ 3 >4H < i3 3 jS^ _^ U H-l 1 uT o > 2 -; rt O 5 o 4-J 1—) 2 t3 C -t-> o o w 4J -t-> c3 12; < - u H 3 § 2 pT^ c 5 .1-1 en 'eT 3 cn c o W 00 — ►J -t-> s; O , — ^ H— ) ^ •S2 M II — II K M ' — ' < C ' — rt 3 C/2 N W O 1 .a 00 O u 4) ! — C/5 w 1— > II 4^ 1-1 M t. ■ ■ S (=! K M — 33 V 60 2 5 ■^ c3 K C/3 +3 d. 3 ^ Wt— ,ro — (/} 00 Ob « »— ) u M ANCESTRY AND YOUTH 5 as made an affectin' copy o' verses the night afore he wos hung for a highway robbery ; and he wos only a Cambervell man, so even that's no rule.' Like Browning, who saved the poetic reputation of the sombre suburb, Mr. Chamberlain was only a Camberwell man. Disdain for it ought to be dispelled by such celebrated names ! On July 8, 1836, sixteen months before the death of his grand- father, Joseph was bom at No. 3, Grove Hill Terrace, now 188, The Grove, Camberwell, a three-storeyed, semi-detached house. At the age of eight he was sent to a preparatory school at Crescent Place in the immediate neighbourhood, kept by the Misses Pace. He was, according to Miss Jane Stoddart's account of his early years, a shy, reserved boy, but he liked to have his own way, and the child was father of the man in respect that he was fond of taking those who submitted to him under his protection. He remained for only a few terms at the Camberwell school, but he never forgot it ; he visited the scene in the days of his fame, and sent fruit and flowers to his old mistresses.^ In 1845 the Chamberlains moved to 25, Highbury Place, Islington, a district much favoured by the well-to-do City merchants. The Highbiiry Place of that period was extolled by the local historian on account of its beautiful view and healthy situation, and here the elder Chamberlains lived for many years. Joseph attended, as a day pupil, the school conducted at 36, Canonbury Square, by the Rev. Arthur Johnson, a clergyman of the Church of England who was an excellent classical scholar. And when the young boy was learning his lessons Sir Robert Peel was carrying the free trade policy which he himself was to attack nearly sixty years later. At the age of fourteen he was sent to University College School which he attended during the sessions 1850-1 and 1851-2. He did well in Latin and French and still better in mathematics. It was recalled in later years at a dinner of Old Boys that he showed a remarkable all- round capacity. He did not, however, join in the school sports. Not even in youth did he care much for physical recreation. One of his contemporaries, Mr. J. W. Mellor, who became Chairman of Com- mittee of the House of Commons, remembered him as ' a very quiet and good little boy.' This was not the character in which he appeared to Mr. Mellor during the Home Rule struggle of 1893. Then the Chairman found him a mischievous big boy who kept the school of St. Stephen's in a state of excitement. Destined for a commercial career, Joseph Chamberlain was at the early age of sixteen taken into his father's business. He was initiated into the mysteries both of the workshop and of the counting * The school accounts kept by the Misses Pace with the entries of the payments by Mr. Chamberlain's parents have been presented to the Camberwell Central Library. 6 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN house, and, as he mentioned in much later life, he learned in a practical way the art of shoemaking. One who took in goods to the firm says he ' frequently saw the tall old gentleman (the father), with a slight book-keeper's stoop, go in and out of his sanctum, and Joseph, as a young man, do the same — ^the exact counterpart of the sire, minus the slight stoop.' One of his own earliest city recollections was dining with his father in the Cordwainers Hall, on which occasion, as he believed, he uttered his first public speech. Probably he saw the funeral of the Duke of Wellington and heard ' the noise of the mourning of a mighty nation ' as the warrior was laid to rest. But, fortunately, when he thought of the soldier's profession, he could not have foreseen that he himself would be responsible, as a states- man, for the greatest war of the reign which was then so full of promise. Half a century later he recalled that as a boy he was an omnivorous reader and that everj^thing came well to him. The books he mentioned did not reveal any individual taste. They were discussed in his day by everybody just as in Dr. Primrose's time the fashionable topics were pictures, taste, Shakespeare and the musical glasses. Mr. Chamberlain recalled with gratitude the essays and English history of Macaulay, the poems of Tennyson, and the novels of Dickens and Thackeray. Only the first two volumes of Macaulay's History had been published when he left London ; The Pickwick Papers came out while he was in his cradle ; In Memoriam appeared anonymously in 1850 ; Esmond was finished about the time that he entered business. He sought self-improvement not only by reading but also by attending scientific and other lectures at the Polytechnic ; and it is evident that he was diligent from youth. Probably no man in the course of a long life wasted less time. His readiness to help and influence others was revealed while he was learning his father's business. He taught in the Sunday School connected with Carter Lane Chapel, and in those days before com- pulsory education had been established religious teaching of the young on Sundays was accompanied by some secular instruction. During the greater part of Mr. Chamberlain's youth the pastor at Carter Lane was Dr. Joseph Hutton, father of the virile editor of the Spectator. Rarely does any place of worship produce in a single generation two such men as Joseph Chamberlain and Richard Holt Hutton, a statesman and a journalist unsurpassed in their time for force of character. The congregation to which they belonged in their early days removed in 1862 to Highbury and opened Unity Church in Upper Street. Here are two painted windows to the memory of Mr. Chamberlain's grandparents besides the tablet (already referred to) in affectionate remembrance of his father. II LIFE IN BIRMINGHAM IF Mr. Chamberlain had continued to live within sound of Bow Bells- what would have been his history ? No feature of his life is more easily traced than the influence upon it of Birmingham — ^the influence of its municipal experience and keen local interests, of its social reformers, its religious leaders and its politicians. If he had remained in London he would have risen to be Lord Mayor and to ride in the great gilt coach ; he would have entertained Princes and. Prime Ministers and been knighted Sir Joseph. But would he have entered Parliament as a militant Radical ? Would he have shaken himself sufficiently free from Cockney habits and engagements ta pursue a strenuous pohtical career ? And would he have found a constituency which remained faithful and admiring through many changes and vicissitudes ? At eighteen years of age (1854) Joseph Chamberlain left London. His father was induced by Mr. Nettlefold, who bad married his sister, to put capital into the manufacture of wooden screws in order to- develop an important American patent for self-acting machinery which the family acquired, and the youth went to Birmingham to- take up the new enterprise along with a cousin, Joseph Nettlefold. From that period he threw in his lot with the pushing people of a district with which he was already to some extent connected by his- descent from the Serjeants. For about twelve years Joseph Chamber- lain lived the ordinary life of a private citizen, devoting himself to his business. At first he sat at a desk with another clerk, posting the ledger and doing other routine work, but after a time he shared a room with Mr. Nettlefold. In the course of his early years he acted occasionally as a traveller, opening up a business connexion, for instance, in Ireland. Joseph Chamberlain took control of the com- mercial department of the firm in which he became a principal and was soon its moving spirit, those connected with it testifying in after years that it owed very much to his capacity and energy. For a considerable period Nettlefold and Chamberlain had to contend with great difficulties. There was over-competition, with a declining trade. By boldness and resource, however, the firm gradually secured success. 8 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Service for the benefit of others, such as he began in London, was continued by Joseph Chamberlain in Birmingham. The young man of business found time to act as a teacher at the New Meeting House of the Unitarians, and subsequently in the Church of the Messiah, He taught history at the night school, doubting, perhaps, whether he would give the best of it to Whigs or to Tories ; and frequently in his Sunday lessons he discoursed on geography, on botany, and on animals and birds. One of his pupils testified in old age that ' he taught me to read and write, and his kindly and gentle disposition will never be forgotten by me. I was unfortunate in my early days and as a poor boy came under his tuition, which enabled me to think and act for myself.' Another pupil recalled that on giving him Pick- wick Papers as a prize Mr. Chamberlain said, ' This will stand reading more than once.' He shared also in the Penny Readings which were popular in those days and was President of a Mutual Improvement Society. His life was not devoid of lighter pleasures. There was a time, according to his own confession, when he looked upon dancing ' as being one of the highest enjoyments of which mortal man is capable,' and at that period he would have ' sacrificed the finest political speech €ver delivered in order to escape ' to its delights. Frequently he took part in amateur theatrical performances, one of his favourite and successful characters being that of Puff in Sheridan's play, The Critic, and he wrote a one- act farce. Who's Who, superintending its production at a friend's house and himself playing one of the roles. Neither plays nor dancing, however, distracted his mind from graver occupations. He was not A clerk foredoom'd his father's soul to cross. Who pens a stanza when he should engross. Business was never neglected by Joseph Chamberlain, junior. One of the greatest debaters who ever addressed the House of Commons acquired early practice, not at a University Union, but in a provincial club. He joined the Birmingham and Edgbaston Debating Society soon after he settled in the Midlands. Not knowing - himself, he imagined he would never open his mouth. Silence was \ impossible in such a nature. Even on the first night he was con- strained to defend the memory of Oliver Cromwell, which has con- tinued for two centuries and a half to excite hot passions in young and old. The Society held its meetings for some time at the Hen and Chickens' Hotel in New Street, but in 1859 it removed to the Midland Institute. Joseph Chamberlain became a most assiduous member. A contemporary has recalled how with eye-glass on eye he smiled with amused complacency at an assailant, and an early friend who became a political opponent has stated that he showed ' perfect eff ron- LIFE IN BIRMINGHAM 9 tery.' On one occasion the young man came to a dead stop in a speech, whereupon he calmly put his hand into his coat-tail pocket, pulled out his MS., looked at it, and went on again. Here was a fine case of effrontery ! ' It shows you,' says the political opponent, ' the character of the man.' Another contemporary mentions that ' there was always promptness and all-there-ness in his nature with a decided touch of self-reliance, and I may even say, audacity.' His first vote of censure was given in 1858, when he denounced the speeches in which John Bright, one of the members for Birmingham, had been expoimding pacific views of foregn policy. In a lively strain the budding Jingo charged the famous orator with several inaccuracies. On another occasion he maintained that so far from the aristocracy being responsible for all our wars, as Mr. Bright had asserted, every war since 1688 had been demanded by the people. At the election of 1859, as Mr. G. M. Trevelyan records in his biography of Mr. Bright, ' a young Radical named Joseph Chamberlain was canvassing for Acland in opposition to the " Quaker's " views on foreign policy.' In the debating society he showed the same tendency in April, i860, when he was in the bold minority which contended : ' That it is the policy and duty of England to assist, even if necessary by arms, the efforts of Switzerland to prevent the annexation of Savoy to France.' The debaters, as he recalled years afterwards, ' surveyed mankind from China to Peru ' ; they declared war without the slightest regard to the Concert of Europe, and dismissed Ministries without consulting the House of Commons. With equal confidence they pronounced on literary questions. In January, 1861, Mr. Chamberlain took the aye side in controversy on the proposition : ' That the works of the English novelists since the days of Scott are superior to those of their predecessors.' He rose to be president of the Society, and in this capacity delivered an address in October, 1863, on ' Difference of Opinion.' Although usually insisting that his own opinion was right, he learned in those early debates to expect difference. The Society formed an important factor in his training, and no doubt by his own pugnacity he stimulated the faculties of others. Soon after his first marriage, however, he ceased to take a frequent part in the proceedings. The web of our life is of mingled yam, and Mr. Chamberlain shared the common lot with its mixture of weal and woe. In his domestic experience he had much sorrow as well as great happiness. He was married three times, his first and second wives living only brief periods after their union. In 1861, seven years after he went to Birmingham, the young screw-maker was married at the New Meeting House to Harriet Kenrick (who was the same age as himself), the daughter of Archibald Kenrick, hollow-ware manufacturer and borough magistrate, and the sister of William Kenrick who subsequently became the 10 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN husband of Mr. Chamberlain's own sister, Mary, and was mayor of Birmingham and one of its representatives in Parliament. Mrs. Chamberlain died in 1863 at the birth of her second child, Austen. For a time the family dwelt at Berrow Court, Edgbaston, the home of the father-in-law, where an aunt attended to the motherless children. In 1868 Mr. Chamberlain, then entering public life, was married at the Church of the Messiah to Florence, the daughter of Timothy Kenrick, of Maple Bank. His second wife was a cousin of his first, but was much younger, being only twenty years of age at her wedding. By her he had three daughters and two sons, one of whom died in infancy. He lived at Southboume, a large house at 35, Augustus Road, Edgbaston, till 1880, when he moved to Highbury, Moor-Green, a residence which became as familiar as Hatfield or Hawarden. Before he went there he suffered another severe blow by the loss of his second wife, her death occurring in 1875, while he was ruling Birmingham and aspiring to a seat in Parliament. His third marriage belongs to a quite differ- ent stage of his career — the stage in which he glittered as a political leader and fought with Gladstone and prevailed. Mr. Chamberlain's business life in Birmingham occupied twenty years. In that short span he acquired what men of moderate means call a fortune. Nettlefold & Chamberlain secured new markets, built up a great industry, and purchased several competing concerns, which they amalgamated with their own, their business being ex- panded until it became one of the most important in the Midlands. It was alleged in after years that Mr. Chamberlain secured a monopoly of the screw trade by the merciless crushing out of the smaller manu- facturers, but imputations on his conduct were attributed to political spite. The Rev. R. M. Grier, vicar of Rugeley, who made careful inquiries, testified in the Daily News that Mr. Chamberlain's firm ' had always stood high amongst the people, and more especially the working men of Birmingham, for honesty and straightforward dealing, and all that could be said against it was that other firms had suffered indirectly through its success.' More precise testimony was given by Messrs. A. Stokes & Co. As a representative firm in the screw trade they wrote on November 25, 1884 : ' We unhesitatingly affirm that Mr. Chamberlain's actions were highly beneficial to those connected with the trade and beneficial to those whose businesses were purchased on such liberal terms : also to those who, like ourselves, remained in the trade as well as to his own firm.' His father, spending in Birming- ham the latter years of a long life, saw and shared the prosperity of the business to which he had sent the youth from London, and in 1874, soon after his death, Joseph and a brother, Herbert, were able to retire. LIFE IN BIRMINGHAM ii The social interests of the workmen employed by the firm were not neglected by Mr, Chamberlain. He ascertained their thoughts and ideas when he met them at their own debating club, and an example of his efforts for them is given in an incident which has been recorded. Mr. Solly, who had been pastor at Carter Lane, was interesting himself in the formation of clubs for working men in the great centres of population. Mr. Chamberlain called on him and said he was desirous of establishing a club at Small Heath for the benefit of his workmen and would be glad if Mr. Solly could come and help him to start it. ' This, of course, I willingly did,' said that gentleman ; ' spoke to a good meeting, saw the capital club-house he had built, had most hospitable entertainment at his house in Edgbaston.' During Mr. Chamberlain's first Parliamentary contest he was charged with being a harsh employer, but his workpeople testified to his character and to the good relations existing between them, and he was supported in his candidature by a deputation of Trade Unionists as well as by the President of the Trades Council. On retiring from business he was presented by the employes of the firm with a silver salver ' in recog- nition of the uniform kindness and liberality which had distinguished him,' and in his acknowledgment he remarked that although some little differences had arisen these had been partial and temporary, and practically nothing had occurred during his connexion with them to interrupt their good relations. At the close of that connexion he treated the whole of the workpeople and their families to an excursion to the Crystal Palace. ' Oh, that's Chamberlain, he looks a swell, doesn't he ! ' ejaculated some one at a meeting held in the Town Hall to protest against a railway project in the 'sixties, when he was known only to a com- paratively limited circle. An observer described him as ' a very well-dressed gentleman. He wore a very long and capacious but smartly-cut drab overcoat, and sported a red tie. Placing a single eye-glass, after the manner of a watchmaker, in his eye, he keenly surveyed the assembly.' In those days he wore side whiskers, low down on the cheek, although in later years his whole face was shaved. When he offered £$ towards the expenses at the meeting the mayor seemed not quite sure who he was till his name was mentioned, and then came the ejaculation quoted above. Another interesting glimpse of him about the same period is given by Judge Conde Williams, who was engaged on the local Conservative paper. ' My youthful attention,' says Mr. Williams, ' was often struck by the statuesque form of a young man, standing nose in the air, as if defying all comers, on the kerbstone nearly at the bottom of Bennetts Hill, where was situated a club at that period. He was pointed out to me as a Radical-Republican champion, the rising hope of the modem 12 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Unitarian party of Birmingham.' ^ Mr. Williams was attracted by his eyeglass, wondering how he kept it in his place, and still more by his winter coat, which reached to his boots and was made of some fur material. His seal-skin overcoat in later years, as a contemporary has recorded, caused the people at his meetings to gasp. Between 1867 and 1870 the manufacturer, whose business success was assured, began to figure as a municipal, educational and political reformer. In 1868, when Mr. Gladstone formed his first Government with Lord Hartington, as one of its members, two other men whose careers crossed Mr Chamberlain's — Mr. Vernon Harcourt and Mr. Henry Campbell (kno\\Ti to fame as Sir William Harcourt and Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman) entered the House of Commons. Mr. Morley had published his first book on Edmund Burke and had begun to edit the Fortnightly Review, but Mr. Arthur Balfour was still at Cambridge, ignorant of the man with the pale, young-looking face, and with eyeglass adjusted ' after the manner of a watchmaker ' whose ambition was soaring high and who was attracting the attention of the people of Binningham. At the election of the first ' household Parliament ' in 1868 Mr. Chamberlain became known in local political circles, and in November, 1869, he was chosen a member of the Town Coimcil. The committee which promoted his candidature recom- mended him as ' a large ratepayer, a man of thorough business habits, enlarged views and marked ability, belonging indeed to precisely the class of burgesses most desirable on the Council.' A new civic spirit was at this period awakened in Birmingham. ' Men made the discovery that perhaps a strong and able Town Council might do almost as much to improve the conditions of life in the town as Parliament itself.' The flame of reform was lit by a remarkable group of. Nonconformist ministers, with whom Mr. Chamberlain was associated in several movements, by Dr. Dale and Dr. Crosskey, by Charles Vince, the Baptist, and George Dawson, ' the prophet,' as Judge Williams writes, ' of a nondescript Nonconformist party of advanced thinkers who crowded his Church of the Saviour.' For upwards of thirty years Dawson was the most prominent preacher in Birmingham and one of its most active and energetic citizens. To him more than to any other man. Dr. Dale attributed the creation of the new municipal spirit. Dale himself, who in the year that the future statesman went to Birmingham, was settled as co-pastor with the Rev. J. Angell James at Carr's Lane Congregational Church, became one of his most intimate and most loyal friends, and late in life he wistfully recalled ' Joseph Chamberlain in his fresh and brilliant promise,' and the time when he used to have a talk with him and his friends twice or thrice a week. It is recorded also that Dr. Crosskey, whose words Mr. * From Journalist to Judge, by F. Cond6 Williams. LIFE IN BIRMINGHAM 13 Chamberlain heard at the Church of the Messiah, pleaded with pathetic earnestness and with passion for the new municipal policy. While Dawson was the prophet of this movement, Dr. Dale in some notes in Mr. Armstrong's Life of Dr. Crosskey remarks that he had not the kind of faculty necessary for putting his generous faith into practice. ' This was largely done by Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, who . . . began to show proof of those great powers which have since been recognized by the nation.' The fine spirit of the reformers is revealed even in the generosity with which they recognized the work of each other. Mr. Chamberlain himself said he was only one of a band of men who had laboured to make Birmingham better and healthier ; he had striven to bring to the homes of its vast population greater com- fort, to bring to its children a better education, to give to its citizens more facilities for innocent recreation, and above all to maintain and keep alive that spirit of freedom and independence for which the town had been long and justly distinguished. A great ideal, worthily realized ! A record of the statesman's share in the municipal movement has been left by Dr. Dale. Mr. Chamberlain, as he testifies, ' gave himself to the work with a contagious enthusiasm. He did not merely enter the Council, give a large amount of time and strength to its committees, make striking and eloquent speeches on the new municipal policy ; he used his social influence to add strength to the movement. He ap- p)ealed in private to men of ability who cared nothing for public life, and he showed how much they might do for the town if they would go into the Council ; he insisted that what they were able to do, it was their duty to do. He dreamt dreams and saw visions of what Birming- ham might become, and resolved that he, for his part, would do his utmost to fulfil them.' Chiefly at his instigation the Liberal Association of Birmingham, powerful in national politics, decided to interpose in municipal elections and a series of contests led to a Liberal majority on the Council and Mr. Chamberlain's election as mayor. Many reformers objected to the intrusion of party politics into local affairs, but Dr. Crosskey made the remarkable assertion that to the adoption of the Liberal policy was due almost all that was most valuable in the institutions and public life of modem Birmingham. ' It meant,' he said, ' the enjoyment by the great mass of the people of the blessing of a beautiful and civilized life.' At the same time he added his testimony to ' the power and administrative genius (I do not think a less word can be used) of J. Chamberlain.' The politician himself at a later stage of his career in defending this part of his work argued that the permanent distinction between Liberal and Conservative affects our judgment and conduct, 14 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN whether we are considering the removal of nuisances or the disestablish- ment and disendowment of the English Church. After being only four years on the Council, Mr. Chamberlain was, in November, 1873, chosen mayor, and in the two following Novembers he was re-elected. Thus, although he did not join in the public work of the town at a very early age, his promotion was rapid. Meantime, as we shall soon see, he was not only playing a great municipal role, but was taking a lead in other affairs of even wider interest. Under Mayor Chamberlain, as his political opponents admit, Bimiingham became one of the best-governed towns in the world. He declared, after long experience of statesmanship, that although he had had ' on the whole a tolerably active life, ' he never laboured so hard or so continuously as during the three years in which he had the honour to be its civic head. The result of his labours is set forth in Mr. Bunce's History of the Corporation. ' The powerful aid of Mr. Joseph Chamberlain,' writes the local historian, ' and those who were glad to acknowledge him as their leader, . . . contributed to develop a new phase of municipal government. The quality of the Council continued steadily and rapidly to improve : a higher standard of public duty was established, capable citizens recognized the obligation of taking part in the government of the town and a series of important enterprises was entered upon, under the brilliant administration of Mr. Chamber- lain, resulting in the acquisition of the gas and water works, the develop- ment of the health department, and the institution of the improvement scheme." One of the earliest occasions on which Punch took notice of a man who provided the subject for many caricatures was in 1874, when he dined with the Lord Mayor of London at the Mansion House on Derby Day. The Mayor of Birmingham said in a semi-humorous vein at the banquet that ' in late years the taunts against corporate bodies had been less frequent, and even their facetious friend, Mr. Punch, had indulged himself less often at their expense.' The facetious friend replied in some verses, one of which ran thus — The artful Mayor of Birmingham May butter Punch, but Punch can say There never yet was epigram Of his thrown e'en on Mayors away. Attacks on the Liberal rulers of Birmingham were made by another journalistic observer. The Times in an article in 1875 denounced the shallow and barren political ideas of the Corporation, referred scorn- fully to the party organization, which strangled all efforts of political development at Birmingham that were not agreeable to the feelings of the majority, and said it was difficult to picture a tyranny more odious or more calculated to destroy the impulses of healthy life within the LIFE IN BIRMINGHAM 15 municipality it oppressed. On the day after this attack a letter, protesting against some of the statements made by the great journal, was published, from ' J. Chamberlain, Mayor of Birmingham.' ' There is, ' he wrote, ' no town in the kingdom in which political, educational, religious and municipal work is more active or more fruitful, and there is no council in England which contains a larger proportion of leading citizens or can point to greater practical results tending to the improvement of the town and the happiness and comfort of all classes of the people.' Power in a man of active, ardent, ambitious temperament leads naturally to a sort of despotism. The despotism may be beneficent, but those whom it thwarts are inclined to resent it ; and in his days of civic rule Mr. Chamberlain excited rancour by what has been described as his ' application of caustic and stinging (and sometimes rather vulgar) epithets.' A local cartoon depicted him saying to the crowd : ' Now, me lads, let us be equal, and I will be your king,' and when he accepted the civic chair an opponent taunted him with being ' not only mayor but Town Council too.' It was his habit then as it was in after years — a healthy habit, as a rule — to magnify his office. Even his friend, Mr. George Dixon, remarked with some soreness in 1878 : ' It seems as if the terms Mr. Joseph Chamberlain and Bir- mingham were become synonymous.' His local experience, however, proved that a public man is not without honour in his own district. Honour was promptly shown by Birmingham to its civic reformer. The memorial fountain, paid for by public subscription and inaugurated in 1880, proclaims ' gratitude for public services given to this town by Joseph Chamberlain.' He was honoured too by having his example followed by capable citizens elsewhere. He dignified the cause of gas and water. Ill RADICAL DISSENTERS IN the revolt of the Dissenters against the Education Bill of 1870 Mr. Chamberlain first became known beyond the Midlands, his earliest reputation being that of an incisive critic of Liberal leaders and Liberal legislation. Soon after entering the Town Council of Birmingham the able and aspiring young man dared to raise his voice on public platforms in censure of Mr. Gladstone himself, and opened the struggle with William Edward Forster which in a later decade and on another stage had a dramatic development. His descent and training, his feelings and surroundings fitted him for the role that he undertook. He was by tradition and instinct a Dissenter ; his awakening interest in public affairs led him to attach high value to the question of the schools ; and he was influenced also by the noble band of Nonconformist ministers in the Midland capital. By the foundation of the National Education League which sprang out of the Birmingham Education Society in October, 1869, that town became the headquarters of Radical Nonconformity at a crisis in its policy and history. Mr. Chamberlain, who had been among the founders of the local Society, was associated with Mr. George Dixon and Mr. Jesse Collings in the formation of the celebrated League ; he was elected chairman of the Executive Committee and gave £1,000 to the funds. The object of the promoters was to secure a national system of education, provided through local authorities, rate sup- ported, unsectarian, compulsory, free. This programme was regarded in many quarters as revolutionary and impracticable, and indeed more than one generation passed without its being carried out. Compul- sion was secured soon after the League was founded, and fees were dispensed with about twenty years later, but for many Parliaments the absence of a complete national system continued to be deplored and a Government of which Mr. Chamberlain was a member repudiated the principle for which he waged war on Mr. Forster. The League, however, at its initiation was full of ardour, hope and energy and it quickly obtained widespread support, for Sir Charles Dilke, the chair- man of the London branch, stated in February, 1870, that the sub- scriptions amounted to £54,000 and that it numbered 10,000 members. High were the expectations of the Nonconformists when the Liberal party secured a majority and Mr. Gladstone formed his 16 RADICAL DISSENTERS 17 Administration in 1868. ' Vast enthusiasm,' as Mr. John Morley wrote,^ ' had been shown for the principles and persons of men whose great cry was rehgious equality. The victory had at length been achieved, and those who had fought the battle expected to enter into the fruits.' Equal to the expectations was the disappointment. ' The first great English measure which followed all this excitement and all this effort was a bill which Mr. Gathome Hardy might have devised, and which a Conservative Chamber would not have rejected.' No legislative project of a Liberal Government in recent times has caused so much regret and annoyance among a large section of their sup- porters as Mr. Forster's Education Bill of 1870. The voluntary system instead of being superseded was supplemented. As Mr. Bright, who had a share in the Ministerial responsibility, but was too ill to take part in the controversies, sorrowfully remarked when he was able to express his opinion, the bill ' established Boards only where the denominational system did not exist, whereas it should have attempted to establish Boards everywhere and to bring the denominational schools under their control,' Those who had hoped to stamp out sectarian teaching were exceedingly vexed when they found that the religious difficulty was not solved but evaded. The Boards, as the League complained, were to decide at their discretion upon the kind of religious instruction to be given in their schools ; they were enabled to grant pecuniary assistance to the voluntary institutions ; and the proposed conscience clause was inadequate. In John Stuart Mill's opinion the measure ' did not merely halt and hang back in the path of good ; it did posi- tive evil — it introduced a new religious inequality.' It gave a fresh advantage to the Established Church. The anger of the Nonconformists was early revealed in a letter to Mr. Peter Rylands, a sturdy Radical member, from the Rev. G. S. Reaney, Warrington. Mr. Reaney described Mr. Forster as ' some- thing like a humbug,' and said that if the Government were to force the bill through by the help of the Tory party the Nonconformists could only bide their time, and when the next fight came, leave Glad- stone to his Tory friends. ' I am utterly surprised that the Cabinet ever imagined that the Nonconformist party would accept such a pro- Church measure. If this is the Liberalism of the men for whom the Dissenters fought tooth and nail I think we made a terrible blunder.' * Such a letter as that may assist the reader to appreciate the action which Mr. Chamberlain took, and the feeling which raised him to leadership. ' Not even at the bidding of a Liberal Ministry,' declared his friend, Dr. Dale, ' will we consent to any proposition which, under cover of an educational measure, empowers one religious denomin- * Fortnightly Review, 1873. • Correspondence and Speeches of Peter Rylands, M.P. i8 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN ation to levy a rate for teaching its creed and maintaining its worship.' Equally emphatic language was used by the newspaper edited by Mr. Edward Miall, Mr. Forster's colleague in the representation of Bradford. After showing that in its practical working the bill would favour one predominant sect, the Nonconformist firmly said that the Dissenters would not consent to this. ' They would be degenerate sons of a high ancestry if they did.' Steps were promptly taken by the National Education League — or the Birmingham League as it was sometimes grudgingly called — and by other advocates of an unsectarian system to secure the post- ponement or amendment of the measure. A petition was presented by 5,173 ministers of various denominations objecting to its ob- noxious provisions ; and Mr. Chamberlain was the principal speaker at an interview which a deputation had with Mr. Gladstone. At their meeting in March, 1870, the Liberal chief may have noted the Birmingham Radical's quickness and cogency in argument, and no doubt the younger man who ' secured his earnest attention ' watched him warily, and perhaps a little boldly, through his eyeglass. The de- mand of the League was that in all existing schools receiving Govern- ment grants the religious education should be given either before or after the ordinary school duties, and that all new, rate-aided schools should be unsectarian. A change made in the bill increased the hostility of Nonconformists. As the clause enabling Boards to extend rate aid to voluntary schools was strongly objected to on the ground that it would lead to fresh sectarian rivalry and contention, the Govern- ment withdrew this provision but associated the schools with the Privy Council and increased their Parliamentary grant. By the new arrangement their denominational character was secured. Mr. Forster in carrying his Bill through Committee proved one of the most stubborn men who ever sat in the House of Commons. ' A Quaker origin, ' as Mr. Morley remarks, ' is not incompatible with a militant spirit, and Forster was sturdy in combat. He had rather a full share of self-esteem, and he sometimes exhibited a want of tact that unluckily irritated or estranged many whom more suavity might have retained.' The more he was attacked the firmer he held to his own ground with what has been described as Olympian self-confi- dence. ' Night after night, with the aid of the Opposition, he defeated advanced Liberals and succeeded in giving a denominational character to his measure.' Pressure from without and pressure within failed to secure for the Dissenters the amendments which they desired. To some extent safeguards were provided by a time-table conscience clause and by the section associated with the name of Mr. Cowper- Temple, by which any catechism or formulary distinctive of any denom- ination was expressly excluded from rate-supported schools. These RADICAL DISSENTERS 19 concessions, however, did not remove the objections taken by Liberals. Strenuous resistance was offered to the twenty-fifth section, by which rates might be levied on the whole community to pay the fees of indigent children in denominational schools. Opposition to this provision was described by the Times as ' simply a matter of private pique and obstinacy ' but Nonconformists seized it as the battle- ground for a great principle. They refused to yield to what they regarded as the imposition of a new Church rate. There was a painful scene at the third reading of the Bill when Mr. Miall gave vent to the feelings of the Nonconformists. As one who had trusted the Government and regarded Mr. Gladstone with affec- tion he reproached the Ministers with having betrayed their best friends and disappointed the expectations with which they were brought into power. ' Once bit, twice shy,' he bitterly exclaimed. Mr. Gladstone turned on him in an angry, severe speech. If Mr. Miall had been ' bitten ' it was, said the irritated chief, only in con- sequence of expectations which he had himself chosen to entertain and which were not justified by the facts. ' We have been thankful to have the independent and honourable support of my honourable friend, but that support ceases to be of value when accompanied by reproaches such as these. I hope my honourable friend will not continue that support to the Government one moment longer than he deems it consistent with his sense of duty and right. For God's sake, sir, let him withdraw it the moment he thinks it better for the cause which he has at heart that he should do so.' Seldom has so much personal emotion been displayed in a political quarrel. ' It was a lovers' quarrel,' tenderly wrote Mr. Miall, but others were moved by sterner feelings. Mr. Chamberlain used the incident as the starting point of a new agitation. ' For years,' he said, at a conference of the Liberation Society, in December, 1870, ' Non- conformists had been the willing servants of the Liberal party and now it was time they claimed their wages. The political power of the Dissenters would be considered a thing of the past if they permitted themselves to be trifled with any longer by a so-called Liberal Govern- ment.' One or two gentlemen at the conference rebuked Mr. Chamberlain for his vehemence and he was told they must be wise as well as zealous, but Mr. Jesse CoUings backed him up with a protest against shilly- shallying. There was much evidence of the fact that the relations of the Nonconformists to Mr. Gladstone's Ministry had undergone, as Dr. Dale remarked, a great and startling change. Confidence had given place to distrust and enthusiasm to resentment. The situation was described by Mr. Morley with biting words in the Fortnightly. ' Mr, Disraeli,' he wrote, ' had the satisfaction of dishing the Whigs who were his enemies. Mr. Gladstone, on the other hand, dished the Dissenters 20 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN who were his friends. Unfortunately, he omitted one element of prime importance in these rather nice transactions. He forgot to educate his party.' ^ As a leader of the disappointed Dissenters whom Mr. Gladstone ' forgot to educate,' Mr. Chamberlain denounced the Government on many platforms. Early in 1871, at a meeting addressed by the members for Birmingham, he moved a resolution thanking them ' more especially for their opposition to the sectarian clauses of the Education Act and to the coalition of the Ministry with the Conservative party by which that Act was passed through Parliament.' In phrases similar to those flung in a later generation at himself the Town Councillor jeered at Mr. Forster as one ' who was once a Radical and a Quaker and who was now a Cabinet Minister and a State Churchman,' and he appealed to Nonconformists to withhold support at elections from Liberals ' until they had learned the Liberal alphabet and could spell the first words of the Liberal creed.' Resentment was increased by the administration of the Act. Nonconformists had hoped that the Department would work it as far as possible in an undenominational manner, but they complained that Mr. Forster was playing into the hands of the clergy, especially by the encouragement given to Boards, in the exercise of their discretion, to pay the fees of poor children in voluntary schools. Against this ' subsidy to the Church ' a determined agitation was directed from Birmingham. A Central Nonconformist Committee, formed there, had connexions with many towns, and in the borough itself the ques- tion became a burning and testing one. At a meeting of protest the manufacturer, who was being gradually recognized as the leader of a group of very earnest men, ridiculed the idea of the poor selecting the schools in which they would receive the benefit of the rates. Suppose, he said, that in times of great distress the Guardians established soup kitchens and gave free tickets, and Roman Catholics asked for the money so that they might take it to their cathedral and have their prayers and their soup together. ' What would be the answer of the Guardians ? It would be that it was not their duty to provide Roman Catholic prayers.' On the first School Board in Birmingham Mr. Chamberlain and his friends were in a minority. They had tried to capture all the fifteen seats and won only six, his colleagues being Dale, Dawson, Vince, Dixon and Mr. J. S. Wright, the president of the Liberal Association. They fought strenuously and successfully for their principles, and in 1873, by better tactics they secured a * In 1873 Mr. Morley showed no more tenderness than Mr. Chamberlain in his deahngs with Mr. Gladstone. Alluding to an argument used by the great leader he said : ' A poorer sophism was never coined even in that busy mint of logical counterfeits.' RADICAL DISSENTERS 21 majority on the second Board, of which Mr. Chamberlain was chairman. The quarrel over the Education Act threatened the Liberal Party with disruption. Dr. Guinness Rogers, an influential Nonconformist, who had been devoted to Mr. Gladstone and who became again an affectionate follower, said he would never help to return a Liberal until he had a clearer understanding with the Liberal party ; and this was the determination expressed by many of its best and most faithful friends. As Mr. Fawcett noted, the Nonconformists were ' never gathered together in any political meeting without declaring that they had been betrayed.' This dangerous discontent was not produced by Mr. Chamberlain, but it found in him a specially effective and resolute exponent, and he distinguished himself by the sharpness of his attacks. Already his platform style was clear and pungent, and he showed even at this early stage the uncompromising methods for which he was later so conspicuous. By the agitation, which owed much to him, Mr. Glad- stone's first Government was weakened. By-elections were lost on account of the abstention of Nonconformists. Such misfortunes for the Liberal party were regarded by Mr. Chamberlain as salutary lessons. To the dissenters themselves he gave fresh courage and force ; and he secured for them greater attention and influence. He would have found a political platform, even if there had been no educa- tion controversy, but the cry of betrayed Nonconformity came from his heart. His feeling as a dissenter was the most abiding of his life. IV EARLY POLITICAL CAREER THE political career of Mr. Chamberlain opened after his thirtieth year. Most of the great players on the national stage begin public life at an earlier age, but for a considerable period it was neces- sary for the screw-maker to concentrate his energy on business ; and thus, except for his share in the local debating society, there is no evidence of his having taken part in public controversy on State affairs until the year of the passing of the Household Franchise Bill. We have seen him as a Jingo Radical in 1859 canvassing against Mr. Bright, with whom, when he was a very young man, he disputed on imperial politics at a dinner party at Mr. George Dixon's. But although he promptly joined the Liberal Association formed in Bir- mingham in 1865, his first political speech from the platform was delivered in a church school in 1867, when he supported Mr. Dixon's candidature. Once he entered the new career his aggressive character asserted itself. At the dinner of the Edgbaston Liberal election com- mittee in May, 1868, he made a lively attack on the young Conservative party, which ' cloaked itself under the title of Constitutional.' He spoke several times during the general election of that year and thenceforward his political progress was continuous. Birmingham, after it gave a seat to Mr. Bright on his rejection by Manchester, had become * the strategic pivot ' of the great army of reform ; and it fitted itself for conflict by means of the Liberal Associa- tion, which was reorganized on a representative basis in 1868, and developed into the National Federation with an ideal secretary in Mr. Francis Schnadhorst.* The affairs of the Association, in which the Working Men's Reform League was induced to merge itself were managed by a central body known at first as the Committee of Four Hundred, later as the Committee of Six Hundred, and subse- quently the Two Thousand. Whigs were perturbed by the appearance of a popular organization which took the place of cliques and coteries in the selection of candidates and the local control of party affairs, » Referring to the Central Nonconformist Committee, Dr. Crosskey notes in 1870 : ' Went with Dale to a small draper's shop and engaged its owner, Mr. Schnadhorst, for part of his time daily. This was the first introduction of Mr. Schnadhorst into public life.' 22 EARLY POLITICAL CAREER 23 and their fears were increased when the rapidly rising Mr. Chamberlain obtained influence over it. In 1869, the year in which he began his career as a civic reformer and assisted to found the Education League, he spoke at a meeting in the Town Hall to protest against the opposition of the House of Lords to the bill for the disestablishment of the Irish Church. After point- ing out that the majority of 114 in the Commons represented the wishes of millions of people, he said in the caustic tone for which he was becoming noted in his town, that the Peers represented three things : — some of them represented the oppression of feudal lords in times gone by ; some represented the great wealth acquired in the possession of land in the vicinity of large towns, which land enriched its proprietors without care or labour on their part ; and lastly, they represented — and very imperfectly in many cases — the brains, the intelligence and the acquirements of ancestors long since dead who unfortunately had been tmable to transmit to their descendants the talents by which they had risen. In 1871, Mr. Chamberlain figured at another demonstration against the Peers, in consequence of their hostility to the army regulation and ballot bills. Resolutions con- demning the hereditary principle having been passed, he was placed on a committee to consider by what means they might be carried into effect. That, however, was not a problem to be settled by a single generation, and its settlement did not prove imperative ; for purchase in the army was abolished by royal warrant and on the ballot bill being sent up a second time, the Lords yielded. But it was not against Peers that Mr. Chamberlain's most pungent strictures as a young Radical were directed. He found much to- criticise in the conduct of Mr. Gladstone's first Government. After they had been four or five years in office a distinct decline took place in their once great prestige. Several of the Ministers were personally unpopular, and the reforming energy of most of them seemed to be spent. Disraeli compared the figures on the Treasury Bench to ' a range of exhausted volcanoes ' ; and their eminent chief, according^ to the scoffer, ' alternated between a menace and a sigh.' They had exasperated a variety of conservative interests, and at the same time they were failing to satisfy the advanced section of their followers. An article on ' The Liberal Party and its Leaders ' which appeared in the Fortnightly Review of September, 1873, carried the name of its author, Mr. Chamberlain, to many persons besides those who had followed the controversy on the schools. Mr. Morley, the editor, had visited him along with Admiral Maxse, the Crimean hero and the friend of George Meredith who had been associated with the Birming- ham reformers in the Educative League. The Saturday Review found in the article a certain dogmatic glibness and the trite commonplaces 24 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN of a smart schoolboy. It was written in a direct, confident style, and was enlivened by literary quotations and allusions. Seldom was Mr. Chamberlain throughout his career an easy, docile, contented Liberal. Until Mr. Gladstone went too fast for him he was usually urging a forward movement. In his first essay he gave faithful admonition. Leaders without a policy and statesmen without prin- ciples found, as he severely said, their natural results in followers with- out loyalty and a party without discipline. It would be no small gain to the country, in his opinion, if its political leaders could be convinced that no enthusiasm would be aroused by substituting for original statesmanship a policy of compromise and weakness which was reduced at last unsuccessfully to attempt to avoid defeat by proposing nothing which was worth the trouble of attack. A gibe was flung by the writer of the article at Mr. Gladstone. Four years previously he had referred to him as ' that great statesman,' tut now he said with a sneer that ' when the Prime Minister has had an opportunity of declaring himself on subjects of the deepest interest and importance he has had as little to tell as Canning's needy knife- grinder.' Faithful followers of the Liberal chief and even some who had lifted up their voices against him were shocked by this rough lan- guage, but Mr. Chamberlain never spared censure when he considered it necessary, and although the Government had a splendid legislative record, they fell short of the Birmingham standard. Thickly strewn over the records of thirty years are the political projects of a most fertile-minded man. His first programme, sketched at municipal ward meetings and more carefully set forth in the Fort- nightly, consisted of Free Church, Free Land, Free Schools and Free Labour. A programme of four F.'s had been suggested previously at Glasgow by Sir Charles Dilke, but the baronet's fourth item was Free Trade. Probably Mr. Chamberlain preferred Free Labour, as a bait for the workers. ' No one of ordinary foresight and intelligence,' he wrote, ' will doubt that every item will be secured before twenty years have passed away.' After the water of double that period had flowed under the bridge part of the programme was still waiting to be carried out. The Church was not yet free ; land was only a little freer than in 1873 ; and although fees had been abolished the schools had not realized the early Radical aspiration. The chief feature of the Fortnightly article was an attack on the Established Church. In 1871 Mr. Chamberlain said it had always been the faithful ally of the landowners in their mistaken policy of Pro- tection and now he wrote that ' the Church has not lost its evil habit of being always on the side of privilege and authority — always op- posed to popular reforms. ... Its interests are bound up with those of wealth and power and vested rights, while the Dissenters, EARLY POLITICAL CAREER 25 nearer in their origin and their circumstances to the poor, share heartily their hopes and possibly their prejudices.' He endeavoured to unite the working classes with the Nonconformists on his programme, and predicted that they would ' claim for the nation as a whole the control and management of the vast funds which have been monopolised and misappropriated by an ecclesiastical organisation.' His immediate aim, at that time and ever afterwards, was ' to force our leaders to raise a standard which we may gladly follow or to make way for bolder or more active rrien.' ^ Happily, there was a very bold and active man in Birmingham ! To his first Radical programme a quaint reference was made in Recollections and Suggestions by Lord John Russell. With his motives of progress he reminded the veteran Liberal statesman of Tony Lumpkin in She Stoops to Conquer. Lord John copied part of a dialogue from the play, in which Tony and his mother, as he thought, represented tolerably well Mr. Chamberlain and John Bull. When asked to describe his journey Tony says : — You shall hear. I first took them down Featherbed Lane, where we stuck fast in the mud. I then rattled them crack over the stones of Up-and-Down Hill. I then introduced them to the gibbet on Heavy-Tree Heath ; and from that with a circumbendibus, I fairly lodged them in the horse-pond at the bottom of the garden. Hastings. But no accident, I hope. Tony. No, no, only mother is confoundedly frightened. 'So, in this case,' added the veteran, 'no harm, no accident has happened, but John Bull was confoundedly frightened.' Some hope of Radicalism was revived in Mr. Chamberlain by the reconstruction of the Government in the autumn of 1873. Mr. Bright, who was then described by Mr. Morley as ' a sounder and an older Liberal than Mr. Gladstone,' and who had resigned on account of ill health at the end of 1870, left no one in doubt as to his opinion of the Education Act. It was, he said, the worst measure passed by any Liberal Government since 1832. When, therefore, he re-entered the Cabinet in October, 1873, Nonconformists assumed that his colleagues had begun to see the error of their ways. At the meeting at which Mr. Bright addressed his constituents Mr. Chamberlain seconded a resolution welcoming that event ' as a means of reviving the en- thusiasm of the Liberal party, and especially of the section of it which has been alienated by recent legislation.' ' If,' he said, in a somewhat unusual strain, ' Ministerial policy had recently struck false notes and jarred on Liberal principles until these had been like sweet bells jingling out of tune and harsh, now they looked hopefully forward, ^ Thirty-two years later, pressing a forward policy on another party, Mr. Chamberlain said : ' No army was ever led successfully to battle on the principle that the lamest man should govern the march of the army.' 26 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN anticipating a master hand once more to touch the string and con- fident that the first strain of the old harmony would dispel the evil spirits of obstruction and reaction which previous discord had started into life.' To Mr. Forster, however, no mercy was shown. He was picked out for continued attack. On the eve of the general election the young Birmingham Radical said in biting manner : — ' The object of the Liberal party in England, throughout the continent of Europe and in America had been to wrest the education of the young out of the hands of the priests, to whatever denomination they might belong. It would be the crowning triumph of what was called Mr. Forster's statesmanship that he had delayed this admirable consummation for perhaps another generation.' A ' future leader of the democratic party ' was recognized in Mr. Chamberlain by a London weekly newspaper as early as 1872. In November of that year his fellow-townsman, Mr. Dixon, then one of the members for Birmingham, said he knew several reformers in the country who were even better than those in the House of Commons. There was, for instance, ' our own brilliant Joseph Chamberlain.' He was certainly thorough enough. On his first election as mayor the Times placed him in a special class as an ' advanced Liberal,' all the other civic chiefs being merely Liberal or Conservative. His opinions, as he noted, were apparently so exceptional that they re- quired a special adjective for their description and he boasted that he was gratified and honoured by the distinction. In the character of an advanced Liberal Mr. Chamberlain was at the end of 1873 invited to stand as a Parliamentary candidate for Sheffield. A local alderman had been brought out along with Mr. Mun- della, whose former colleague was not offering himself for re-election, but some members of the party were dissatisfied with the alderman and induced the newly chosen mayor of Birmingham to come forward. At a public breakfast on the first day of 1874, referring to a taunt that the majority of his committee were Dissenters and working men, he said he did not expect to find the nobility and gentry from the surrounding district thronging into the town to hear him address a meeting. He did not care to go into the House of Commons as the representative of wealth and influence ; these were already sufficiently represented. It was to represent the interest that he believed had been too long ignored that he wanted to go — ' the interest of the poor working men and the Dissenters.' An avowal which he made on this occasion has served as a mark in controversy : ' I avow myself,' he said, ' a political Dissenter ; mine is a family of political Dissenters.' At the breakfast and an open-air meeting Mr. Chamberlain gave an exposition of views which justified The Times adjective ' advanced.' He exhorted Mr. Gladstone and other Liberal leaders to be more EARLY POLITICAL CAREER 27 steadfast in their course of progress, and he denounced the mockery and sham which were called representation, and according to which the voice of the majority was stifled by a mass of class interests, vested rights and hereditary privileges. They must also, he said, consider the constitution of the Second Chamber, if Second Chamber there was to be. ' Nothing could be more absurd than to obtain the opinions of thirty millions of people and then allow their deliberate decision to be perverted and thwarted by three or four hundred gentle- men who met in a gilded chamber and represented the virtues or the vices or the abilities of ancestors who died a very long time ago and who unfortunately in every case had not been able to transmit to their descendants the talents by which they themselves rose to place.' Unfolding his programme of free schools, free labour, free land and free church, Mr. Chamberlain argued with regard to the schools, that the Sate should confine itself to teaching those things upon which all were agreed and leave matters of religion upon which they differed to the churches or voluntary organizations and to the parents themselves. He agreed with Mr. Bright that the control of the drink traffic should be taken from irresponsible magistrates and placed entirely in the hands of the people, who, he felt confident, would find some means to diminish the evil they all deplored. To save the party in Sheffield from being split into sections favour- ing the local alderman and the mayor of Birmingham respectively, it was arranged to have a test vote in Paradise Square, and this took place on January 29, 1874. Five days earlier Mr. Chamberlain's father died at his residence, Moor-Green Hall, in his seventy-eighth year. In the interval Parliament had been suddenly dissolved ; so that the Radical candidate's opportunities for making the acquaintance of the electors were extremely limited. To the people who packed Paradise Square he delivered a speech which frightened the moderate reformers, but he boldly said that as his opinions had not been assumed without reflection or consideration there was no likelihood that he would recant them. He expressed the conviction that power had been too much in the hands of the aris- tocracy, and that the working class had not reaped its due advantage from the changes which had occurred during the previous century. ' The rich were growing richer, and the poor were growing poorer every day.' While terrifjdng the timid with his description of social discontent, Mr. Chamberlain indicated a remedy. ' I find it in the frank and loyal confidence of the people in popularizing our institutions. I find it in extending education, which is the gratest enemy of class distinction. I find it in removing every pernicious restriction which has been imposed by our ancestors for the privilege of property. I believe in perfect intellectual, religious and political freedom. That 28 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN is my creed.' It included, as shown in a later chapter, the admission of Ireland's claim to Home Rule ; yet advanced as it was, the creed was accepted in Paradise Square, and the pushing young mayor was chosen along with Mr. Mundella to carry the Liberal colours. Mr. Roebuck, known as ' Tear 'Em,' who had been defeated in 1868, came forward as an independent candidate. Although still calling himself a thoroughgoing Radical, he had for several j^ears sup- ported the Tories. His career was to some extent a precursor of Mr. Chamberlain's. ' It is not I who have changed ; it is they,' said Mr. Roebuck, as he attacked the Liberals, just as Mr. Chamberlain spoke and acted in the next generation ; and like the later Tear 'Em, Mr. Roebuck advocated a new party which would be neither Whig nor Tory, but ' the party of the country itself.' Sir Wemyss Reid, who was editor of the Leeds Mercury, says in his Memoirs that Mr. Chamberlain's speeches at Sheffield attracted some notice in Yorkshire, though they passed unobserved by the larger public beyond. ' Up to that moment,' he writes, ' I had only known Mr. Chamberlain as a young Birmingham politician who was fond of sa5ang things both bitter and flippant, not only about his political opponents, but about the older members of his own party.' Mr. Morley took the trouble to know him better, and his speeches were not unobserved by The Times, which drew attention to his candidature as that of ' a prominent champion of the Birmingham Dissenters, and of advanced reform of all kinds.' Although the Midland capital regretted the departure of its capable citizen to seek a seat elsewhere, it sent him forth with good wishes. Dr. Dale wrote expressing high admiration of the spirit of fairness and justice and generosity which had invariably distinguished him ; and the Birmingham Daily Post, one of the ablest and steadiest supporters in the press which any politician ever had, declared that considerations higher than those which affected a particular locality rendered his presence most desirable in the House of Commons. ' No man is better qualified to make his way in the esteem of those who desire that Liberal principles shall be clearly stated and boldly maintained. To those who have any vestige of Toryism in them, Mr. Chamberlain is not likely to prove acceptable ; and this we suspect is one of the strongest reasons why he should be peculiarly suited to the robust Liberalism of Shef- field.' In the contest he encountered very powerful hostility. A section of Liberals, even in Sheffield, feared a candidate who was described as a revolutionist and Republican, and who demanded universal suffrage ; he was traduced as an atheist and infidel ; charges of harsh treatment of employes, made by a man who held up a screw at his meetings, did him harm although denied by Labour representatives I EARLY POLITICAL CAREER 29 from Birmingham ; and he lost the votes of some zealous partisans of the alderman to whom he had been preferred. He may have suffered also from the sneers which, as Sir Wemyss Reid says, he had flung at almost all the recognized leaders of Liberalism. When it was alleged during the contest that he was an enemy of the Prime Minister, he pointed to the fact that Mr. Bright,' than whom Mr. Gladstone had no more loyal friend, and no more consistent adherent,' had publicly wished him success ; but his former taunts and criticisms rose up against him. On the other hand, Mr. Roebuck, fighting under the banner of beer and Bible, received the support of the Conservatives. The varied influences against Mr. Chamberlain prevailed. He was at the bottom of the poll, the figures being : — Roebuck, 14,193. Mundella, 12,858. Chamberlain, 11,053. The defeat of the mayor was deplored by the Birmingham Daily Post as ' a serious blow to the advanced Liberals and to the Nonconformists,' and on the other hand, it was noted with gratification by The Times as a significant rebuff, and it gave immense pleasure to the Sheffield Conservatives themselves. The Liberal party lost heavily in the general election. There was a Jonah in the Government ship. The twenty-fifth clause of the Education Act and Mr. Forster's obstinacy, according to Mr. Bright, did much to wreck the vessel. Mr. Gladstone's own reference to the sore subject in his address was described by the National Education League as a serious misapprehension of its gravity, and on the day of the dissolution Mr, Chamberlain, as chairman of the Executive Committee, signed an appeal to the electors to exert their utmost influence upon candidates with the view of pledging them to vote for the repeal of the obnoxious clause and to resist any further concessions to denominational interests. This attitude weakened the Liberal force. For the sake of the general cause the indejjendent section rallied at last to the Government but, as Mr. Gladstone said, they rallied too late. They never forgave the chief offender. When he aspired to the leadership which Mr. Gladstone resigned, his candidature was opposed by the League and its numerous friends in the Liberal ranks. ' There is no vindictiveness,' wrote Mr. Morley, ' on the part of those who think Mr. Forster's attitude about the schools a reactionary mistake, nor any malice in their refusal to continue in membership in a party to which he is to dictate its policy.' Lord Hartington, the Whig, was preferred by the least Whiggish to the statesman ' who was once a Ra.dical.' Thus retribution fell on Mr. Forster. His champions have 30 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN pointed out that his colleagues were equally responsible for the Edu- cation Act, but several of them, on obtaining their freedom from office, voted for the repeal of the clause to which there was the keenest ob- jection, whereas he himself supported it in the Tory lobby, although nearly three hundred candidates were pledged against it. On Mr. Chamberlain's return to Birmingham from his unsuccessful contest in Sheffield the Town Crier put into his mouth the words of A MODERN ULYSSES. I cannot rest from canvass — I have tried. . . . Much have I seen and known — meetings of wards. Mass meetings, School Boards, Councils, Caucuses — Myself not silent, heard among them all. . . . 'Tis not too late to seek another seat ; For my purpose holds To rise above the Council and the Board And sit in Parliament before I die. It may be I shall reach the Happy House And see the great Mundella whom I knew. The independence of his political career was suspended for only a very brief period. We found him at Sheffield calling upon Mr. Bright as a witness that he was no enemy of Mr. Gladstone. Before twelve months had passed he was again addressing his defeated leader with great freedom. ' It may be at once admitted,' he wrote in the Fort- nightly of October, 1874, ' that if the late Prime Minister is willing once more to lead the advance, no better and no more skilful general can be found or desired.' But he proceeded : ' Much as Mr. Gladstone is honoured and respected, it is not for his credit or for ours that we should take him back as we recover a stolen watch — on the condition that no questions are asked.' Mr. Chamberlain went so far as to describe Mr. Gladstone's election address as ' the meanest public docu- ment that has ever, in like circumstances, proceeded from a states- man of the first rank,' and to denounce his manifesto as ' simply an appeal to the selfishness of the middle classes.' It was for the Radicals and Nonconformists that he claimed to write, although most of them treated the Liberal chief with much less disrespect. His gibes were considered cruel and in bad taste. Even the Daily Telegraph remarked that ' when Mr. Gladstone had just fallen from power — when the great Liberal lion lay asleep after his defeat — Mr. Chamber- lain crept up to give a safe kick at the leader who had led the party in a succession of magnificent campaigns.' The article entitled ' The Next Page of the Liberal Programme,' which attracted the attention of all politicians, appeared in the same number of the Fortnightly as a chapter of Beauchamp's Career in which Mr. Chamberlain might have found an interesting study of the character of his friend. Admiral Maxse. To have had some brilliant pages from EARLY POLITICAL CAREER 31 George Meredith along with a bold political contribution from the rising Radical was a triumph for the editor, although in later years Mr. Morley may have raised his eyebrows and shrugged his shoulders at the recollection of Mr. Chamberlain's readiness to dispense with the chief whose trusted lieutenant he himself became. The Birmingham championship of the Radicals was confident enough. ' Without them,' said the politician whose pen was almost as pungent as his tongue, ' it would be difficult to distinguish the party of the Moderate Tories, who do not practise their principles, from the party of the Moderate Liberals, who have no principles to practise. Political opinions on both sides are becoming gelatinous, and in the case of the Liberals, it is Radicalism which gives all the flavour.' Separation of Church and State was the subject which Mr. Cham- berlain wished to write on the Next Page, It was indeed for refusing to promote disestablishment that Mr. Gladstone received his warning. ' Mr. Gladstone, it is true,' he wrote, * commissioned his son to say at Whitby that this page of Liberal history would not bear his name ; but the rapidly changing conditions of the problem may yet cause him to reconsider a decision which might place him at no distant date in opposi- tion to the will of a clear majority of the nation. If, however, Mr. Gladstone feels that he has done his work, his worst enemies will admit that he has earned his right to repose. His absence from the field may alter the character of the battle, but will not delay the encounter nor change the fortunes of the fight. Great crises do not wait for leaders, but create, or do without them.' On account of the Fortnightly article scorn and abuse were poured on Mr. Chamberlain. By one superior critic he was compared to a Yankee opposition orator on the stump, and no severer censure seemed possible. Whigs as well as Tories shuddered at his sentiments and still more at the boldness of his language. What was thought of him on the other hand in sympathetic quarters may be gathered from a note in English Radical Leaders, published in 1875. ' A representative man, in the best sense, of the well-to-do English middle class, Mr. Chamberlain,' as the friendly writer recorded, ' has already achieved, without any fortuitous aids, a position of considerable influence. It is not too much to say that his opinions are largely instrumental in moulding the demands of advanced Radical and Liberal politicians in Great Britain.' Not yielding to censure, and not valuing praise overmuch, he con- tinued to advocate the first of his programmes. He kept disestablish- ment in the forefront, and was regarded with increasing favour by Nonconformists. Presiding on May 3, 1876, at the annual meeting of the Liberation Society held at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, he produced a great impression by his zeal ; and he was equally effective 32 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN in exciting enthusiasm at similar gatherings elsewhere. Temperance was another of his lofty causes. In an article he pointed out ' The Right Method with the Publicans,' and in a second he advocated Muni- cipal Public Houses. Mr. Robert Lowe had said that there were causes at work which would gradually and ultimately eradicate the evils of intemperance. In old age Mr. Chamberlain himself spoke in the same strain. At the time of his early programme, however, he was less patient. ' No doubt,' he scornfully wrote, ' there are causes at work which tend to the ultimate eradication of everything, but why must the present generation go on wearing the devil's chain ? It is no comfort to families whose happiness has been wrecked, and their homes made desolate by the drunkenness of some relative, to hear that in a century or two a millennium may be expected in which the evil of drinking will disappear.' REPUBLICANISM AND ROYALTY THE taint of Republicanism adhered for a long time to Mr. Cham- berlain. Perhaps he was not anxious at first to get rid of it. On the other hand, his language was sympathetic rather than definite. On the fall of the French Empire, in 1870, he attended a meeting of congratulation held in Birmingham and in supporting a resolution, ' That we rejoice that the irrepressible instinct of the French people for the divine right of self-government has re-estab- lished their Repubhc after a century of sacrifices for freedom,' he said he did not feel any great horror at the idea of the possible estab- lishment of a Republic in our own country. He was quite certain that sooner or later it would come ! For an address by Charles Bradlaugh on ' The Impeachment of the House of Brunswick,' the use of the Town Hall was requested by a Republican committee, and the memorial came before the Town Council on October 10, 1871. The mayor moved the rejection of the apphcation on the ground that the lecture was an attack on the reigning House, but this plea failed to frighten Councillor Chamberlain. He supported the petition, remarking that he did not think there was anything stronger against the House of Brunswick in Bradlaugh's impeachment than in the lecture on ' The Four Georges ' which Thackeray had given in Birmingham. Controversy took place in later years as to the character in which he presided at the Electoral Reform Congress in St. James's HaU, London, on November 12, 1872. When he wished to minimize his connexion with Republicanism he explained that he attended on behalf of the Birmingham Liberal Association, and that the proposal of the Republican Club of his borough that he should represent it was made without his knowledge. At the time, however, he appeared to acquiesce in a proposal which in itself indicated the impression produced by his speeches and sentiments. He announced at the Congress that he had been delegated to attend by the Liberal Associa- tion and had been nominated as the representative of several Non- conformist Committees, 'and in common with Mr. CatteU as the representative of the Birmingham Republican Club.' A great sensation wa» caused by a speech which Councillor Cham- 33 7 34 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN berlain delivered, in proposing the health of Queen Victoria, at a dinner which he gave on December 5, 1872, to the volunteers who had worked for him in a municipal contest. The views which he then expressed were not those of a scatterbrained youth. He was thirty-six, and a leader in civic, educational and political reform. Among the many bad qualities which his opponents discovered in him the one, he said, which perhaps exercised them most was his Republicanism. He had not introduced that matter into the con- test, but when he was attacked he was bound as an honest man to avow the opinions which he entertained and to defend them as he best might. Thus he set them forth — He was one of those who held — and he was bound to say he thought there were very few inteUigent and educated men who did not hold — the opinion that the best form of government for a free and enlightened people was that of a Republic, and, moreover, that that was the form of government to which the nations of Europe were surely and not very slowly tending. At the same time he was not at all prepared to enter into an agitation in order to upset the existing order of things, in order to destroy the Monarchy and to change the name of the titular ruler of this country. He thought that was a matter of not the slightest importance. What was of real importance was that Republican opinions — what he believed to be the true Republican spirit — should be spread among the people. The idea that, to his mind, underlay Republicanism, was this : that in all cases merit should have its fair chance, and that it should not be handicapped in the race, that it should not be preceded by the accident of birth and of privi- lege, that all special privileges that interfered with the happiness of the people should be swept away, that men should have equal rights before the law and equal opportunities of serving their country, and lastly that the principle of fraternity should prevail and that every effort should be made to promote, as far as possible, friendly feelings among the various classes of the country. If when these objects were attained the majority of his countrymen were still anxious to have v/hat Mr. Frederic Harrison had very wittily called a hereditary grand master of the cere- monies he did not think there would be any need to quarrel with their taste or to dispute the decision at which they had arrived.^ In reply to a ' heckler ' at Sheffield, when offering liimself as a candidate in January, 1874, Mr. Chamberlain spoke guardedly. He said : ' As to the Queen, he, like every wise citizen, had the highest personal esteem and respect for her. He did not think the question of Republican institutions in England was at present a practical question at all. As a matter of theory the best form of government for a free people was a popular form in which merit was always pre- ferred to both.' He continued, however, to be described in the press as a Republican. On account of Mr. Chamberlain's daring opinions and aggressive tongue a very lively interest was taken in the visit of the Prince and Princess of Wales to open the new municipal buildings in Birmingham ^ Birmingham Daily Post. REPUBLICANISM AND ROYALTY 35 during his mayoralty in November, 1874. The newspapers reveal the amusement with which the piquant affair was watched. The Mayor's bold attacks on the Liberal leaders, his eloquent championship of the Dissenters, his speeches at Sheffield on social discontent, his attacks on privilege and his Repubhcan sympathies had drawn general attention to the man who was to receive their ro3'al highnesses, and London turned upon him a quizzing gaze. He was sneeringly re- minded that it had been written of him that he had already been favoured with an interview by the Prince and had endeavoured to explain to him, with only partial success, the advantage of surrender- ing to the people his rights of succession ! In a mocking vein The Times remarked with reference to Mr. Chamberlain's introduction to the royal visitors, that the curiosity of the polite crowd was as great as it was when Mayor P6tion was presented to Marie Antoinette. Tliis was the heavy, virtuous Parisian who in a historic procession to Paris, ' at his luncheon, comfortably filled his wine-glass in the Royal berhne, flung out his chicken-bones past the nose of Royalty itself, and on the King's saying, France cannot be a RepubUc, answered No, it is not ripe yet.' The Mayor of Birmingham might have been pohte enough to give a similar response if the Prince of Wales had made the same remark, but his critics promptly learned that he did not belong to the order of men who throw chicken-bones past the royal face. His conduct on the occasion of the royal visit was one of the earliest surprises in a life of surprises. At the borough boundary he received the great personages who had driven from Packington Hall. In the first carriage with the Prince and Princess and their host (Lord Aylesford) sat a statesman, ' the serious son of a serious duke,' whose career crossed and recrossed Mr. Chamberlain's. Did any presage of conflict flash through his sharp and busy brain when, after he had been presented by Lord Aylesford, he raised his eyeglass and looked at Lord Hartington ? Or was his mind preoccupied by the cares of the courtier ? Fastidious critics discerned no embarrassment in the mayor's beha\aour, and as each hour of the royal visit passed their wonder and admiration grew. Here was no rude demagogue — no man of ordinary talents. His speech at lunch, in giving the toast of the Prince and Princess, produced a most agreeable impression. ' I do not doubt,' he said, ' that the result of their visit, under the circumstances, is to draw closer the ties between the throne and the people, and to increase the ])opularity already enjoyed by the members of the royal house — ■ a popularity based quite as much on their hearty sympathy and frank appreciation of the wishes of the nation as on their high position and exalted rank.' Their royal highnesses were delighted with their visit ; and thus Mr. Chamberlain, while his Parhamentary career was 36 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN approaching, won the friendship of his future king and queen without forfeiting the respect of pohtical friends or municipal colleagues. Testimony was borne in various quarters to the correctness of his conduct. His own fellow-townsmen were gratified and at the same time amused by the ease with which, as an evening newspaper recorded, he showed himself a perfect courtier all through the pro- ceedings ; and some of the spectators who had come to sneer went away with praise on their tongues and their pens, declaring that he had said the right thing and behaved as a gentleman. A reporter who had chronicled many mayors' speeches, delivered before royal personages, doubted if he had ever heard any which were couched in such a tone at once of courteous homage, manly independence, and gentlemanly feeling, which were so perfectly becoming and so much the right thing in every way as those of Mr. Chamberlain ; and with all its editorial authority The Times, which had shuddered at the mayor's politics, generously admitted that his reception of the Prince and Princess was ' simple, dignified, and becoming, and the speeches in which he proposed the health of Her Majesty and of their Royal Highnesses were as distinguished for their loyal courtesy as by their self-respect.' Punch depicted Mr. Chamberlain as ' a Brummagem Lion,' kneeling before the Princess, submissively laying his claws on her lap and con- cealing the Fortnightly Review behind his back, while the Prince, with hand on mouth, represses a smile. The cartoon was accompanied by the following amusing verses which enable us to realize the feeling of the time — A BRUMMAGEM LION {Reproduced by permission of the proprietors of ' Punch ') That this Brummagem Republican Mayor ironical fate should tether, With this pleasant Prince and Princess of Wales in hardware handcuffs together ; That this Chamberlain must hide his red cap — not to speak, as yet, of destroying it— And bow his bow, and speak his address, and feel how his Council's enjoying it I But Punch gives credit where credit is due, and if Chamberlain have put his foot in it, And set up his Tree of Liberty, without first making sure there's a root in it. And talked a great deal of brag and bounce and nonsense, and written more. Punch owns that Birmingham's banner, in this fix, he gallantly bore. Like a gentleman he has comported himself in this glare of the Princely sun ; Has said just what he ought to have said, and done what he ought to have done ; Has put his red cap in his pocket, and sat on his Fortnightly article. And of Red Republican claws or teeth displayed not so much as a particle. Nay, this Brummagen Republican Lion for the nonce has ta'en to roar him As gently as any sucking dove, or the gentle Princess before him : Has laid his awful claws in her lap, and meekly begged her to clip 'em — And has promised, if smaller lions dared roar, to take and whip 'em — I REPUBLICANISM AND ROYALTY 37 In short, has behaved himself less like a Republican than a Chamberlain Who has worn a gold key all his life, and in marSchale-poy/der and amber lain ; There's only one little query, which e'en a kind Punch can't smother — On which side is the electro-plate — the ' advanced ' face, or the other ? A caricature called A Vision of the Future, which amused the people of Birmingham, depicted the arch-Radical on his knees re- ceiving the honour of knighthood. If he had been an ordinary man this would have been his gratifying reward. The gift of prophecy, withheld from the artist, was granted to Mr. Newdegate, a stiff Midland Tory who was impressed by the manner in which Mr. Chamberlain played the host and the infinite grace with which he conducted the Princess to the luncheon table, and who was reported by Mr. T. H. S. Escott (Mr. Morley's successor as editor of the Fortnightly) to have said : ' It was the prettiest sight I ever saw in my hfe : Chamberlain I always suspected to be a born courtier and squire of dames — by the time he is sixty he wiU be working together with Robert Cecil.' A prediction that was fulfilled ! Soon after the royal visit, with its glimpse of the complex character of the Republican mayor, he was plunged into deep grief. The death of his second wife in February, 1875, was a terrible stroke to a man who, with increasing poUtical and municipal duties, relied greatly on the aid and solace of home hfe. This aspect of his loss was alluded to by his friend, Mr. C. E. Mathews, at a pubhc meeting. The blow which he had sustained ' could only be guessed at by those who had watched in the midst of a laborious and successful public career how closely he had clung to domestic ties.' Condolence was expressed by the Town Council, one alderman remarking that the sad event had fallen on the whole town as a bereavement is seldom felt out of a particular family, and another stating that those who were present at the funeral scarcely ever witnessed an event so solemn and so touching. Mr. Chamberlain tendered his resignation as mayor, but the Council would not accept it, and although he suffered another severe affliction by the death of his mother in the following August, the call to public duty was too urgent and imperious to be ignored, He was, indeed, at the gateway of the avenue which led to fame. VI RADICAL MEMBER ' \ T the age of forty,' said the Birmingham Daily Post, in a review 2\. of Mr, Chamberlain's career at a much later period, ' he had already achieved sufficient to satisfy the ambitions of most men. Combining astonishing energy with a remarkable capacity for leader- ship, he had done an enormous amount of social and philanthropic work before he entered the City Council, and then in the short space of a three years' mayoralty he carried three schemes, each of which would have appeared too colossal for attack to a man with an ordinary outlook on life.' It was after accomplishing all this that he entered the arena where he won world-wide celebrity. A seat in Parliament was found for Mr. Chamberlain as a repre- sentative of Birmingham on the retirement of Mr. Dixon in June, 1876. No doubt or hesitation was felt by the local Liberals with regard to the man they should select. As soon as the vacancy was announced the new candidate was chosen with enthusiasm by the Committee of the Four Hundred. The president of the Association, giving an assurance which might have been reserved for a quarter of a century, stated that although he had passed the borderland between youth and middle age he had still all his intellectual vigour and all his physical powers in full activity. Popular faith in Mr. Chamber- Iain was quaintly expressed at the nomination meeting by a work- ing man who said : ' Joseph, thou hast been faithful over the things in our borough — over the things we have committed to thy trust thou hast been faithful ; we will make thee a ruler of the nation.' In the same phraseology another elector, at a public meeting held after the new member's unopposed return, declared : " We can trust our Joseph to go down into Egypt where, fearless of the power of Pharaoh and the seductions of Potiphar's wife, he will do his duty to his constituents.' Tory newspapers sneered at ' our Joseph,' but the term was one of endearment in Birmingham, and as the local Liberal organ said : ' We give the nation of our best, even though our own interests may suffer by the gift.' Mr. Chamberlain had retired from business two years previously to devote himself to the affairs of his fellow-citizens, and now — while he retained his connection with the Council as an 38 RADICAL MEMBER 39 alderman — he resigned the mayoralty and the chairmanship of the School Board in order that he might give his whole time to politics and the public interest for the remainder of his life. It was said that Mr. Chamberlain went to Parliament as the representative of Dr. Dale. ' Well,' he retorted, ' if that be so there is not a representative in the House of Commons who will have a better, wiser or nobler con- stituency.' His credentials were summed up by the Daily Post in a passage which, although eulogistic, may be read without much allow- ance being required for local partiality. ' The education campaign, in which as chairman of the Committee of the League, and as one of its founders, he took so large a share, made him widely known in all the great centres of population in the country. His gallant fight as one of the Liberal candidates for Sheffield, though unsuccessful in its immediate purpose, gave him reputation as an earnest and advanced Liberal politician, and established his rank as a speaker of no ordinary range and power. His rare combination of literary skill with ora- torical faculty has made him known as a vigorous and attractive political writer, and as a thinker whose opinions and conclusions, how- ever much in some quarters they may challenge dissent, must at least command examination.' On the threshold of his Parliamentary career Mr. Chamberlain gave offence to a great political party. Within a few hours of his selection as candidate, he made at a School Board meeting an attack on Disraeli which friends found ' unjustifiable and most re- grettable.' Criticising Lord Sandon's Education Bill he imputed to the Conservative Government deliberate dishonesty, and described Mr. Disraeli as ' a man who never told the truth except by accident, a man who went down to the House of Commons and flung at the British Parliament the first lie that entered his head ... a man who on fifty other occasions had deliberately played with the House of Commons and exhibited his cynical contempt for the honour of Eng- land.' For this language he was denounced in the press throughout the country. The Daily Telegraph said it looked as if he were pos- sessed of what horse-dealers call ' an ugly temper ' ; the Sportsman advised him to simulate the language of a gentleman ; the Globe scolded him for Billingsgate, a free use of calumny, threadbare fustian, intemperate rhetoric. A prompt apology was offered by the offender. In a published letter he expressed regret that he should have used expressions which conveyed, or could be construed into an imputation on the personal character of members of the Government. ' I hope,' he wrote, ' it may be accepted as an extenuation of an unwitting offence, that I have been greatly over-worked lately, and that I was speaking with- out preparation under considerable mental strain, and in face of 40 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN somewhat irritating interraptions.' The apology was not considered satisfactory by all his opponents. A member of the School Board, denying provocation, stated that he spoke with the aid of notes which he had made during the debate, and the local Tory organ, the Daily Gazette, took the opportunity to expatiate on his tongue and temper. The Saturday Review sneered at him as a fair example of the Mechanics Institute mind and strongly protested against a man capable of such gross and vulgar abuse being sent to Parliament, while a speaker at a meeting in his own town said the sooner he was sent to St. Stephen's to learn manners the better. The Liberal leaders were not forgotten by the daring man who caused so much annoyance in the Conservative camp. Instead of showing meekness and docility when about to sit near them, he said in his first speech to his constituents : ' We hear a great deal about the loyalty which the rank and file owe to the chiefs of the party, but may we not fairly ask whether some loyalty is not due from the leaders of the party to the principles by which the party is governed ? ' In this challenging mood, with the reputation of a good platform speaker, of a successful man of business, of a great municipal admin- istrator and of an advanced and rather dangerous Radical and political Dissenter, he went from Birmingham to Westminster. Disraeli was within a few weeks of the close of his career in the House of Commons when Mr. Chamberlain entered it. There, the newcomer found also the gentle-mannered, fair-minded Sir Stafford Northcote ; Mr. Gathome Hardy, a fluent orator and a favourite of the country squires ; Mr. Assheton Cross, an unomamental Home Secretary ; Lord John Manners, the champion of the old nobility ; and the hard-headed, hard-hitting, dogged Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, with whom the pushful mayor was to be closely associated ten years later. On the front Opposition bench were statesmen whom Mr. Chamberlain had counselled and rebuked. Lord Hartington had already been the subject of his strictures, Mr. Goschen had shared the sneers aimed at ' moderate Liberals,' and Mr. Forster had no reason to be grateful for the election of the Leaguer who did so much to dis- credit his education policy. Mr. Bright took comparatively little part in Parliamentary controversy, and Mr. Gladstone, to whom in retirement the hearts of Liberals fondly turned, only flashed on the familiar scene at incalculable intervals. On the Conservative side sat a tall, thin, elegant young man, who was known chiefly as the nephew of the Marquis of Salisbury, and who was pondering A Defence of Philosophic Doubt. An alliance between Arthur Balfour and Joseph Chamberlain in the government of the country would have seemed then more unlikely than official co-operation between Mr, Gladstone and Mr. Disraeji. RADICAL MEMBER 41 Introduced by John Bright and Joseph Cowen, the new member took his seat on July 13. While he was waiting on a cross-bench below the bar he did what others did ; he put on his hat. This pro- ceeding on the part of a man who had not been introduced was a dreadful breach of Parliamentary etiquette. Conventional members saw in it a portent. The doorkeeper pointed out to the newcomer his error, and after a discreet interval he uncovered his head, where- upon the sensitive champions of order breathed again. His recep- tion was thus described by the unsympathetic Birmingham Gazette ; ' A slight buzz of expectation passed through the House. . . . The general feeling seemed to be one of curiosity rather than enthusiasm. On the Conservative side of the House there was silence. Above the gangway on the Liberal side there was silence also. Below the gang- way on the Opposition benches there was a slight cheer ; and that was all.' Mr. Chamberlain took his seat among the independent Liberals below the gangway. There he found a member as remark- able as himself — Charles Stewart Pamell, who had been elected for Meath in April, 1875. He became intimate with the famous Irish- maji, and as he told the House of Commons, after their estrangement, ' we did not look at questions altogether from the same point of view. Nevertheless we found that at times we could act with each other, and our intercourse was close and frank.' Soon after his election, a friend came to the confident Radical and said : ' Would you mind, as I am an older member, my giving you a little bit of advice ? ' Of course he made a polite response and the friend went on : ' Well, you know, you have come into the House of Commons rather late, and you have come with some sort of repu- tation from outside. The House of Commons does not like outside reputations ; it is accustomed to make and unmake its own, and I think that if you would not mind — if you could contrive to break down a little, I think the House would take it as a compliment, and you would be all the better for it.' To break down was more than Mr. Chamberlain could contrive. Out of respect for the assembly he was ' so proud to enter ' he had intended to remain silent for the few weeks that remained of his first session, but even this reticence was impossible. His voice was heard for the first time in the House on August 4, when Lord San don's Education Bill drew him into debate in defence of the Birmingham School Board. He rose from the third bench below the Opposition gangway — a bench from which in later years many a taunt was flung at him by Mr. Healy, Mr. Dillon and Mr. T. P. O'Connor. The Prime Minister, whom he had attacked a few weeks previously in Birmingham, sauntered in, and raising his eyeglass between thumb and forefinger, scrutinized the new member. Prob- 42 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN ably Mr. Disraeli was less surprised than some of his friends who had queer notions of Radical mayors when he watched the smartly dressed man with youthful-looking face and slim figure and heard the clear, penetrating, subdued voice. It was appropriate that Mr. Chamber- lain should make his maiden speech on the subject which had given him notoriety. His experience, he said, had led him to the conclusion that the religious difficulty was not a parents' difficulty and that in fact very little would be heard of it if the priests and parsons would stand aside. He advocated the separation of religious and secular education, and said it was believed that by throwing religious instruc- tion on voluntary effort they would secure much more satisfactory results. In this strain he spoke for about twenty minutes and he sat down amid the hearty cheering of the Liberals. According to a correspondent who wrote with a friendly but not uncritical pen, ' he addressed the House with the greatest fluency and self-possession ; his elocution was good and free from provincialisms ; his manner was persuasive and his voice agreeable ; and what was especially remarkable was that he struck at once, and as to the manner born, the conversational key and tone of argument which characterizes the present House of Commons.' Compliments flowed from several speakers. Colonel Nolan, an Irish Catholic, whose point of view was far from Mr. Chamberlain's, described his speech as able and temperate, and Radical Mr. Hopwood remarked that it must have been listened to with attention and pleasure by all who heard it. Praise came even to the lips of Mr. Forster, who was unaccustomed to the paying of soft compliments. More than any other member he might have grudged praise to the conspicuous assailant of his education com- promise, but generosity was not among the qualities which this rugged man lacked, and he congratulated his antagonist on ' the remarkable ability with which he had realized the expectations entertained by many of his colleagues.' A cynic hastily likened Mr. Chamberlain in his spruceness to a ladies' doctor, and he was evidently regarded as the mildest-mannered Radical that ever cut a poHtical throat. Even that rigid, old-fashioned Tory, Sir Walter Barttelot, praised him when he delivered his second speech — on the Prisons Bill — on February 15, 1877. With kindly condescension Sir Walter encouraged him by saying his views were expressed ' with a convincing calmness which was so acceptable in that House.' His first eleborate speech in Parliament was on the Gothenburg licensing system. He spent part of the recess in 1876 along with Mr. Jesse Collings, in a visit to Sweden and Lapland and an inquiry into the working of the municipal control of the liquor traffic. In January, 1877, he induced the Town Council of Birmingham to apply RADICAL MEMBER 43 to Parliament for powers to adopt a similar system ; and in the House of Commons on March 13 he proposed to enable municipalities to acquire the existing interests in the retail of intoxicating drinks, and, if they saw fit, to carry on the trade for the convenience of the in- habitants. He remarked that moral suasion had been practised for more than thirty years, and had never reduced the returns, nor diminished the gains of a single person engaged in the trade, and he feared that the evidence would not warrant them in believing that any better results would follow the progress of education than had followed the exercise of moral suasion. On the other hand he felt certain that if the community were entrusted with the control of the drink shops, one half of them would, as a matter of course, be inmie- diately abandoned, and the remainder be placed under strict control. He spoke of ' the baneful influence of a gigantic, vested interest, whose tyranny and whose insolence must be as repugnant to those who could profit by it as it was to those who were suffering from its oppression.' The favourable impression produced by his earlier efforts was confirmed by his comparatively long speech on this occasion. He delivered it from Mr. Bright 's old place at the upper end of the second bench below the gangway. ' His voice,' a critic wrote, ' is perfect ; his articulation distinct. His action, too, is good ; he knows what to do with his hands.' Fault was found only with his use of an eyeglass, but to this the House becemie accustomed. His lucidity was admired by all hsteners, and there was again an air of wonder at the temperate tone of one who, as Sir Wilfrid Lawson remarked, had been looked upon as a rather dangerous and revolutionary character. Notwith- standing his lucidity and moderation, his resolution was rejected by 103 votes to 51, the minority consisting mainly of Radicals and Irish. * * * * * The complaint of imperialists that they hear too much of domestic policy and too little of foreign affairs did not apply to the Disraeli regime. When Mr. Chamberlain entered Parliament the Eastern Question forced forward by the outrages in Bulgaria, was beginning to disturb Eiu"ope, and a few weeks later Mr. Gladstone, who for three years made this subject the main business of his life, stirred the national conscience by a famous pamphlet. His demand for the expulsion of Tiu-kish power ' bag and baggage ' from the oppressed and desolated province was enthusiastically supported by Radicals. Instead of now attaching conditions to his return Mr. Chamberlain appealed to him to resume the leadership of the Liberal force, and expressed the belief that Lord Hartington would be the first to urge him to put on once more his well-dinted armour. The veteran refused to do what the new member and many others suggested, but he acted with such vigour and spoke with such eloquence that the great mass of the party turned 44 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN to him for guidance. In April, 1877, without the support of the official leaders of the Opposition, Mr. Gladstone gave notice of five resolutions declaring that Turkey, by its misgovernment, had lost all claim to support, and calling for the joint intervention of the Powers. To meet, however, the views of his former colleagues he withdrew four of his resolutions, and moved only the general censure of the Porte. According to Lord Elcho, he thus lay down in peace with both Lord Hartington and Mr. Chamberlain, while Mr. Bright gave them all his blessing. This was an inaccurate account of the position. Although the whole ground was covered by Mr. Gladstone's speech, which Mr. Arthur Balfour regarded as an unequalled feat of Parlia- mentary courage. Parliamentary skill. Parliamentary endurance and Parliamentary eloquence, the Radicals were disappointed by the modification of the resolutions and their new leader from Birmingham undertook the advocacy of joint intervention. Political friendship between Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Chamberlain was promoted by a visit which the elder statesman paid to Birmingham in the summer of 1877, at the inauguration of the National Liberal Federation. Mr. Chamberlain invited him in what Lord Granville described as ' a very well-written letter.' ^ There was some fear lest the active Radical who was endeavouring to reorganize the party might set up the old chief against Lord Hartington and hail him as a returned leader. Perhaps a hint was sent to Birmingham that this would be embarrassing. Indiscreet language was avoided. Mr. Gladstone, who was the guest of the new member delivered, on May 31, a thrilling oration on the Eastern Question to an audience of 25,000 people in Bingley Hall, and his next day's engagements included an interview with Cardinal Newman at which his host was present. ' Saw Mr. Chamberlain's very pleasing children,' is a note in the statesman's diary, reproduced by Mr. Morley. Host and guest praised one another. At a banquet Mr. Chamberlain, who may have regretted his attack on Mr. Gladstone's last election address, proposed the health of the visitor in a glowing eulogy, recalling the years in Queen Victoria's reign. When statesmen at her council met Who knew the seasons when to take Occasion by the hand, and make The bounds of freedom wider yet. No words could have pleased Mr. Gladstone better, and he in turn paid a friendly tribute to ' my kind host, and your respected well-known and distinguished member, Mr. Chamberlain.' The restlessness of the younger Radical at the same time provoked some ^ Life of Lord Granville, by Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice. RADICAL MEMBER 45 banter from Mr. Bright. ' His great complaint,' said the tribune, ' is that nobody is active enough for him ; and next week, after the great week which you have experienced here, I am afraid he will be looking forward to some further great political excitement.' ' Mr. Chamberlain looks through his eye-glass,' he added, ' as if he was only waiting till I should resume my seat, and then he might answer this charge which I have brought against him.' In the agitation on the Eastern Question Mr. Chamberlain took a prominent part by formulating Liberal opinion through the new Federation and by addressing a large number of meetings. The object of the meetings, as he said in his pithy style, was to prevent a drop of blood from being shed, or a pound of English treasure being spent in order to uphold the detestable tyranny of the Turks ; and to enlist all the influence which could be exercised by diplomacy in order to secure the better government of their Christian provinces. Opinion in this country was divided between sympathy with those provinces and fear of their patron, the Tsar. At the beginning of 1878, when the Russian forces entered Adrianople and reached the Sea of Mormora, popular feeling was excited by the supposed danger to our interests at Constantinople, and there was an outburst of jingoism when the British fleet was ordered to the Dardanelles as a warning demonstration, but Mr. Chamberlain declared in the House of Commons that our interests in the east of Europe included not merely the good government and the welfare of the Christian inhabitants of Turkey, but also more cordial and friendly relations between Russia and Eng- land. If this question were once satisfactorily settled, he did not see any reason why these two countries should be alienated from one another. Jingo feeling became still more excited when Disraeli insisted on the Treaty of San Stefano, which was concluded between Russia and Turkey, being submitted to the European Powers. The decision of the Government to call out the Reserves and summon Indian troops to Malta was noisily applauded. Still the Radicals resisted the popular sentiment. In April a deputation of about 450 representative men, organized by the Committee of the Federation and the National Reform Union, under the direction of Mr. Chamberlain, had an interview with the Opposition leaders, whose attitude did not satisfy them ; and in the House of Commons Sir Wilfrid Lawson submitted an amendment declaring that the calling out of the Reserves was neither prudent in the interests of European peace nor necessary for the sake of the country, nor warranted by the state of matters abroad. This, although moved against the desire of the party chiefs, was supported by Mr. Chamberlain. It had been said that the Treaty of San Stefano would abrogate Turkey in Europe. 'If that were all,' 46 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN said Mr. Chamberlain, ' so much the better for the world. Turkey in Europe was an anachronism, and the sooner she was abrogated the better for the Turkish provinces.' Lord Hartington, deprecating ' this unfortunate and ill-advised amendment,' urged that it was not desirable to multiply occasions of difference between the one side of the House and the other. The mover, however, took a division, and Mr. Chamberlain acted with him as teller. Liberals of the two sections united after the Berlin Congress. The Treaty of San Stefano was in most of its essential features ratified by the Congress, and thus it led to the emancipation of eleven millions of people from the Turkish yoke, but by an arrangement with the Porte we acquired Cyprus and undertook to defend Turkey against Russian aggression in Asia. Lord Hartington, on August i, submitted a resolution to the House deploring that an engagement had been entered into and responsibilities incurred without the previous know- ledge of Parliament. The speech which Mr. Chamberlain delivered on this issue was strikingly in contrast with his imperialist orations of later years. Although willing to undertake a certain responsi- bility, he declared that already the weary Titan staggered under ' the too vast orb of her fate,' and he denounced the Government for having spent ten millions to satisfy the ' vulgar patriotism of the music-halls.' He complained that the British plentipotentiaries at the Congress showed themselves the ready and willing champions 6f the selfish fears and jealousies of great despotisms, and that on more than one occasion they repressed the aspirations and limited the claims of the subject-nationalities. One of these plenipotentiaries became his first chief in a Unionist Government, and the private secretary who accompanied that Minister to Berlin was his second coalition chief. From the latter he received the sternest rebuke in the controversy, Mr. Arthur Balfour complaining of his ' most bitter harangues ' and deploring that he remembered too much that they belonged to different parties and too little that they belonged to the same country. The unrepentant Mr. Chamberlain exclaimed a few years later with reference to the Congress : — But .ill the honour Salisbury hath won Is that he was the Lord Ambassador. VI 1 CONSERVATIVE BOGEY EVEN when Mr. Chamberlain sat below the gangway in his first Parliament his schemes to make the world better than he found it began to irritate politicians who thought either that this was the best of all possible worlds or that they themselves were the persons to reform it. Sir Robert Peel, the great statesman's son and elder brother of the celebrated Speaker, remarked that the member for Birmingham was always ready to bring forward his patent medicines for remedies. ' Chamberlain's plans,' he said, were so constantly produced in the Midlands that he was quite sick of them. Another interesting criticism was that of Lord Derby, who remarked that Mr. Chamberlain reminded him of the American politician of whom it was said : ' He's beat, but he ain't going to stay beat,' Certainly he did not at this or any other sta;ge of his career stay beat. He continued on every opportunity to advocate Free Schools, Free Land, Free Church ; and in 1878 he anticipated the institution of local govern- ment by urging that the administration of county business should be entrusted to a Board elected directly by a household franchise. Many years were to pass ere the Conservatives recognized the necessity of popular county government, and at this time Mr. Chaplin, his friend at a later epoch, confronted Mr. Chamberlain with their fears and prejudices, Whigs and Tories were frightened by the new political ' machine,' of which the rising Radical was the most conspicuous promoter. He gave the whole credit for it to his friend, Mr. Wilham Harris, the honorary secretary of the Birmingham Liberal Association. This Association, based in 1868 upon purely representative principles, had for half a dozen years few imitators, but after the general election of 1874, when the Liberal party maintained its position in Birmingham while sustaining many defeats elsewhere, one constituency after another adopted the new model. The next step taken was to unite the Associa- tions in a National Federation. This movement, like so many others, originated in Birmingham. On the invitation of the officers of several Associations a conference was held there in May, 1877 ; it was attended by delegates from many parts of the country ; the Federation was inaugurated with Mr. Chamberlain as president and Mr. H. H. Fowler 47 48 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN (afterwards Lord Wolverhampton) among the vice-presidents ; and Mr. Gladstone on the occasion of his visit, described in the previous chapter, gave it his countenance and support. At the first meeting of the General Committee, on July 2, Mr. Schnadhorst was appointed secretary. The Birmingham Association had been hotly denounced as an odious tyranny, and when the Federation was formed with the aim of being, in its president's words, ' a Liberal Parliament outside the Imperial Legislature,' the alarm of cautious Whigs and hostile Tories was increased. Lord Hartington, on being asked to give it his official blessing, demurred on the ground that it represented only one section of the party. Its legality was questioned in the House of Commons. Sir George Bowyer inquired if it came under the Act of George III, for the effectual repression of societies established for seditious and treasonable purposes. Mr. Chamberlain retorted with a counter question as to the National Union of Conservative Associations, which had been founded on a somewhat similar plan. The Attorney-General replied that as at present constituted the Federation did not come within the Act, but, by way of favourable contrast to it, he mentioned that Mr. Gorst (afterwards Sir John Gorst), the honorary secretary of the National Union, had assured him that the Conservative organi- zation was established, not to overturn, but to maintain the laws and constitution of the Kingdom ! Dishke of the strange monster was strengthened by the part it played in the agitation on the Eastern Question. For three years its operations were mainly directed against the foreign policy of Lord Beaconsfield's Government. Numerous resolutions were adopted and circulars issued by the Committee with the view of educating and formulating public opinion, and on a single day at the beginning of 1878, in response to a suggestion from headquarters, 127 meet- ings ' of weight and influence ' were held throughout the country with a common object. Seeing that the officers were Birmingham citizens and that Mr. Chamberlain was the president, that ambitious man was able to control the ' machine ' and to exercise great influence on public opinion and to bring it to bear effectively on party leaders. Lord Beaconsfield sneered at the new organization as a Caucus. The word was imported from the vocabulary of United States politics, where it indicated a local meeting of the voters of a party to choose candidates for local offices or to nominate delegates to a convention, but although its American origin ^ was brought up against it in disparagement its champion was undisturbed, and he was inclined, * ' This day found that the Caucus Club meets at certain times in the yard of Tom Dawes, adjutant of the Boston (Militia) Regiment.' — Diary of John Adams, 1753- CONSERVATIVE BOGEY 49 indeed, as he said, to take the sneer as a compliment. Mr. Chamber- lain defended the Caucus in the Fortnightly Review of July, 1877, and November, 1878, explaining that what was sought was not a change of leaders, but the expression of such an amoimt of public opinion as would encourage them to move a little quicker and a little farther. Looking forward a few years we find him describing it as absolutely representative, whereas in the Conservative copy the body was there but not the soul. ' The Primrose League,' he said, when it was formed in 1883, ' is more in the Tory way, with its silly, sentimental title.' But he lived to be the hero of the League. ***** The most piquant and memorable incident of Mr. Chamberlain's early years in Parliament was his repudiation of the leadership of Lord Hartington, who confessed nearly a quarter of a century later that his position as an old Whig between Mr. Gladstone and ' the new and aspiring Radical leader,' was not always a happy one. Re- bellious words used by the member for Birmingham were quoted on innumerable occasions by Conservatives when the two statesmen sat in the same Liberal Cabinet, and by Liberals with equal iteration when they acted still more closely together in a Unionist Adminis- tration. In one respect his impression of the controversy which provoked the outburst differed from that of his friends. While they regarded him as among the pioneers of obstruction in consequence of his conduct on this occasion, he asserted after becoming ' a re- formed character ' that he never obstructed. It was on the Army Discipline Bill of 1879 that the incident occurred. One of the severest, most determined contests ever fought in the Parliamentary arena took place on the question of flogging in the army. Mr. Chamberlain denoimced the practice as degrading, debasing, and unworthy of our civilization ; he contended that it was injurious to discipline and prevented the best men from going into the ranks. In a protracted resistance to the system he was associated with Mr. Parnell and other Irish Nationalists as well as with a number of Radicals. On June 17 he admitted ' it might be said ' that their proceedings amounted to obstruction but he thought persistent opposition was justified by the persistent obstinacy of the Government. A speech in which he showed a large number of offences for which flogging was liable to be administered produced a grave impression even on the Conservatives, and Colonel Stanley, the War Minister, expressed his readiness to limit the class of crimes in this category. Two days later Mr. Parnell and others pressed for total abolition. Sir William Harcourt advised them to give way on account of the concessions obtained, but Mr. Chamberlain, while professing, perhaps ironically, the readiness of members below the gangway to 4 50 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN receive Sir William's advice at all times with respect, retorted that they could get nothing from the Government except by what was commonly called obstruction. The friends of humanity and the friends of the British army, he said, owed a debt of gratitude to his honourable friend, Mr. Parnell, for standing up alone against this system when others had not the courage of their convictions, and Mr. Justin McCarthy has stated that Mr. Chamberlain privately spoke to him with great admiration of that remarkable man and his tactics. ' What was commonly called obstruction ' was resumed in the beginning of July, and opponents of flogging insisted on specimens of the ' cat ' being exhibited. There was a prolonged sitting on the subject on July 3 ; the House met on Saturday, the 5th, to deal with • it and did not adjourn till Sunday morning ; and when Irishmen were charged with obstruction their Birmingham friend declared that English representatives were prepared to take the same course. Lord Hartington at the renewal of the controversy on the following Monday had, as he told Lord Granville, ' a row with Chamberlain and the Radicals.' After the discussion had lasted for several hours, Mr. Hopwood, one of the latter, incidentally referred to him as their leader. Declining this title, he warmly declared that the course which Mr. Hopwood and those acting with him were taking was ill- advised, and extremely prejudicial to the dignity of Parliament. Thereupon came Mr. Chamberlain's repudiation. ' The noble lord,' he said in his icy manner, * had not imfortunately been in the House during a great portion of the discussion — a thing which had been very much noticed on previous occasions. It was rather inconvenient that they should have so little of the presence of the noble lord, lately the leader of the Opposition, hut noiv the leader of a section only.' Every phrase in this utterance must have been galling to the statesman who had reluctantly undertaken a thankless task, and the deepest insult was given by the final taunt. It was among the things which would have been better left unsaid ; but that Mr. Chamberlain ever wished it unsaid there is no proof. Mr. Fawcett, an independent Radical who although he had lost his sight acquired an influential position in Parliament, rushed to Lord Hartington's defence and undertook still to follow him. The obstructives, however, continued their practices. There was a curious sequel to the incident. Eight days later the Whig statesman threw in his lot with the Radicals. It had become apparent that the Government had no clear conviction in their own minds of the indispensable necessity of the punishment which was so strongly opposed, and in these circumstances he stated that he did not feel obliged any longer to support them. Naturally, Mr. CONSERVATIVE BOGEY 51 Chamberlain heard the announcement to this effect with ' much pleasure and gratification,' and once more with characteristic readiness to follow a chief who took the direction from himself he recognized Lord Hartington as ' the leader of the Opposition.' When the noble lord himself, with Mr. Gladstone's approvzil, moved an amendment against the permanent retention of corporal punishment for military offences, Mr. Charles Russell, afterwards the Lord Chief Justice, congratulated Mr. Chamberlain on ' his great triumph,' and Mr. Chaplin scornfully attributed the Liberal leader's conversion to the fact that the chief of the Caucus had gone down to Birmingham, and set to work all his wires and all the resources of his American organization, Mr. Punch, who described him and his friends as English intransigents, did ' not like to see the tail of the Opposition wagging its head in this way.' The aboUtion of flogging, which was not long delayed, was justified by the results, and some of those who had defended the practice lived to recognize that a pubUc service was done by the obstructive Radicals and their Irish friends. As for Mr. Chamberlain, however much his views on other subjects changed, he never modified his detestation of this form of punishment, and when he was Secretary of State twenty years later he stopped it in Crown Colonies. There was no malice in his reference to Lord Hartington. He had stated in 1877, even when he did not see eye to eye with the Whig statesman on the Eastern Question, that ' with the exception of Mr. Gladstone there is no Liberal leader who would command as much confidence and support as Lord Hartington has secured,' and he never showed a preference for any substitute. After their passing disagreement he joined with other members of the party in inviting him to a banquet in honour of his services to the Opposition. At almost all points of Conservative policy Mr. Chamberlain was a very severe and bitter critic. Parliament having been summoned in December, 1878, on accoimt of the military expedition to Afghanis- tan, he made a sharp attack on the Government and complained of a deliberate attempt to substitute might for right in dealing with Indian princes. 'What,' he asked, 'of our scrupulous good faith? What of our prestige in India ? These we are willing to throw away in pursuit of the hazy phantom of a scientific frontier ! ' The war with the Zulus also provoked his strongest censures, and in an impas- sioned passage he asked where was the policy of annexation to stop. He sneered at the new Imperialism, and declared that ' unless this spirit were, either by Parliament or by the people at large, severely and sternly repressed there could hardly be a limit to the responsi- bilities which might be fastened upon us, and none to the difficulties and even the disasters yet in store for this country.' Annexation of territory and increase of responsibility were dreaded by a member 52 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN who, in later years, described those who inherited his views as Little- Englanders. As the Beaconsfield Administration drew near its doom his invec- tive did not grow milder nor did the rebukes of his own censors abate in severity. In 1879 he called on its chief to appeal once more ' to the country he had betrayed, the tax-payers whose burdens he had increased, and the working classes whose industry he had paralysed.' While Lord Hartington enjoyed the commendation of the Ministerial organs for his moderation, violence was attributed to Mr. Chamber- lain. The Times charged him with passing the boimds of decent political warfare. ' We feel for our part ashamed,' it said, ' that any English politician who holds a respectable position should con- descend to this kind of Billingsgate.' Mr. Chamberlain was, however, incorrigible. He suggested the following epitaph for the expiring Government : — Here lies a Tory Ministry Whose word no man relies on ; Who never said the thing they meant, And never did a wise one.^ ' The bogey of Toryism, ' was his character at the close of his first Parliament. Sir William Harcourt who visited the Midland capital as his guest in January, 1880, said in the course of a speech : ' I remember the time when the senior member for Birmingham was the great bogey of the Tory party, but those heretics had the habit both of burning what they adored and of adoring what they burnt, and accordingly Mr. Bright had been deposed from the high rank of a destructive spirit to the inferior grade of guardian angel, and by a sort of apostolic succession Mr. Chamberlain had been consecrated the arch-bogey of Toryism.' In the same strain he referred to his host as ' this dragon of Birmingham by terror of whose name Tory mothers keep their infants in order.' Sir William himself and Mr. Chamberlain had not always agreed in Opposition, but a feeling of personal esteem, which survived many political storms was sown in fertile ground — for both men were capable of abiding friendship. ' I have spent,' Sciid the visitor, ' twenty-four hours under the dragon's roof, and I am prepared to prove that he partakes of the qualities of ordinary human nature. He eats, drinks, sleeps like other mortals, and I have not yet been able to detect the cloven hoof.' Not yet ! * A parody on the lines written by the Earl of Rochester on the bed-chamber- door of Charles II : — Here lies our sovereign lord the king. Whose word no man relies on ; He never says a foolish thing, Nor ever does a wise one. VIII LIBERAL MINISTER AND ' PRO-BOER ' IN less than four years from the time that he entered the House of Commons Mr. Chamberlain was a Cabinet Minister seated on the Treasury bench in the company of statesmen who had felt the lash of his tongue. Parliament was dissolved in March, 1880. If Mr. Glad- stone was the inspirer of the Liberal victory which swept Disraeli forever from power, Mr. Chamberlain was its organizer. For the success of the party a large share of the credit was claimed on behalf of his Caucus. It existed in sixty-seven of the boroughs in which contests occurred, and in sixty of these Liberal seats were gained or retained. Also in all of the ten county constituencies in which it had been established and where contests took place the Liberals "won seats. Pohticians who had sneered at it were not ashamed to profit by the new organization. The Parhament returned with the impetus of the Midlothian campaign was, according to Bright, the best that had ever been elected. Unexpected events sadly marred its achievements, but it opened its career with the very best intentions under the glamour of the great statesman who had been called by the unmistakable voice of the country to buckle on again his ' well- ■dinted armour.' Queen Victoria reluctantly accepted the advice of Lord Hartington and Lord Granville, and commissioned Mr. Gladstone to form a "Government. He received the promise of the co-operation of the two statesmen who had led the party in Opposition and at once named Lord Selbome and Mr. Childers also for high offices. The Duke of Argyll, Sir William Harcourt, Lord Kimberley, Mr. Bright and Mr. Forster were quickly added. But what of the Radicals ? When the list came out, and the name neither of Sir Charles Dilke nor of Mr. Chamberlain was found, the advanced pohticians who had done so much for victory were bitterly disappointed. Birmingham Liberals were specially annoyed. It was rumoured, and the rumour has been confirmed, that Mr. Gladstone was reluctant to call any of the new Radicals to Downing Street. When at last he responded to the representations of friends and sent for Sir Charles Dilke, he learned that the baronet and Mr. Chamberlain had agreed not to join the Government unless the one or the other received a post of Cabinet 53 54 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN rank. Yielding to the inevitable, he gave the preference to the member for Birmingham, who became President of the Board of Trade, while his friend and ally was appointed Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs. ' Your political opinions,' wrote the Prime Minister to Mr. Chamber- lain, ' may on some points go rather beyond what I may call the general measure of the Government, but I hope and beheve that there can be no practical impediment on this score to your acceptance of my proposal.' ^ As the new Minister told his constituents, he accepted the office which Mr. Gladstone graciously offered him, not without some hesita- tion, both because he distrusted his own qualifications after so short an experience of Parliamentary life, and also because he could not surrender without regret that full independence which he had enjoyed as a private member. It was only now that he finally severed his connection with the Birmingham Town Council by resigning his seat as an alderman. He was still proud of his parochial interests. ' I will confess to you,' he said, in one of those sonorous passages which impress the memory, ' that I am so parochially-minded that I look with greater satisfaction to our annexation of the gas and water, to our scientific frontier in the improvement area, than I do to the result of that imperial pohcy which has given us C5^ru3 and the Transvaal ; and I am prouder of having been engaged with you in warring against ignorance and disease and crime in Birmingham than if I had been the author of the Zulu War and had instigated the invasion of Afghanistan.' Surprise and doubt were expressed in some quarters on account of the selection of Mr. Chamberlain instead of his friend for a post within the Cabinet — a preference which may have been influenced by the aggressive manner in which Sir Charles Dilke had advocated RepubHcanism. The Times remarked that the member for Birm- ingham was not the most conspicuous of the advanced Liberals. ' In Parhamentary experience and reputation he is scarcely the equal of either Mr. Fawcett or Sir Charles Dilke.' At the same time it admitted ' he has shown a vigorous grasp of affairs and considerable power in debate. Moreover, he is the Carnot of the hour, the organizer of Liberal victory.' The Standard also said that the country would not altogether endorse the preference shown for Mr. Chamberlain, as compared with Sir Charles Dilke, and sneeringly remarked that the author of the Caucus in England had obtained his reward. ' These Radical gentlemen ' — the Conservative organ went on to observe — ' who now find themselves for the first time in Downing Street or thereabouts will discover before long that they have a good deal to learn and not a httle to forget. We are not altogether sorry that * Life of Gladstone, by John Morley, LIBERAL MINISTER AND 'PRO-BOER' 55 they are there, and that their political education, in the higher sense of the word, is thus about to commence.' The Daily News expressed Liberal opinion on the appointment without any fervour : ' Mr, Chamberlain has not indeed had long Parhamentary experience, but he has what may be called the pohtical instinct to a remarkable degree ; he has made good use of his time in Parliament, and he is the recognized representative of a new pohtical school in one part of England.' The limitation to ' one part of England ' was not at all generous. The superior claims of Sir Charles Dilke were frankly recognized by Mr. Chamberlain. He had thought, as he told his constituents, that if representatives were chosen to sit in the Cabinet of what was sometimes called the advanced section of the Liberal party, the choice would fall elsewhere than on himself. ' There was one of his pohtical friends, one of his dearest pohtical friends, who was designated by public rumour — he meant Sir Charles Dilke — to whom he would most gladly have given place.' But, he added, when the offer was made to him he did not feel that it would be right for him to shrink from the responsibihty, however great he felt it to be. The conduct of Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Charles Dilke on this occasion reflected credit on both. Their friendship was closer than that of political colleagues, as a rule, and it stood the test of many severe buffets. By their comradeship the strength of each was doubled in the Govern- ment. They were often in consultation and on many a night during the Parhament of 1880 they left the House together, conversing eagerly, and laying plans which, alas ! went agley. In 1886 their paths were divided, and for many subsequent years they faced each other as pohtical opponents, but their personal allusions were always of a kindly and considerate character. Here, in May, 1880, was the Birmingham mayor on the Treasury bench — a very piquant personahty — alert, resolute, clear-minded and ambitious, with the sharpest eyes in the world and a fine faculty for speech. Usually he sat near the Speaker's chair. John Bright often lounged at that part of the bench, but would now and again move up beside Mr. Gladstone, the spectacle of the two noble old heads and faces close together forming a most striking and memorable picture. It was a Government of remarkable men. Next to Mr. Gladstone, as a rule, were Lord Hartington and Sir Wilham Har- court, the Home Secretary. Lord Hartington was deputy leader and commanded the respect of all the Liberals. Although regarded as the chief of the Whig group in the Cabinet, his loyalty to the Prime Minister and services to the party were highly appreciated, and he was thoroughly trusted and hked. Sir Wilham Har- court was not taken quite seriously. In his old age pohticians of 56 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN every section recognized his earnestness, but in the early 'eighties he gave the impression of a splendid place-man, more conspicuous for deverness than for conviction. Mr. Childers sat as near Mr. Glad- stone as possible, and often had a close companion in Mr. Forster, who as Irish Secretary was greatly badgered by the Nationalists, and who defended his policy with a dogged, animated energy which appealed to the House. His shaggy hair, which he tossed from his forehead in his vehemence, was characteristic of the demeanour of a man whose rough aspect concealed a humane disposition. Another interesting figure on the bench was that of Sir Henry James (after- wards Lord James of Hereford), the Attorney-General. Sir Henry, with deep political interests, exercised more influence than that of the average law officer and enjoyed in a considerable degree Mr. Glad- stone's regard. The colleague for whom the chief showed the warmest feeHng was Lord Frederick Cavendish, the Secretary to the Treasury, who in an iU-fated hour went to Dublin Castle. Lord Frederick's devotion to him was more thsm that of a political subordinate. It was characterized by a knightly chivalry. The Cabinet of 1880 was a sort of coalition in which Whig was allied with Radical. Mr. Gladstone gave it equilibrium, now inclining to the one section, and now to the other. He had shown a preference for moderate men in forming the Government, but on several critical occasions during its existence he yielded to the influence of advanced opinion. The leaders of the rival sections differed as much in tem- perament as in ideas. Lord Salisbury wittily hkened the Cabinet to an old Dutch clock : ' When it is going to be fine Lord Hartington appears, and when Mr. Joseph Chamberlain is seen you may look out for squalls.' The Radical, however, was not irreconcilable. Just as he had made a favourable impression on the royal visitors at Birm- ingham, and on the House of Commons when he first entered it, he won now the esteem of colleagues at Downing Street. Lord Sel- borne, the new Lord Chancellor, writing on the formation of the Government, described him as ' a personally agreeable man, of good countenance, manners and address.' He was helpful with his sug- gestive mind and faculty for business, and he recognized that in politics he could not get everything he wanted at once. Froude expressed the opinion of at least the majority of his associates when, in writing to Lady Derby, he said, ' I hke Chamberlain. He knows his mind. There is no dust in his eyes and he throws no dust in the eyes of others.' ^ Transvaal troubles were among the earliest that afflicted the Government, and their change of policy within a year provided an opportunity for attack. Mr. Chamberlain was entrusted by the * Life of Froude, by Herbert Paul. LIBERAL MINISTER AND 'PRO-BOER' 57 Prime Minister with the duty of speaking for the defence, although the matter lay far outside his own department. According to Sir William Harcourt's recollection of the incident, given in 1900, a great honour was thus conferred upon one who was ' only lately a Cabinet Minister, in being selected to declare to Parhament what was the poUcy and what were the motives of the Cabinet.' In 1877 Mr. Chamberlain voted in the minority against the annexation of the Transvaal, and Mr. Gladstone's references to the subject in Midlothian, although brief, were sufficient to produce the impression that he also would, if he could, reverse the policy of his predecessors. Never- theless, when the Liberals came into office, they decided that what- ever might be thought of the original act of annexation they could not safely or wisely abandon the territory. Mr. Chamberlain, while defending this decision in debate in August, 1880, admitted that the House in authorizing the annexation acted on inaccurate information, inasmuch as the general belief was that the vast majority of the inhabitants were in favour of it, whereas subsequent proceedings proved conclusively that this was not the case. Events, however, did not halt here, and the Government were soon hurried into another frame of mind. The Boers, disappointed by the Liberals in whom they had placed their hopes, broke into rebellion. A series of disasters to our troops culminated at Majuba Hill ; and although our forces were soon declared to be in a position to overwhelm the Boers, it was decided to continue the negotiations which had been opened before the defeats took place, and the Trans- vaal speedily recovered its independence. Again Mr. Chamberlain's ingenuity was employed in debate to defend the new decision. On the former occasion attack came from Mr. Courtney, a champion of nationahties struggling to be free ; now it proceeded from the Con- servatives, who stood by their original policy. The spirited and sympathetic speech in which the Radical Minister justified the magnanimity of the British Government was frequently quoted against him twenty years afterwards. He Hved to describe the retrocession as ' a disastrous mistake,' ^ but at the time it was effected he commended it with an earnestness which undoubtedly sprang from conviction. Never had he been more eloquent or forcible. To maintain annexation was, he said in 1881, ' impossible for any Government caring for the honour as well as for the interests of this country. It was contrary to our treaty engagements ; it was con- trary to the best traditions of a free country.' His generous and glow- ing tribute to the virtues of the Boers formed the text of many diatribes in another Parhamentary generation by men who were his early friends but from whom he parted. ' Are they not virtues,' he asked, 1 September 23, 1900. 58 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN ' which we are proud to believe form the best characteristics of the English people ? Is it agdnst such a nation that we are to be called upon to exercise the dread arbitrament of arms ? ' The defeat of a few hundred troops by greatly superior forces could not, in his opinion, be treated as a matter of national importance demanding necessarily the further sacrifice of human hfe. ' A great nation could afford to be generous.' This was a note he had struck at Birmingham. ' What,' said Mr. Chamberlain, ' is the use of being great and powerful if we are afraid to admit an error when we are conscious of it ? Shame is not in the confession of a mistake. Shame lies only in persistency in wilful wrong-doing.' This opinion he repeated in debate on April, 1883. He protested against the idea that it was the duty of the Government to have continued the war, after they had determined to abandon the territory, for the purpose of revenge and to maintain our military prestige. * It was, and it is our opinion,' he said, ' that that would have been an act of unparalleled wickedness.' Sir WiUiam Harcourt stated nearly twenty years later that Mr. Chamberlain was selected to speak for the Government on this subject because he was so earnest a believer in retrocession. He could not, in De Quincey's fine phrase, look ' behind the curtain of destiny.' IX IRELAND AND EGYPT ALMOST every step taken by the Ministry in the Parliament of 1880-85 was impeded by the two bold leaders below the Opposi- tion gangway, whose poUtical genius was equal to Mr. Chamberlain's and who excited an interest as great even as was aroused by the aspiring Radical. While Lord Randolph Churchill at the head of the Fourth Party devoted his brilliant talents to a constant effort to discredit and thwart the Liberal administration, Mr. Pamell did his utmost not only to destroy British rule in Ireland, but also to render Parha- mentary government impossible at Westminster so long as Home Rule was denied to that country. There was now in the House of Commons a compact and independent party of Nationahsts. They included several able debaters, eloquent speakers and untiring obstructives. Mr. PameU's mastery over the party was complete. His manners were cold and reserved ; with a slow, stiff utterance he could make a biting ferocious attack, but he was not an orator ; he came and went mysteriously and was sometimes absent when a lead was urgently needed ; yet his influence appeared unshakable. His followers might murmur at his absence and even venture in an emergency to take a line of their own ; he would enter at the bar and push his way along the third bench to a seat near the gangway, scarcely glancing at the men around him ; he would ascertain what had happened, and if necessary express his views in his precise, chiUing phrases, with a rare and momen- tary flash of the fiercest passion ; then colleagues who had been previously muttering against him applauded with unrestrained enthusiasm, and British members listened in a sort of angry, terrified silence. A mysterious speU was cast over the whole House by this strange, masterful man. He seemed to wield an incalculable force. Mr. Gladstone was saddened by the outbursts of the Irish ; Mr. Chamberlain was suspected of sympathy with their discontent ; most of the other Ministers were filled either with despair or with resentment. Mr. Pamell's career came to a deplorable end with name sullied in the Divorce Court, with his leadership wrenched from his strong, hard- holding hands, with the reproaches of colleagues and allies in his djang ears. But in the early eighties he played the Parliamentary 59 6o JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN game with a skilful and long-sighted, inflexible audacity which ex- torted a Home Rule policy from a great British party and excited the amazement and almost the awe of members on both sides. While Ireland hampered and harried the Government, from the beginning to the end of its existence, Mr. Chamberlain was carried through many phases of emotion. The House of Lords added not a few drops to the cup of his wrath when it threw out in 1880 the Com- pensation for Disturbance Bill ; and when Mr. Forster demanded that Parhament should be summoned at the end of the year to pass a measure of coercion he threatened to resign. His threat was partly responsible for the postponement of this process. In the session of 1881, which was mainly devoted to Irish affairs, the Government applied not only the lash of coercion but along with it a remedy for the ills of the distressed country in the shape of a great scheme of agrarian reform which provided for the fixing of fair rents by a com- mission, for the free sale of the tenants' interests in their holdings, and for security of tenure. Mr. Chamberlain felt no sorrow when the Duke of Argyll left the Government on account of the Land Bill. He was more gravely concerned by the Nationalist opposition to the other Irish measure, which authorized the Lord-Lieutenant to issue a warrant for the arrest of any person whom he might reasonably sus- pect of any treasonable or agrarian offence. ' I hate coercion,' said the Radical Minister, in one of those in- cisive and unmistakable passages which have been included among Parliamentary classics, and with which every political novice is famiUar ; ' I hate the name and I hate the thing.' ' I am bound to say,' he continued, ' that I believe there is not one of my colleagues who does not hate it as I do.' ' But then,' he added, in order to justify his support of the obnoxious bill, ' we hate disorder more.' Ordinary Parliamentary rules were unable to overcome the obstruction with which it was resisted, and debate on the first reading was closed by the arbitrary action of Speaker Brand, who terminated a sitting which lasted two days and two nights by rising, and on his own authority, putting the question to the vote. Even the Land Act, carried by Mr. Gladstone, when accompanied by coercion, failed to conciliate the Nationahsts, and for a time at least Mr. Chamberlain was constrained to point out that their object was not the same as his. ' We want,' he said, ' to remove every just cause of grievance ; they want to magnify grievances, and to intensify differences.' Still he laboured in and out of the Cabinet, while supporting the cause of order, to promote sympathy and to arrange a settlement between the two countries. The arrest of Mr. Parnell and several colleagues as ' suspects ' in October, 1881, rendered his position more embarrassing. The legis- lation of the year had been followed in Ireland by a no-rent agitation IRELAND AND EGYPT 6i and a system of terrorism which included moonhghting and boycotting. Mr. Gladstone sent resounding from Leeds the phrase that ' the re- sources of civilization against its enemies are not yet- exhausted,' and a few days later the kingdom was startled by the news that Mr. Pamell had been sent to Kilmainham prison. It had become neces- sary, as Mr. Chamberlain explained, to put the Irish leader and some of his friends in jail to prevent them from interrupting the operation of the Land Act.. At the same time the Land League, with which the Nationahsts controlled agrarian Ireland, was proclaimed as an illegal and criminal association. While acquiescing, as a member of the Government, in these proceedings the Radical Minister alarmed the Conservatives by a speech which he delivered at Liverpool. His opponents had complained that the League was not suppressed sooner. ' Its original objects,' repUed Mr. Chamberlain, ' were legal, and were even praiseworthy, and to stifle agitation at such a time would have been to have prevented reform.' His dishke of coercion was again expressed in a manner displeasing to the Opposition. ' With the Tories,' he bluntly asserted, ' coercion is a policy ; with us it is only a hateful incident.' Yet his attempts to unite conciliation with coercion satisfied nobody. At the beginning of the next Session he was attacked both by Conservatives and by Nationahsts. By the former he was roundly abused for his Liverpool speech, which was regarded as a paUiation of crime. By the latter he was reproached for his conniv- ance in coercion. ' We have honestly endeavoured,' he pleaded, ' to do our duty and to steer an even course between extremes.' In the troubled sea of politics an even course is hard to keep. Sir Richard Cross described Mr. Chamberlain as the evil genius of the Cabinet in Irish pohcy, and before long that vigilant Conservative was convinced that his suspicion was justified. A demand for the recall of Mr. Forster from the Irish Secretaryship was made with persistency early in 1882 by the Pall Mall Gazette, which was then, under the editorship of Mr. Morley, exercising a power- ful influence on the Liberal side. Although the Radical Minister, when challenged on the subject of the articles in the House of Commons, described the editor as one of the most independent men in the king- dom the Pall Mall was regarded by Mr. Forster's friends as the organ of opinions which had either been suggested or would be adopted by Mr. Chamberlain. In these circimistances high significance was naturally given to such a passage as the following : ' Lord Hartington was not the ideal Chief Secretary,^ but his hard, grave sense is much nearer the mark of what is wanted than any quantity of dishevelled sentimentahsm. As for sympathy with the population of Ireland, what is wanted is not sentimental sympathy, but an eye for the forces in 1 Lord Hartington was Chief Secretary from 1871 to 1874. 62 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Ireland out of which we may hope to build up an ordered government.' The arrest of the Nationalist leaders had failed to check the agrarian movement and it had become painfully clear that Mr. Forster was not the man to bring peace to the disturbed country. Mr. Gladstone said of him, when all his struggles in this mortal scene were over, ' He was a man upon whom there could be no doubt that Nature had laid her hand for the purpose of forming a thoroughly genuine and independent character.' His qualities, however, were not those of tact and con- ciliation. His ' dishevelled sentimentalism ' was spurned by the leaders of the people to whom s5Tnpathy, accompanied by coercion, was offered, and statesmen were dismayed by the fear of another year of disorder in Ireland and turmoil in the House of Commons. A new departure was decided upon. Another effort of conciliation was made in response to an overture from Kilmainham. The struggle between the member for Birmingham and Mr. Forster reached a dramatic stage when Mr. ParneU was released in May and the Chief Secretary resigned his post. Mr. Forster's biographer has attributed Mr. Chamberlain's conduct mainly to personal dislike. He says the followers of the Birmingham statesman were naturally anxious that their hero should arrive at the summit of his ambition, and Mr, Forster was the man who stood most directly in his path. The discovery that the Irish Secretary had at that time any prospect of succeeding to the Liberal leadership was probably confined to Sir Wemyss Reid, but undoubtedly many politicians beUeved that he had been the victim of an intrigue in the Cabinet, and the Conservatives rallied to the cry. He became their hero when he explained that he refused to share the responsibility for the release of the imprisoned members. ' I believe their release,' he said, ' will tend to the encourage- ment of crime.' This was truly a damning statement to come from the Minister who had been responsible for the government of Ireland, and it caused a profound impression. Suspicion of a political compact was whispered in club and corridor. Mr. Gladstone denied that there was any arrangement between Mr. ParneU and the Government, and when the hberated leader, from his place in the House, read the letter which he wrote in Kilmainham to Captain O'Shea, the Irish Liberal who had been the go-between and which formed the justification of his release, no allusion was found to a party understanding. It merely sketched a general political programme. Mr. ParneU wrote that if the arrears question were settled on satisfactory hues he and his coUeagues had every confidence that the exertions they would be able to make ' would be effective in stopping outrages and intimidation of aU kinds.' This, however, although suggestive enough, was not aU. From the corner of the second Liberal bench, to which Mr. Forster had retired, the IRELAND AND EGYPT 63 ex-Secretary kept hostile watch on the proceedings of his colleagues. When he asked if the member for Cork had read the whole letter the Conservatives sprang into an expectant attitude, and the Liberals looked imeasily at their chief. Mr. Parnell explained that the copy which he read had been furnished to him by Captain O'Shea. ' I have not the docvmient with me,' pleaded the Captain, but escape was impossible. Mr. Forster handed to him a copy of the letter with a brusque request to ' read the last paragraph.' When he compUed with the request the excited House learned that the Irish leader wrote in prison that the accomphshment of the progranune he had sketched would enable the Nationahsts to ' co-operate cordially for the future with the Liberal party in forwarding Liberal principles.' This party contract, and the circumstances of its omission, excited great prejudice, and the ' Kilmainham treaty,' which Mr. Forster vehemently denounced as a disgraceful compromise, inflicted perma- nent injury on the reputation of the Government. Although in a Cabinet of thirteen persons, twelve (as was authorita- tively stated) were in favour of release, Mr. Chamberlain was held chiefly responsible for Mr. Forster's downfall. Mr. Justin McCarthy has stated in British Political Leaders that the whole arrangements of the treaty were conducted between the member for Birmingham and Mr. Parnell ; and for his share in the negotiations, whatever it may have been, the Radical Minister offered no apology aiid felt no repent ance. On the contrary he boasted of what had been done. In a dis- cussion raised by Mr. Balfour, who said the transaction stood alone in history in its infamy, Mr. Chamberlain defended the hberation of the prisoners on the ground that it would contribute to the peace of Ireland. It was, he held, the duty of the Government to seek Irish opinion wherever they could find it. ' And I cannot help thinking,' he added, ' we should have done better in the past if we had sought it more frequently.' ^ Charges of intrigue were persistently brought against Mr. Cham- berlain by the Conservatives and these were repeated by the National- ists after his own quarrel with them. In The Life of Charles Stewart Parnell, Mr. Barry O'Brien says : ' The Irish Secretary seems to have been quite sympathetic on the question of arrears, but ... he would not bargain with the Irish leader. He would not allow himself to be undermined by Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Morley. He looked * In a letter to Captain O'Sbea during the Kilmainham negotiations Mr. Chamberlain wrote : ' I entirely agree in your view that it is the duty of the Government to lose no opportunity of acquainting themselves with representative opinion in Ireland, and for that purpose that we ought to welcome suggestion and criticism from every quarter, and from all sections and classes of Irishmen, provided that they are animated by a desire for good government, and not a blind hatred of aU government whatever.' 64 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN upon the whole business as an underhand proceeding, quite in keeping with the attempts which had been constantly made to thwart him in his Irish administration, and he resolved to take no part in negotia- tions which had been begun over his head.' It was, said Lord Cowper, who had been lord-heutenant, the way the thing was done, rather than the thing itself, to which he objected. When Mr. James Lowther, however, stated in Yorkshire that Mr. Forster had disloyal colleagues who conducted clandestine proceedings the ex-Secretary chivalrously contradicted the statement, and declared that he was cognisant of the negotiations. On the subject being debated at the beginning of the session of 1883, Mr. Chamberlain was fiercely attacked by Mr. Gibson (Lord Ashbourne) and other Conservatives with whom he subsequently sat in Lord Salisbury's Cabinet. Sir Herbert Maxwell, a future fiscal friend, accused him of making ' profligate promises ', Mr. Chaplin charged him with a ' very foolish and painful proceeding ', and Lord George Hamilton, who it is to be hoped had forgotten Oliver Twist, went so far in political animosity as to say that he suggested the character of the Artful Dodger. Other expressions were used which showed that in his Radical days Mr. Chamberlain was regarded by the Conservatives with feelings of rancour not usually excited by politicians. He assured the House that any conrmiunications addressed to him with reference to the Kil- mainham transaction were instantly made known to Mr. Forster. Nevertheless, the insinuations and charges against him were frequently renewed. At the close of 1883 Mr. Gorst, referring to the period of the Kilmainham treaty, expressed the belief that there existed a sort of inner circle within the Cabinet, very much in the same way as an inner circle of Invincibles existed within the Land League, and that the inner circle of the Cabinet also had its Number One. (' Number One ' of the Invincibles was supposed to be the chief director of intimi- dation.) A similar idea was expressed by Sir Henry Drummond Wolff, who found two currents in the Government — one which wished to exercise all the powers of the law for the repression of crime, and was represented by Lord Hartington, and the other which looked to the agencies of outrage as useful allies in passing Liberal measures. On Mr. Forster's retirement Mr. Chamberlain would have accepted the Chief Secretaryship. The leading members of the Irish party were sounded and were in favour of his appointment. The post was, however, given to Lord Frederick Cavendish, while Earl Spencer, who was to be the principal ruler at Dublin Castle, succeeded Earl Cowper as Viceroy. Lord Frederick was appointed on May 4, and two days later he and Mr. Burke, the permanent Under-Secretary, were assassinated in Phoenix Park, Dublin. ' One of the very noblest hearts in England,' said the Prime Minister, ' has ceased to beat at IRELAND AND EGYPT 65 the very moment when it was devoted to the service of Ireland.' The assassination excited a thrill of horror in every class and part}'. It was regarded, by Conservatives at least, as a sequel to the clemency shown by the Government, although evidence proved that the assassins had originally intended to take Mr. Forster's life and were unfamiliar with Lord Frederick Cavendish. On the day after the hideous event Mr. Pamell and Mr.McCarthy visited Sir Charles Dilke and Mr.Chamber- lain in order to express their horror at a tragedy which would retard the Irish cause, and Mr. McCarthy has recorded that he was greatly impressed by the firmness with which the member for Birmingham declared that nothing which had happened would prevent him from accepting the office of Chief Secretary if the opportunity were offered to him. The opportunity did not even now occur. Sir Charles Dilke was offered the difficult, if not dangerous post, but declined it because it was not accompanied by a seat in the Cabinet and he would have had to advocate a policy for which he was not responsible, and thereupon Sir George Trevelyan took Lord Frederick Cavendish's place. It has been suggested by Lord Eversley, who was a member of the Government, that Lord Spencer may have been unwilling to have as Chief Secretary one who was so masterful as Mr. Chamberlain.^ The policy of the Government, at Mr. Pamell's release, was to settle the question of arrears, and to arm the Executive with greater powers for the prevention of crime. The Phoenix Park murders altered ' only the order ' of their proceedings. Promptly on May 11, Sir William Harcourt introduced the Prevention of Crimes Bill, by which trial by jury was suspended in certain districts, and a power of search was granted. The Pall Mall Gazette, steady in the cause of liberty, remarked that when it became law ' Ireland would be under an iron hand indeed.' The Arrears Bill was in the sympathetic charge of Mr. Gladstone himself, and was in turn attacked by the Conser- vatives, Sir Herbert Maxwell dropping into poetry to express their view : — You may twist, you may alter, this Act as you will ; The taint of the Land League will hang to it still. Credit to the Government for restoring peace and order was claimed by Mr. Chamberlain at the beginning of 1883. He said that success was due to the fact that while they had firmly administered the law they had also recognized the substantial grievances of the Irish people, and had made extraordinary efforts to remove those grievances. He was too sanguine. The Irish were neither grateful nor peaceful. Their spirit may be gauged by a speech delivered by Mr. Pamell, who found it impossible to pursue a pacific policy in view of fresh coercion. Alluding to the Crimes Bill, and looking at Mr. Forster, * Gladstone and Ireland, by Lord Eversley. 5 66 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN who lounged heavily in a comer seat, he exclaimed with the most intense bitterness : ' It would be better to have the Act administered by the seasoned politician who is now in disgrace. . . . Call him back to his post. Send him to help Lord Spencer in the congenial work of the gallows in Ireland. Send him to look after the secret inquisitions of Dublin Castle. Send him to levy the payment of blood-money. Send him to raise the taxes, which an unfortunate and starving pea- santry have to pay for crimes not committed by them.' Any one who listened to these words, and who noted their effect on the House, might have learned how a speaker without eloquence could produce an impression rarely attained by the finest orator. Liberals and Con- servatives shuddered, while the Nationalists cheered wildly ; Mr. Gladstone was grieved and angry ; Mr. Forster glared at his assailant with a dour, dogged countenance. If the words hurt him he concealed his pain. His chief expression was that of scorn. II ' The only Jingo in the Cabinet ! ' Thus Mr. Chamberlain was described even in his most Radical days by Mr. Bright, who knew him better than the general public ; and Lord Granville, informing Lord Spencer in June, 1882, that there had been several Cabinets about Egypt, noted : ' Bright of course the most peaceable. Chamber- lain almost the greatest Jingo.' ^ The Radical leader's political education, in the higher sense of the word, as the Standard put it, was promoted when he came to deal practically with British interests abroad. Egypt kept step with Ireland in harassing the well-intentioned Government, and on a verydehcate and difficult theme he was several times selected to expound the Ministerial policy. Notwithstanding his vision of the weary Titan staggering under ' the too vast orb of her fate ' and his animated protests against the extension of our responsi- bilities, he acquiesced in the steps taken with the object of restoring order in Egypt and maintaining the safety of the Suez Canal, which had been threatened by the movement of Arabi Pacha ; and he parted company with his colleague, John Bright, when the veteran resigned office on account of the decision to send troops to Egypt and the bom- bardment of Alexandria by our fleet. An example of how to resign without rancour was given by Mr. Bright. In a few dignified sentences he explained that he had with- drawn from the Government because he thought there had been a manifest violation both of international and of moral law. This was severe enough opinion, but he offered it modestly, without any claim to special righteousness. Mr. Gladstone, glancing at the old friend ' Life of Lord Granville, by Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice. IRELAND AND EGYPT 67 who had gone once more below the gangway, and speaking in a tone of affectionate remonstrance, remarked that the difference between them was a difference as to the particular application of the divine law in this particular case. Mr. Bright 's resignation was to the Government, as it was to himself, the occasion of the profoundest pain, but the Prime Minister assured him that he carried with him in his retirement ' the unbroken esteem of his colleagues.' This was the last time the two orators were associated together in office. Mr. Bright hved long enough to assist in defeating Mr. Gladstone's first Home Rule Bill, but in the interval he spoke several times from his independent comer in support of his old chief and colleagues. The budding Jingoism of Mr. Chamberlain came out in discussion on the military operations on July 25, 1882. The Radical leader ex- plained that the cause of our intervention was the danger of anarchy. ' Anarchy in Egypt,' he argued, ' would affect British interests of para- mount importance, and I would say the interests of civilization gener- ally.' This was a new note. Hestruckit lightly and incidentally now, although later in his life it swelled into a great theme. Mr. Justin McCarthy, who kept watch on Radical developments, remarked that he had talked in a strain with which they were a little more familiar in the days of Lord Beaconsfield. Liberal peace-makers also were startled. Sir Wilfrid Lawson, for instance, twitted the people of Birmingham on shouting peace with Bright, and glory and gun- powder with Chamberlain. Mr. Gladstone detected the tendency of his Radical colleague's mind. In a letter to the Queen, dated December 18, which has been quoted by Mr. Morley, he noted that his leanings on foreign policy would be far more acceptable to Her Majesty than those of Mr. Bright. Mr. Chamberlain himself, however, seemed unconscious of the direction in which he was travelling. At a meeting of the National Liberal Federation in the month in which the Prime Minister assured the Queen as to his ' leanings ' he still repeated doctrines which, in later days, he would have described as Little Englandism. It was not necessary, he said, that he should waste time in repudiating again the idea of annexation, or of a protectorate, or even of an indefinite super- vision of the Egyptian government such as foimd favour in some quarters. ' We think our possessions,' he added, ' are sufficiently ample, our duties and responsibilities too onerous and complicated ' ; and he dreaded the creation of a new Ireland for ourselves in the East, Events proved stronger than phrases. Although the alternate ' slumber and rush ' of the Government in Egyptian and Soudanese matters, and particularly the delay of measures for the relief of General Gordon at Khartoum, alienated large masses of the people, Mr. Gladstone and his colleagues laid the foundation of the present system. Looking back 68 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN from 1890, Mr. Chamberlain candidly reviewed the course of events. ' I admit,' he said, ' I was one of those — I think my views were shared by the whole Cabinet of Mr. Gladstone — who regretted the necessity for the occupation of Egypt. I thought that England had so much to do, such enormous obligations and responsibilities, that we might well escape if we could this addition to them ; and when the occupation was forced upon us I looked forward with anxiety to an early, it might be even to an immediate evacuation.' In his Imperialist days, having seen the results of the occupation, he changed his mind. I REFORMER AND FREE TRADER AT the Board of Trade Mr. Chamberlain found the work con- genial and he took, as he said, ' an ever fresh interest in the many fresh subjects ' with which he was brought into close acquaint- ance. The Irish Office with its notoriety and its opportunities appealed to him in 1882, and if he had obtained it, much besides his own career might have been different ; but although the post which he held through- out the whole of Mr. Gladstone's second Administration did not by any means absorb all his thoughts and energies, he made the most of it. He was the business head of a business department, to which he attended as diligently as if it were his own factory, personally studying all important matters for which he was responsible. Permanent officials like a strong, though not a meddlesome Parliamentary chief, and Mr. Chamberlain's qualities were properly appreciated, while he himself, then, as always, proved a good friend to able and faithful subordinates. Business men also were pleased to deal with him, for they admired his directness and vigour. He was celebrated for his handling of deputa- tions, getting quickly to the point and keeping attention to it. For the fiscal poUcy of the country, on which he subsequently changed his course, he bore special responsibility as President of the Board of Trade. His speeches during the years that he occupied that office formed as effective a defence of the existing system as has ever been given. The officials supplied him with the facts of the controversy, and they were surprised by his quick mastery of them, and by the vivid manner in which he presented the arguments. He exposed the fallacy of the new doctrines of Fair Trade and Reciprocity, challenging their advocates to point out any distinction between the policy they called by these names and ' what the rest of the world consented to call Protection ; ' he ridiculed those who were alarmed by the excess of imports over exports and said he regarded this, not as a proof of our commercial decline, but as a fact which ought to give us the greatest satisfaction. ' What,' he asked, ' does this balance represent ? ' His answer was turned against himself on many a platform in a new century. ' In the first instance,' he said, ' it represents the cost of freight, the carrying trade of the world and especially of English 70 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN goods having passed almost entirely into English hands. But over and above this item it represents nothing more nor less than the profit derived by this country from its external trade and the interests from its investments abroad during forty years.' Mr. Chamberlain, when at the Board of Trade, disposed light-heartedly of the gentlemen (among whom he was afterwards numbered) ' who fume and fret when- ever the value of what we receive is greater than the value of what we give.' ' Is any one,' he demanded, ' bold enough to propose that we should put duties upon food ? ' He did not foresee that he himself would be bold enough to propose ' these strange remedies,' for then he contended that a tax on food would mean a decline in wages : it would certainly involve a reduction in their productive value ; it would raise the price of every article produced in the United Kingdom, and it would indubitably bring about the loss of that gigantic export trade which the industry and energy of the country, working under conditions of absolute freedom, had been able to create. It may be said that even in the early eighties a shadow of doubt now and again crossed Mr. Chamberlain's mind. There were qualify- ing parentheses in his most strongly-worded speeches, as for instance : ' I do not like to speak dogmatically.' Nevertheless, on the main issue he continued to hold unflinchingly to the doctrines of Cobden. He made sport of those who argued that we had not ' real ' Free Trade, and he ridiculed the idea, which he subsequently adopted, that Pro- tection is a question of intention. ' One-sided Free Trade,' later so keenly denounced, he then held to be absolutely the very best for this country, and when a Sunday paper sneered at Cobden as the author of a number of predictions which had been falsified by events he re- torted that nearly nineteen centuries had passed and still the doctrines of the Christian religion had not received universal acceptance. While he was a Liberal Minister he extolled cheap imports and pointed to trades that were dependent upon the access which the manufacturers had to every market in the world for the supply of the raw material. No modem champion of Cobdenism has given a more moving picture of the effects of Protection than was painted in the eloquent words of Mr. Chamberlain, when he showed how it * starved the poor, ' and how the country ' was brought by it to the brink of revolution.' He re- called the description which was given in the following verses by the Com Law rhymer of the sufferings endured by the people, and of the burning indignation which these sufferings called forth : — They murder'd Hope, they fettered Trade, The clouds to blood, the sun to shade, And every good that God had made They turned to bane and mockery. REFORMER AND FREE TRADER 71 They knew no interest but their own, They shook the State, they shook the Throne. O years of crime ! The great and true. The nobly wise — are still the few — Now bid Truth grow where Falsehood grew. And plant it for eternity. The last verse he rendered thus : — O years of crime ! The great and true. The nobly wise — now, not the few — Bid Freedom grow where Corn Laws grew. And plant it for eternity. That, as Mr. Chamberlain said, was not a retrospect which would be favourable to any party or any statesman who would have the au- dacity to propose that we should go back to evil times ! Bills useful to the community were promoted by the Radical Presi- dent of the Board of Trade. The adoption of electric lighting by municipalities was simplified in 1882 ; and in 1883 he carried through the new Grand Committees a bill to prevent fraudulent liquidations, and a Patents Bill framed in the interests of poor inventors. His Parliamentary reputation was considerably increased by his skill in piloting, especially, the former measure ; he proved himself a tactful manager of his fellow-members. It was the subject of one of the earliest cartoons which Tenniel devoted to him in Punch, the artist depicting him spoiling the spoilers. A very acrimonious attack was, however, made upon him in 1884, with reference to the Bankruptcy Act, his political opponents maintaining that posts under it were given as rewards to partisans. Although he assured the House that he did not know the political opinions of the great majority of the officials whom he had appointed, Sir Richard Cross and Sir Hardinge Giffard (the future Lord Chancellor, Halsbury) pressed for inquiry, and Mr. Healy, who was then on friendly terms with Mr. Chamberlain,, expressed the opinion that the attack was levelled at him because he was the spokesman of the Radical party. The most ambitious piece of legislation which he ever undertook was the Merchant Shipping Bill. Early in his official career, influenced by the agitation raised by Mr. Plimsoll, he moved for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the losses of British ships. He investigated the subject for several years, and not only found that there was a terrible loss of life but formed the conviction that much of this was preventable and that the conditions of trade were such as to tend to the loss. Severe criticism was passed on the manner in which he sought a remedy. His own account of it showed that at any rate he was not rash. ' I sought,' he said, ' in the first instance the assistance of the shipowners — and of the best shipowners in the trade 72 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN — in the hope that they would co-operate with me in seeking a reform. I saw scores of them ; I saw the underwriters ; I saw shipmasters ; I saw everybody who was wilhng and able to give me any information in reference to the matter. But when I asked for public co-operation I am sorry to say I failed in obtaining it.' Never did he show more earnestness than in his endeavour to pass the Merchant Shipping Bill in 1884. It justified the Punch cartoon on ' The Cherub,' and the lines : — There's a sweet little Chamberlain sits up aloft, To keep watch over the life of poor Jack. On the motion for the second reading on May 19, he held the atten- tion of the House for three hours and three quarters. Describing his speech, Mr. Samuel Smith, M.P., in My Life Work, says : ' He im- pressed us with his enormous ability. One thing I noticed : he did not need to take a sip of water during that long delivery — a wonder- ful sign of physical strength, and also of vocal power.' Although speaking in a studiously subdued tone he did not withdraw the charges he had made against the shipowners, but undertook to substantiate them, and indeed added new counts to the indictment, so that his speech increased the exasperation with which his inquiries had been followed. The basis of his action was the belief that there was un- necessary loss of life in the mercantile marine, and he contended that the main causes were under-manning, overloading and over-insur- ance. What he objected to, he said, was gambling in human life. ' I proposed to make it impossible for any man to make a profit by the loss of his ship, and of the crew that sailed in her. I proposed to make it impossible for any man to contract himself out of the liability for the negligence of himself or the persons whom he employed. I proposed that the Employers' Liability Act should also be applied to the sea service.' The bill and the speech were fiercely denounced, and the Minister was accused of wanton interference with trade interests. Mr. David Maclver, a shipowner, who in other circumstances became one of his admirers, scolded Mr. Chamberlain for making personal and libellous attacks on an honourable class, and Mr. Edward Stanhope, a lead- ing Conservative, vehemently accused him of recklessness, while Lord Salisbury denounced him for having brought a horrible and fantastic charge against the shipowners. Even Mr. Samuel Smith, a friendly pohtician, records that the bill ' excited great repugnance among shipowners generally. Many of them were high-minded men, and resented the imphed slight on their honour. They refused to believe in the piratical shipsinkers.' Throughout the country the owners Kiised a powerful resistance. Mr. Chamberlain fought his case with REFORMER AND FREE TRADER 73 boldness and ability, and among large classes excited very deep sym- pathy. The opposition to the bill, however, proved relentless, and, the Government beset by other difficulties, were unable to proceed with it. Fortunately its author's efforts were not altogether wasted. A Royal Commission was appointed to inquire into the whole subject, and several measures which he subsequently inspired or suggested greatly increased the safety of the merchant service. In consequence of his rebuff in 1884 Mr. Chamberlain contem- plated the plan of operation which he adopted about twenty years later in the case of fiscal reform. He expressed his desire to resign office, and fight out the shipping question on the public platform, Mr. Gladstone, however, could not at that period dispense with his services. The franchise agitation had been raised, and in deference to his leader's judgment, he withdrew his resignation so that he might take part in the struggle for reform. Into that struggle he carried the passion which had been baffled in the lesser controversy. XI TWO DEMOCRATS ' Op^HAT Birmingham demagogue ' was the scornful title by which JL in the early years of his official life Mr. Chamberlain was described by the plain, blunt Tory, Sir Richard Cross. The daring independence with which he started a Radical propaganda caused alarm in the highest quarters, and might have led to a breach in the Government had not he and Mr. Gladstone been at the time necessary to one another. His praise of his chief was occasionally very warm. In a panegyric uttered when Mr. Gladstone was thinking of resigning on account of ill-health, Mr. Chamberlain said on January i6, 1883, that ' his eloquence, his ability, and his experience were part of the national glory, and the vast majority of men would feel that^his retirement from the scene upon which he had played so illustrious a part would be an incalculable misfortune for his country,' and he applied to him the words which ' the poet wrote concerning the great- est statesman of the preceding century.' ^ In him, Demosthenes was heard again. Liberty taught him her Athenian strain ; She clothed him with authority and awe, Spoke from his lips, and in his looks gave law. The Prime Minister dealt patiently with Mr. Chamberlain, not only because he himself was magnanimous but also because his col- league had influence over the advanced section of the party and would be more dangerous out of than in the Cabinet. Yet he was sorely tried by the attitude and tone which his subordinate began to assume in the third year of his administration. The ' Birmingham dema- gogue ' then defiantly bounded forward as the exponent of more advanced views than those entertained by the Cabinet, and opened that very bitter personal duel with the Marquis of Salisbury which lasted till the combatants arranged a truce preliminary to an alliance. One of his most notorious and significant gibes was used as a retort to the Marquis, who, since Lord Beaconsfield's death in 188 1, had been the most influential of the Conservative leaders. Lord Salis- bury invaded the Midland stronghold on March 28, 1883, and directed a sharp assault on its leader. Two days later Mr. Chamberlain, in a ^ Cowper on Chatham. 74 TWO DEMOCRATS 75 vivacious reply, described him as the spokesman of a class ' who toil not neither do they spin.' ^ Alluding to the warlike policy which his assailant advocated, he quoted the Shakespearian sally : ' See what a desperate homicide this Salisbury is ! ' and on another theme he attributed to him a ' light and airy arithmetic which is peculiarly his own.' The allusion by a Minister of the Crown to those ' who toil not neither do they spin ' has never been forgotten. At the time the gibe was uttered it was received with tremendous dehght by the ultra-Radical classes, and by all who expected or desired a social revolution. Here was a levelling leader after their heart ! On the other hand, Whigs as well as Conservatives, and the official classes generally, were shocked and offended. They regarded Mr. Chamber- lain as a sort of traitor to the cause in which Ministers of the Crown, ex-Ministers and future Ministers were associated. Undaunted by reproof, and unheeding those who tried to pull him back, he attended a celebration in honour of John Bright at Bingley Hall on June 13, and dared to sketch a new programme for the Liberal party, includ- ing disestabhshment, extension of the suffrage, equal electoral dis- tricts, and payment of members. The independence which he thus displayed, rather than the proposals themselves, produced nmibling and grumbhng in high places. The Court was disturbed, Whigs were irritated, and Mr. Gladstone confessed his ' deep regret.' Attention being called in the House of Lords to so unusual a speech, the Government were asked if it represented their pohcy. Lord Granville, as skilful a fencer as ever stood at the table of the peers, gave a chaffing reply. With acid sar- casm the Marquis of Salisbury affected to find a dual personahty in his antagonist. There was the Mr. Chamberlain who represented Birmingham, and there was the Mr. Chamberlain who was a member of the Cabinet. The Marquis compared this dual figure to the Chan- cellor in lolanthe, who was disposed to commit himself for contempt of court because he allowed himself to make love to a ward in Chan- cery without obtaining his own consent. In the House of Commons also the Government were challenged with reference to the speech, and Mr. Gladstone drily declared that Mr. Chamberlain had expressed merely his own opinions. These he continued to declare with grow- ing audacity. Tenniel in a Punch cartoon depicted him as a daring duclding. While he swims boldly away on the pond of Radicalism, the ' grand old hen ' gazes in wonder and alarm at the duckling she has hatched and the Whig brood watch on the brink with expressions of varied significance. ' Come back ! come back ! ' the old hen clucks. * This gibe was uttered by Mr. Chamberlain on the occasion of an address by Lord Rosebery to the Birmingham Junior Liberal Association. 76 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Oh, where is he going, and what will he do ? And will he to warning give ear and turn back ? Or will he prove deaf to the hullaballoo. And make his own choice between cackle and quack ? Cluckitty-cluck Audacious young duck ! Is he off prematurely to try his own luck ? On the very day — the first of July — Mr. Gladstone was writ- ing to a colleague complaining of the license that Mr. Chamberlain took and of his failure to recognize that he was ' a member of a body,' gleeful allusions were made to the ' daring duckling ' at the Cobden Club dinner, at Greenwich, at which the Radical Minister presided. The Free Traders were delighted to learn that his audacity had been unabated by the snubs administered to him on account of his Bingley Hall performance. He was rapturously applauded, and the high-spirited speech which he delivered awoke enthusiasm in a Club by which, twenty years later he was hated beyond any other man, and which he jeered at more bitterly than he ever jeered at the Carlton. His popularity took a marvellous leap. He excited the most dazzling political visions in the minds of Radicals, while he be- came more than ever the bogey man in the Tory nightmare. The most vigorous and persistent attacks upon Mr. Chamberlain proceeded from the Fourth Party, which was founded in 1880. It consisted, as a rule, of four exceedingly clever men who sat on the front bench below the Opposition gangway, and played an indepen- dent role on the Parliamentary stage. Their independence consisted, not in voting now with one side and now with another, but rather seizing opportunities of debate which were neglected by the official leaders of the Opposition, and in pressing home the attack by guerilla methods, from which ex-Ministers naturally shrank. Mr. Balfour, whom Lord Randolph Churchill used to call Postlethwaite, was re- strained by his relationship with Lord Salisbury and was the least active and attached member of the party. He sat to ' Spy ' of Vanity Fair for the well-known cartoon of the group, but the tie which bound him to it was comparatively slender. Even in those early days he adopted the habit of sprawHng on his back, with his long legs thrust forward, and often he seemed as if lost in contemplation of his hand- kerchief and gaiters, while Sir Henry Drummond Wolff fidgeted on the edge of the bench, Mr. Gorst plucked his beard and studied the leaders above the gangway with cold, quizzing eyes, and Lord Randolph Churchill stood at the corner with right foot propped for- ward, badgering the Ministers, or flouting the ' old gang ' of Conser- vative statesmen. During a discussion in 1880 when a member re- marked that there were two great parties in the State, Mr. Parnell claimed that there were three and Lord Randolph Churchill cried TWO DEMOCRATS ^^ ' Four.' The exclamation provoked jeering laughter, and when a Nationalist nicknamed the noble lord and his friends the Fourth Party, few persons imagined that it would occupy a considerable place in history. Lord Randolph was the ' Randy ' of the early eighties. News- paper writers described him as ' an aspiring youth,' as ' youthful but impertinent,' as a member possessing ' a puerile love of mischief.' Cartoonists depicted him as Puck, as a clown or a dog, as a midget with Disraeh's curl or Gladstone's collar, as a Lilliputian tying threads round the giant Salisbury, a bumptious boy taking the lead at the hunt on a pony, a rude scholar irritating gentle Dame Northcote and snatching the lesson book out of her hand. He was ' the Uttle cliild from Woodstock' (the pocket borough which he represented), and the source of parliamentary gaiety was increased when Mr. John Bright's brother, Jacob, alluded to him as ' the member for Wood- cock.' Sir William Harcourt was described playing with Lord Randolph as if he were a kitten, and Mr. Gladstone was reproached with paying him too much attention. One can recall him standing at his familiar corner, curling his moustache, or grasping his waist with his hands, and cocking up his patent leather boot on the heel. He was a dandy in those days, with frock-coat, bluish trousers, tie in a large bow and coloured shirt cuffs. Sometimes, in a pause in his vivacious speech, he would glance at the ring on his finger, which passed to his son. Above the gangway sat Sir Stafford Northcote, with his hands timidly hidden in the sleeves of his coat, and on the other side of the table was the impetuous Prime Minister, very impa- tient under the stings of one whom, in a moment of anger, he likened to an insect. In spite of snubs from Conservative leaders, and denunciations from Liberal statesmen, Lord Randolph grew in boldness as well as in skill and power, until at last he attracted more attention than any member of Parliament except the Prime Minister himself, and was ' ne'er seen but wondered at.' His heavy moustache, curled up at the ends, became as familiar as Mr. Gladstone's high collars, or Mr. Chamberlain's eye-glass. By dint of much practice he developed into a forcible, though not a finished speaker. He piled up big words into picturesque, extravagant phrases, and was a hard but not a vin- dictive hitter. His success in the House of Commons was due in large measure to his instinct for tactics, and his great popularity among Conservatives in the country was the result of the courage and vivacity of his attacks on Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Chamberlain. A sort of fellow-feeling with the independent Tory enabled the Radical Minister to set a true estimate on his character. ' I believe,' he re- marked, ' the noble lord always says what he means and means what 78 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN he says : and I find that what he says to-day his leaders say to- morrow.' They met in friendly manner at private houses. Like Sir William Harcourt and Sir Charles Dilke, Mr. Chamberlain was often at Lord Randolph Churchill's, and he had the honour to dine with the Fourth Party, — an event which greatly shocked the Duke of Marlborough, ' who did not understand how his son could cultivate social relations with a person of such pernicious opinions.' This friendship, however, did not interfere with political warfare. Personal abuse of Mr. Chamberlain was plentiful in the years when he was the hope of the Radicals. His gibe at those ' who toil not neither do they spin ' provoked many retorts of a quality which was at any rate not better than that of his own taunt. Lord Randolph Churchill, for instance, sneered at the critic of peers for basking in the smiles of the Earl of Durham at Newcastle, and mockingly described him as ' this stern patriot ; this rigid moralist ; this unbending censor — the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain.' ' Humbug of hum- bugs,' cried the Tory democrat, ' all is humbug ! ' Recrimination of a virulent sort was indulged in very freely in a pamphlet by Mr. W. T. Marriott, Q.C., a member of Parliament who left the Liberal party long before Mr. Chamberlain and who had attacked his conduct as a manufacturer. ' Were Mr. Chamberlain himself an anchorite,' wrote Mr. Marriott, ' or a monk living on plain fare, and wearing mean apparel, and distributing his goods to the poor, nobody would condemn the jeremiads he preaches against wealth and the wealthy, however useless they might consider them. But for one who is clothed in purple and fine linen, and who fares sumptu- ously every day, to denounce purple, fine linen and sumptuous fare strikes people as somewhat incongruous.' The polite pamphleteer, who was honoured by the Tories when they obtained office, referred in the same tone to Mr. Chamberlain's princely income, his stately luxurious mansion, and the flower to the cultivation of which he de- voted annually sums of money sufficient to clothe, house and feed comfortably a score of his poorer neighbours ! An extravaganza entitled ' Mr. Daniel Creedy, M.P.,' published in 1884, was intended as a skit on Mr. Chamberlain. Creedy is a screw manufacturer, and the writer, describing how he lost his nose, declares that although a Radical gentleman he was not radically a gentleman. He was ' conscious that he carried about with him and betrayed in the presence of his social betters a soup^on of the Great Unwashed, whence he had issued more or less remotely, which no amount of gilding would cover. As he sat in his chair by himself, as he walked in the lobby of the House of Commons, as he conversed with a lady at a dinner, it was there — haunting but never humbling him.' Abuse of this sort was applauded by the Conservatives who in a few years hailed the member for Birmingham as a saviour of the country. XII LORDS AND RIOTS Beware of entrance to a quarrel, but being in Bear't that the opposer may beware of thee. ALTHOUGH this was the spirit in which Mr. Gladstone approached the House of Lords with the measure for the extension of house- hold suffrage to the counties, it did not represent Mr. Chamberlain's temper. The Radical leader eagerly and hastily adopted a threatening tone. As early as December 4, 1883, alluding to the expectation that the peers would try to force a dissolution on the Franchise Bill, which was to be the main legislative business of the following year, he chal- lenged them with taunts. ' I am inclined,' he said, ' to hope, in the words of the beautiful Church Litany, which is read every Sunday, that the nobility may be endued with grace, wisdom and understanding. I trust that the House of Lords will have the wisdom and the under- standing to appreciate the justice of the claim which will be preferred to them, and I hope that Lord SaUsbury will have the grace to yield without provoking a conflict in which he cannot possibly be victorious.' A fortnight later he was still more stinging. ' As to the House of Lords,' he remarked, ' if that august assembly is afraid of the Radical flood there is one very simple plan by which it may save itself from all possible injury. Let it clear out of the way, then the popular movement will do it no harm at all.' This language, although ap- plauded by Radicals throughout the country, was not calculated to smooth the passage of reform. A crisis occurred in the Cabinet at the end of 1883, when procedure was considered, Lord Hartington taking the line which was afterwards followed by the Conservatives, and desiring that the extension of the suffrage should be accompanied by a redistribution of seats. Eventu- ally it was decided as the Government policy that redistribution should follow as rapidly as possible, but friction was for a time increased by Mr. Chamberlain's too great frankness. ' I have intimated to Hart- ington ' — Lord Granville wrote Mr. Gladstone — ' my regret at indivi- dual members of the Cabinet publicly announcing their opinions on matters which are to be discussed there.' ^ ^ Life of Lord Grenville. 79 8o JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN In the House of Commons, Mr. Chamberlain seemed more anxious to heat the furnace of feehng than to show consideration for timid and halting folk. The action of the Opposition, in meeting the Franchise Bill with an amendment declining to proceed with it until there was also submitted a scheme of redistribution, gave him an opportunity for the sort of speech in which he excelled. He twitted the Conservatives on being ' willing to wound and yet afraid to strike,' and he excited emotion by his references to those from whom the vote was being withheld. One stirring passage caused a special commotion. ' What,' said the orator, ' has happened in consequence of the agricul- tural labourers not having a voice in this House ? They have been robbed of their land.' (Protests, and cries of ' Withdraw.') ' I repeat that they have been robbed of their land. They have been robbed of their rights in the commons. They have been robbed of their open spaces. ... It may be said that those proceedings which I have characterized in language not a whit too strong have now come to an end. Not a bit of it ; they are going on still.' ' The agricultural labourers,' he added vehemently, ' are still being robbed.' This heightening of the controversy again embarrassed Mr. Glad- stone, who was chiefly concerned to secure the passing of his bill, and it caused annoyance to Lord Hartington and the other moderate Liberals. Lord George Hamilton expressed a feeling which was not confined to Conservatives, when he said he had never listened to ' a more ill- conditioned speech,' and Sir Robert Peel described it as ' most mis- chievous and most inflammatory,' and as a direct appeal to mob violence. According to another critic Mr. Chamberlain posed as the Admirable Crichton of all the revolutionary classes. The controversy became still more animated when the Franchise Bill was sent in the summer of 1884 to the Upper House. It had been for four months before the Commons, but the Lords lost no time in dealing with it, and they rejected it for a session by passing an amendment such as had been moved by the Conservatives in the representative Chamber. In the campaign which followed the obstructive action of the peers, Mr. Chamberlain was the most forward, aggressive leader. He spoke with impatience of the counsels of calmness which came from the Whigs. Conspicuous among these was Mr. Goschen, whose opposition to the extension of the county franchise had kept him out of the Government, who had declined the Viceroyalty of India, the embassy at Constantinople, the War Secretaryship and the Speakership, but who in a special mission to Turkey had done great service for the State, and whose authority in the Liberal party had been increased by his conduct at a Parliamentary crisis produced by the Soudanese imbroglio. Although sj^mpathizing with much of the Conservative criticism he had LORDS AND RIOTS 8x refused to give Lord Salisbury' a blank cheque,' and thus he assisted to prolong the life of the Government. Now he was listened to by a large section of the country with respect when he preached moderation. Mr. Chamberlain, however, sneered at his counsel. ' It reminds me,' he said, ' of the recommendations which were published some time ago in the Philadelphia Ledger addressed to those whose garments might unfortunately catch fire, one of which wound up with the earnest injunction to any lady who should find herself involved in flames to keep herself as cool as possible.' Most lively encounters took place between Lord Salisbury and Mr. Chamberlain. The antagonists were well-matched in caustic and incisive speech. Neither was afraid of words and neither was afraid of the other. A monster demonstration held in London on a summer day in favour of the Franchise Bill provoked the injudicious jeers of the Tory leader. He remarked that the Government instead of going to the polls took the public opinion of the streets ; they called for processions ; they attempted legislation by picnic. The voice thus heard was ' a counterfeit voice manufactured by the Caucus.' This was quite in the Salisbury vein, and the master of the Caucus was equedly characteristic in his prompt reply at the Devonshire Club. To ' legislation by picnic ' he retorted with a gibe at ' obstruction by privilege,' and he imputed to Lord Salisbury ' an air of patrician arro- gance.' Behind his ' flimsy and disingenuous pretexts ' Mr. Chamber- lain detected hate of the franchise, and he declared that the marquis was in this respect ' only the true representative of the inveterate prejudices of his party.' The language of the chief controversialists was still angrier in the autumn, and included rather unseemly allusions to broken heads. Lord Salisbury imagined Mr. Chamberlain leading a procession from Birmingham, and wished him a broken head for his pains. The Radi- cal replied that he was not afraid of ' my Lord Salisbury nor of his retainers,' and offered to lead a procession on the condition that his adversary should conduct the opposing column. ' In that case,' he added, ' if my head is broken it will be broken in very good company.' This was a rather unusual style of controversy to be carried on by statesmen, but probably when the combatants united in a common cause they laughed at the old feud. Deep emotions were stirred by the attacks on the House of Lords delivered during this crisis by the member for Birmingham, and fears were felt for the permanence of an institution which he subsequently called to his assistance. He spoke exultantly of the issue, which, as he represented, had been raised by Lord Salisbury : ' the issue between the peers and the people ; between the privileges of the few and the rights of the many,' and he declared that the Upper House had always 6 82 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN been the ready tool of the party of obstruction and of prejudice. ' Dur- ing the last hundred years it has never,' he said, ' contributed one iota to public liberty or public freedom, or done anything to advance the common weal, and during that time it has protected every abuse and sheltered every privilege. It has denied justice and delayed reform. It is irresponsible without independence, obstinate without courage, arbitrary without judgment, and arrogant without knowledge.' ^ In a merry mood he added, in words which the Birmingham Tory paper had sarcastically applied to the Commons on his own election to Parliament : — Alas, unconscious of their doom The httle victims play ; No thought have they of ills to come No care beyond to-day. Alas, it was Mr. Chamberlain who was unconscious of his doom ! Blind to the future — on which no living man can look — he spent the autumn of 1884 exposing the peers to the wrath of the people, and heaping denunciation on their Conservative leader. He seemed not only ready but anxious for a conflict between the two Houses. His language was conspicuously different in tone from Lord Hartington's. As Lord Salisbury sneeringly remarked. Lord Hartington had ' a natural but temporary disinclination to abolish his own father.' ' Compromise, ' a word which even Mr. Gladstone at the moment did not like, was breathed by the leader of the Whig section of his Cabinet, but at Hanley in a very vehement speech on October 7, Mr. Chamberlain flouted Lord Salisbury's ' arrogant proposals ' for the simultaneous passing of franchise and redistribution, and refused to have any transactions with ' a statesman whose attitude was so over- bearing.' Next day his chief wrote to him a kindly and conciliatory letter counselling ' reserve.' Lord Salisbury declared that his language was ' as discreditable to the Minister who uttered it as to the Ministers who remained his colleagues ' ; Lord Randolph Churchill sneered at him as a pinchbeck Robespierre, and Mr. Balfour was severe in condem- nation of his strictures upon members of the House of Lords, saying that ' they consisted in about equal measure of bad history, bad logic and bad taste,' and maintaining that the riots which occurred at Aston Park ' naturally resulted ' from his speech at Hanley. These strictures on the peers culminated in a famous deliverance at Denbigh on October 20. It seemed at the time as if this deliver- ance definitely committed Mr. Chamberlain to a movement for the * Attention was called to this attack by Viscount Newport in the House of Commons, but each point in the quoted passage was cheered by the Radicals, and the Prime Minister refused to be brought to account for every word spoken by a colleague. LORDS AND RIOTS 83 abolition of the hereditary principle in the Legislature, and Radicals have looked back upon it with admiration as one of the ablest and most finely-phrased indictments of the Upper House. On many an occasion, either in sympathy or in sarcasm, they have quoted the statement of the lost leader that ' the chronicles of the House of Lords are one long record of concessions delayed until they have lost their grace, of rights denied until extorted from their fears.' And Non- conformists, with feelings of sadness and anger, have recalled how they cheered and honoured — aye ! and loved the man who said that as a Dissenter he had an account to settle with the House of Lords, and would not forget the reckoning. ' The cup is nearly full,' he exclaimed, ' the career of high-handed wrong is coming to an end ! * The cup of wrath was not filled. Moderate counsels prevailed in the Conservative party. Negotiations between leaders on the two sides were promoted by the Queen, with of course the approval of the Prime Minister, and after much diplomacy they arrived at an arrangement. The scheme of redistribution was settled in a friendly manner between representatives of the Government and of the Opposition, and the Franchise Bill, reintroduced in an autumn session, was passed by the peers and became law in December, If the Lords had proved obdurate Parliamentary history would have followed a different course from that which it took during the next twenty years. Instead of the Liberal party being rent in twain by Home Rule it might have united under Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Chamberlain in an attack on the Upper House, and the flood-gates would have been opened to a rush of Radicalism. Reference has been made to the Aston Park riots. These were memorable not only for the encounter by which they were followed in the House of Commons, but also for their own ferocity. They have been described by a prominent Midland politician as ' the last appeals of the bludgeon as a political factor in England.' ^ A demonstration in support of the peers was arranged to be held at Aston Park, Birming- ham, on October 13, and speeches were to be delivered by Sir Stafford Northcote and Lord Randolph Churchill. Local Radicals objected to a meeting, to which Tories from the surrounding districts were to be conveyed by special trains, being represented as an expression of Birmingham opinion ; tickets of admission were forged, thousands of persons assembled for a counter-demonstration, scaled the wall and forced their way into the grounds ; the meeting place was stormed, the platform was captured and the intending speakers were exposed to rough treatment and forced to withdraw. Although Sir Stafford Northcote expressed the good-natured opinion that the proceeding was mainly horse-play, some of his friends were afraid at the time that he * Reminiscences of a Country Politician, by John A. Bridges. 84 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN might be injured. Mr. Chamberlain was held responsible by opponents for the disgraceful outbreak. It was contended not only that his speeches incited the Radicals to make the counter demonstration, but that it was organized by his satellites and that he knew of its object beforehand and might have prevented it by the exercise of his influence. General sympathy with Sir Stafford Northcote was ex- pressed, and Lady Randolph Churchill in her Reminiscences testifies to her husband's ' righteous indignation at such treatment, particu- larly from a friend, even though a political opponent.' The Parliamentary duel on the subject between the President of the Board of Trade and Lord Randolph was anticipated with immense interest. There was some manoeuvring as to the order of combat. On October 23 Sir Henry Drummond Wolff approached the subject and accused Mr. Chamberlain of comphcity with the outrages. Lord Randolph waited in vain for the adversary's defence. Next day he demanded an answer, but the Birmingham fighter still reserved his speech, remarking that Sir Henry Drummond Wolff appeared to be acting as jackal to the leader of the Fourth Party. Although a hubbub was caused by the use of the term ' jackal,' Mr. Chamber- lain did not relinquish any advantage in position. He waited for the charge of his chief assailant. At last Lord Randolph, who boasted that he would draw the badger, submitted on the 30th a motion practically accusing the Radical leader of having incited to riot and disorder. He asserted that tickets had been forged by Liberals, that ladders had been pro- vided and gangs of roughs organized by the Caucus. His indictment appeared to be very damaging. The member for Birmingham, however, was in his element. He repUed in one of the most adroit and spirited speeches which he had ever deUvered. For his defence he read a number of affidavits by roughs who were said to have been engaged by a Conservative official to turn out Liberals from the meeting, and he insisted that it was their violence which provoked the outbreak. Mr. Churchill in the biography of his father mentions that as Mr. Chamberlain's speech was drawing to a close Lord Ran- dolph leaned across the gangway and asked Sir Michael Hicks-Beach if he would reply, but Sir Michael, much impressed by the Radical Minister's arguments, dechned. The spirits of the Conservatives, however, were revived by personal attacks upon him and by the argu- ments of Sir Hardinge Giffard, who threw doubt upon the authenticity of the quoted documents in which there was ' suspicious identity of language.' Dislike of Mr. Chamberlain was expressed with special bitterness in a strange maiden speech by Mr. P. A. Muntz (afterwards Sir Philip) who had been a Liberal but had gone over to the Conservatives an4 LORDS AND RIOTS 85 was elected for a constituency within the Birmingham sphere of influence. Not foreseeing that they would again be on the same side Mr. Muntz commented on the audacity of the Radical leader and charged him with irregular practices. The conduct of the mob was, he said, the result of a council of war held by Mr. Chamberlain and the Caucus, ' which dared not hft a finger without his know- ledge.' He taunted him as a declared Repubhcan with having ac- cepted office under the Crown and as a servant of the Constitution with making attacks on it, ' on every occasion and in every conceivable way.' Mr. Chaphn, in a prophecy at which the Radicals laughed derisively, predicted that the day would come when Mr. Chamberlain would regret that he had spoken with such violence of the House of Lords. His speeches, according to this grieved censor, had been animated by the desire to inflict irreparable injury on a great institu- tion. Mr. Arthur Balfour, in turn, remarked that certain constituen- cies were ' not too fastidious,' and that if the speech which he had made at Hanley were delivered in Ireland he would have had to sleep on a plank bed and hve on prison cocoa. No gibes or personal censures, however, undid the effect of his brilliant defence. Mr. Gladstone cheered and enjoyed ' an extremely powerful ' speech, and the whole Liberal party were delighted with its skill and success. Lord Randolph could not be congratulated upon his badger-drawing. An eminent naturahst, as a proud Radical reminded the House, had said that the badger was an inoffensive animal provided by nature for its own defence with very powerful claws. Such claws were effectively used on this occasion. The case of the riots was carried into the courts and a man whose affidavit had been quoted was charged with criminal hbel and sentenced to six weeks' imprisonment, the judge moralizing on the result of political rancour, and counsel for the prosecution describing the offender as a poor, ignorant fellow who had been made a tool. So far, however, as Parhament was concerned Mr. Chamberlain's victory was complete, and the fear of Birmingham and its fighting member was increased. To draw that fighter became for twenty years the most hazardous sport at St. Stephen's. He was, as Mr. Morley said, ' the wariest, toughest, and most powerful badger ever known.' As we learn from the biography of Lord Randolph, a total breach in his strange friendship with the Radical minister was caused by the quarrel over the riots. Radical democrat and Tory democrat no longer saluted one another, and such correspondence as was necessary was conducted with frigid formahty. Mr. Churchill gives in his brilliant book a letter, dated October 28, 1884, in which ' Mr. Chamber- lain presents his compliments to Lord R. Churchill.' When, however, the President of the Board of Trade heard a month later that Lord 86 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Randolph was about to start for a holiday in India on account of his health, he wrote to ' My dear Churchill,' expressing very kindly wishes and describing himself sans rancune. To this generous letter his old friend replied in the most hearty terms. ' I had always hoped,' wrote Lord Randolph, ' that the friendship which existed between us and which for my part I most highly valued, might at all times be altogether unaffected by any parliamentary conflicts, however brisk and even sharp the latter might be.'^ The Fourth Party, which in its later career lost the assistance of Mr. Balfour, was dissolved in the confusion of the Franchise Bill controversy, when its leader came to an understanding with the Marquis of Sahsbury and dined at the Cecil mansion in Arlington Street. ' The two men,' says Mr. Churchill, ' met as chiefs on almost equal terms.' In a Punch cartoon Mr. Linley Sambourne treated the event as a manage de convenance, after Orchardson's famous picture. Lord Randolph sitting gloomily at one end of the table and Butler Northcote pouring wine into Lord Salisbury's glass at the other end. ^ Lord Randolph Churchill, by Winston S. Churchill. I XIII UNAUTHORIZED PROGRAMME ' The poorest he that is in England hath a life to live as much as the greatest he.' — A Roundhead of 1647. THE year 1885 marked the flood tide of Mr. Chamberlain's popular- ity in the Liberal party and among the reformers of the country. While he submitted and with great earnestness advocated the proposals which Mr. Goschen truly described as the unauthorized programme, the eyes of Radicals and of all who desired to see vast changes turned to him with hope and confidence. By the working classes in the towns, and by labourers in the rural districts, he was hailed as a- poUtical prophet, as a social saviour, who could and would introduce a new era of equahty and comfort. Nothing but an old man's life stood between him and the headship of the Liberals. He was already regarded by a section as the real leader of the party ; and the champions of privilege and vested rights dreaded him as their most dangerous enemy. Many of those who cheered Mr. Chamberlain in 1885, and from whom he parted in 1886, charged him with desiring to supplant Mr. Gladstone. As he was ambitious, and went faster than his chief, it was suspected that he wished to take the chief's place before the veteran was ready to retire. But although he advocated his own views with unusual independence and endeavoured by means of public opinion to secure their adoption in the Cabinet he resorted to no act of rebellion. On the contrary, almost since he entered Parhament he had abstained from the admonitions to the leader in which he indulged in previous years, and during his tenure of office he pronounced on Mr. Gladstone some glowing panegyrics. In December, 1882, he described him as ' the noblest figure in English pohtical history ' ; and in the following month, as already noted, he said Mr. Gladstone's retirement would be ' an incalculable misfortune.' In January, 1885, he boasted of a leader ' whose unsurpassed ability and long-tried devotion to the people's service had earned for him their undying regard and esteem ' ; and in June he delivered a splendid eulogy of which he was often reminded, declaring that great men are like great mountains,^ and that we do not appreciate their magnitude while we are still close • He had previously used this simile with reference to Cobden. 87 88 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN to them. Extolling ' the greatest statesman of our time ' he protested against the vulgar affronts and the lying accusations of which Mr. Gladstone had nightly been made the subject in the House of Commons, and said it ' behoved those whom he had served so long to remember these things, to resent them, and to punish them.' It was against the moderate Liberals, rather than against their common chief, that he openly directed his ambitious designs. He admitted that he found it difficult to reconcile his loyalty to colleagues in the Cabinet with the Radical principles which he represented ; and while frankly reserving the immediate application of his opinions, he strove to ensure their success in the future. Probably in those ■days he shared the general belief encouraged by Mr. Gladstone himself that the famous chief would soon put off his armour, and no doubt he was determined that in that event his own views, and not the more moderate doctrines of Lord Hartington and Mr. Goschen, should prevail. The struggle of 1885 was a struggle between these statesmen and himself. His speeches in expounding the unauthorized Radical programme were the most eloquent of his life. They were inspired by a vivid consciousness of the needs of his poor fellow-countrymen, and by a burning conviction as to the necessary remedies. Out of the heart the orator spoke. His utterances were those of deep sincerity. A tone of passion vibrated in his voice, and thrilled his audiences. He tried in later years to repeat that thrill, but the fire seldom flashed into the old flame. After 1886 Mr. Chamberlain's career — to use another metaphor — was diverted from its original tendency and course, and while swollen into a great stream it lost some of its natural impetuosity and force. Although his independent campaign opened with a sensational declaration on ransom at Birmingham in January, 1885, it had been prepared a considerable time beforehand. There had been a growing divergence between Mr. Chamberlain's aims and aspirations and those of the Whig section of his Cabinet colleagues. Even in 1883 that keen and incisive critic. Lord Salisbury, expressed surprise that so Radical a politician should be a member of the same Government as Lord Granville and Lord Hartington. ' We have,' he said, ' a Cabinet which, as a Cabinet, looks upon manhood suffrage as dangerous, and utterly resists the disestablishment of the English Church. We have a minister in that Cabinet, wielding the authority of the Cabinet, and standing in his position by virtue of the countenance they give him. We have him declaring that any other solution than that of manhood suffrage will be depriving millions of their right, and that the property of the Church of England belongs to every section of the nation.' In the same year this independent Cabinet minister gave UNAUTHORIZED PROGRAMME 89 the following sketch of the questions upon which he beUeved the great majority of the people were agreed, but whose solution was delayed till all were taken into counsel : ' The complete estabUshment of rehgious equahty, the freedom of education in our national schools, the improvement of the dwellings of the poor, the improvement of the condition of the agricultural labourers, the popular control of the liquor traffic, and such a readjustment of taxation as would proportion its burdens to the means and abiUty of the taxpayer.' Then came the battle of the franchise with Mr. Chamberlain's eager desire to fight the House of Lords, in order that — as he said — its career of highhanded wrong might be brought to an end. At the close of that controversy he began his own new campaign with full energy and vigour. ' How to promote the greater happiness of the masses of the people, how to increase their enjoyment of fife : ' that, he declared in his celebrated speech at Birmingham, on January 5, 1885, was the problem of the future. The centre of power, as he argued, had been shifted, and the old order was giving place to the new. Tracing this new order he made the allusion to ransom which was so often quoted during the remainder of his life. ' I ask,' he said, ' what ransom will property pay for the security which it enjoys ? What substitute will it find for the natural rights which have ceased to be recognized ? Society is banded together in order to protect itself against the instincts of men who would make very short work of private ownership if they were left alone. That is all very well, but I maintain that society owes to these men something more than mere toleration in return for the restrictions which it places upon their liberty of action.' On several occasions Mr. Chamberlain had caused a shudder to run through the contented classes, but his new offence was regarded as the worst. He was reprimanded and reproached for making a direct attack upon the rights of property, and for inciting the poor to confiscation. ' The Tiwes newspaper,' as he said, ' did me the honour to misrepresent me ; Lord Salisbury denounced me ; Mr. Goschen lectured me ; the Duke of Argyll scolded me ; and the Spectator newspaper preached to me.' In a note in his journal on the ' ransom ' speech Mr. Goschen wrote : ' Quite detestable. . . . Setting class against class ; all against property, which he implies but does not actually say is landed property.' ^ Mr. Chamberlain was undismayed by a storm of protests. He continued to warn friends and foes that the political world was about to be changed by the great increase of the power of the large towns, secured through the redistribution of seats, and by the appearance at the poll of the agricultural labourer. The old shibboleths would be found insufficient for the altered circum- stances of the case, and it would be no good to rattle the dry bones * Life of Lord Goschen, by the Hon. Arthur D. Elliot. go JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN of past political controversies. With feelings of gratitude and hope such warm words as the following were heard in the humble cottages of the land : ' The agricultural labourer is the most pathetic figure in our whole social system. He is condemned by apparently inexor- able conditions to a life of unremitting and hopeless toil, with the prospect of the poorhouse as its only or probable termination. For generations he has been oppressed, ignored, defrauded, and now he will have to be reckoned with.' ' The right to live,' ' natural rights,' ' a right to a part of the land of his birth,' ' the duty of society as a whole to secure the comfort and welfare of all its individual members ' — these were phrases with which Mr. Chamberlain caused a greater fright even than his actual proposals. When such have been used in a later day by Socialist members of the House of Commons they have been severely reprobated, and in 1885 they were regarded as the phrases of a leveller and an anarchist. Their author was denounced by the landed aristocracy as a man who, for his own political purposes, was prepared to turn society upside down. Taunts often heard in private were publicly repeated at a Conservative Club by Mr. Marriott who sneered at Mr. Chamberlain posing as a plebeian and added : — ' H to have an income of ;£i5,ooo or £20,000 a year, if to live in a palatial residence, and to have the best food, and the choicest wines and cigars, and to entertain the rich and noble, was being a plebeian, why ! every man would like to be a plebeian. Mr. Chamberlain was ready to be all things to all men. No doubt he had made sacrifices. For a member of a Republican Club to take the oath of allegiance was a sacrifice ; for the man who before 1873 desired to abolish the Royal family it must have been a sacrifice to go to Windsor and dine with Her Majesty.' Meanwhile the new programme continued to be unfolded by its inventor. At Ipswich, on January 14, he advocated free education; the extension of local government to the counties ; the provision of healthy, decent dwellings in large towns and in the country ; facilities for the labourer to obtain a small plot of land ; the taxation of ground rents ; graduated income-tax ; land reform ; the restitution of common land and of charitable endowments diverted from the poor. ' If the rights of property are sacred,' he argued, ' surely the rights of the poor are entitled to an especial reverence. Naboth's vineyard deserves protection quite as much as Ahab's palace.' Torrents of abuse and whirlwinds of invective enveloped him, as he informed his constituents on January 29, but he ridiculed the clamour about con- fiscation and blackmail and plunder. It was, he declared, ' so much dust raised by men who were interested in maintaining the present system, and who are either too prejudiced to read my proposals or to stupid to understand them.' Among these proposals he included UNAUTHORIZED PROGRAMME 91 labour representation, payment of members, one man one vote, and in spite of the anger and derision of the landed class, he repeated that he was anxious to call in the local authorities in every district and give them power to take land at its fair value and incur expenditure in the provision of small holdings. He had a warning for the landlords who were rebuking him. ' If they are unable to develop their pro- perty to the best advantage, if they cannot perform the obligations which attach to it, then I say they must be taught that their ownership is a trust which is limited by the supreme necessities of the nation, and they must give place to others who will do full justice to the capabihties of the land.' By declarations which not only were made without the approval of the Cabinet but were obviously intended to bring popular pressure to bear on the Whig section, Mr, Chamberlain again added to the embarrassments of the much-vexed Prime Minister. Earl Granville's letters show that the most tolerant of colleagues resented his con- duct. It was complained that he had used a great meeting at Birming- ham to overcome the opinions of those who disagreed with him in the Government. ' I intended,' wrote Lord Granville to Mr. Gladstone on February i, ' raising the question of his home utterances if he had been present at the Cabinet, not as a complaint of his holding opinions from which I might partially or wholly differ, but of his action as a member of the Cabinet.' ^ Lord Hartington was uncomfortable and unsettled, and there was imminent danger of a rupture in the Government, which was threatened at many points. News of the fall of Khartoum arrived on February 5 ; in April the decision was taken to retire from the Soudan ; then arose the risk of a war with Russia in consequence of the Penjdeh incident on the frontier of Afghanistan ; and Ireland was as usual a cause of contention and keen anxiety. Nevertheless, as Mr. Morley recalls, Mr. Gladstone ' imputed no low motives to a colleague because the colleague gave him trouble.' Criticism of the new doctrines of Socialism at the early stage of their advocacy proceeded chiefly from Lord Salisbury and Mr. Goschen ; and to these critics Mr. Chamberlain replied with light heart and undaunted mind. Dealing with the Conservative leader at an Eighty Club function he complained of characteristic invective and characteristic inaccuracy, and described the gist of Lord Salisbury's recent speeches as the promise of a vigorous foreign policy, and a feeble imitation of Protection in the guise of what was called Fair Trade. This seemed to the Radical reformer to be ' rather a small programme for a great party.' At Mr. Goschen he sneered in an elaborate passage of sarcasm, as ' the candid friend.' To hear some > Life of Lord Granville, by Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice. 92 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN people talk one would suppose that the only thing for a Liberal to do was to cultivate his own garden for himself. Mr. Chamberlain, however, did not think that the circumstances justified the optimism of Candide. Describing the poverty which ' goes on in sight of the mansions of the rich,' and calling for something more than barren and fruitless criticism, he boldly asserted ' the duty of society as a whole to secure the comfort and welfare of all its individual members.' Dissension in the Cabinet extending over a variety of subjects came to a point in the case of Ireland. The question of renewing the Crimes Act clamoured for decision, and agreement was diffi- cult. Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Charles Dilke pressed for local govern- ment and no coercion. At most they would consent only to the renewal of the Crimes Act for one year, and the Birmingham Post announced, on May 22, that if the Government did not take this course these Radical statesmen would resign their places. Subse- quently they agreed to the milder provisions of the Act being continued for two years, if accompanied by satisfactory measures of local govern- ment. The Ministers were still deliberating on the portions of the statute to be renewed when they were defeated on the Budget by a combination of the Nationalists with the Conservatives.^ Passionate enthusiasm was displayed by the victors. Stirring scenes of triumph have been witnessed since then, but on no occasion was passion fiercer than in June, 1885. Nationahsts exulted over the defeat of a Government which had mixed very stiff coercion with generous remedies, and Conservatives were excited to ecstasy by the overthrow of those whom they held responsible for the death of General Gordon. The Ministers themselves were not sorry to escape from office, and it was asserted that the chief Whip took less than the usual measures to secure a majority. Although the achievements of Mr. Gladstone's second Govern- ment fell short of expectation they formed the subject of complacent retrospect by one of its members. Mr. Chamberlain gave a record of great accomplishments : ' We have aboHshed flogging in the army ; we have suspended the operation of the odious Acts called the Con- tagious Diseases Acts ; we have amended the game laws ; we have reformed the burial laws ; we have introduced and carried an Employers' Liability Bill ; we have had a Bankruptcy Act, a Patents Act and a host of secondary measures, which together would have formed the stock-in-trade of a Tory Government for twenty years at least. And these are the fringe only, the outside of the more important ^ An understanding had been arrived at between the allies that a Conservative Government would not renew the Crimes Act, would grant an inquiry into the case of certain convictions known as the Maamtrasna case and would appoint a Viceroy sympathetic to Irish aspirations. UNAUTHORIZED PROGRAMME 93 legislation of our time, the chief elements in which have been the Irish Land Bill and the Reform Bill.' It was, however — then and always — rather with the future than with the past that the Radical leader was concerned. He wound up a review of two Parliaments by saying : ' I believe that the reduction of the franchise will bring into prominence social questions which have been too long neglected, that it may force upon the consideration of thinking men of all parties the condition of our poor — aye, and the contrast which unfortunately exists between the great luxury and wealth which some enjoy, and the misery and destitution which prevail amongst large portions of the population. I do not beheve that the Liberal poUcy, mine or any other, will ever take away the security which property rightly enjoys — that it will ever destroy the certainty that industry and thrift will meet with their due reward ; but I do think that something may be done to enlarge the obhgation and responsibility of the whole com- munity towards its poorer and less fortunate members.' XIV THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP RELIEF from office was welcomed by no Minister more than by Mr. Chamberlain. The defeat of the Government in June, 1885, gave him a freer opportunity to advocate his own programme. A turning point had been reached in the Liberal march, and the question arose — Who was to lead the party henceforward ? Was the old chief to remain at the head of the forces, or was he to give place to another ? And if he was to retire to his tent was he to be succeeded by a Moderate or by a Radical ? All the qualities of a leader were displayed bj' Mr. Chamberlain. He was prompt and brisk in attack on the opposing party and bold in the promotion of a policy for his followers. At a Cobden club dinner and at a Holloway meeting a few days after the Liberal defeat, while prescribing his own remedies, including the satisfaction of Irish patri- otic feeling, he poured unmeasured contempt on the Administration which had been formed by Lord Salisbury. He ridiculed the ' stop- gap Government ' and the ' caretakers on the premises/ and pictured the Conservative party ' with indecent expedition hastening to divest itself of a whole wardrobe of pledges and professions which it had accumulated during the past few years, stripping off every rag of consistency, and standing up naked and not ashamed in order that it might squeeze itself into office.' He complained of a want of fair play on the part of the Conservatives when they were in opposition, alleging that they had ignored the decencies of debate, and lowered the dignity of the House of Commons, in order to embarrass ' a statesman who with a load of years upon his head, and with the almost intolerable burdens of the Empire upon his shoulders, had been called upon again and again to bear the brunt of personal malignity and of studied disrespect.' With equal vehemence at Hackney, on July 24, Mr. Chamberlain denounced them for making a compact with the Parnellite party, and in language such as is seldom applied by one in his position to Ministers of the Crown, he remarked that the consistency of our public life, the honour of political controversy, the patriotism of statesmen had been profaned and trampled in the mire by a crowd of hungry office- seekers who were now doing Radical work in the Tory uniform. Lord 94 THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP 95 Salisbury and Sir Michael Hicks-Beach were, he said, dragged at the tail of Lord Randolph Churchill (who had been appointed Secretary of State for India), but he added, for the consolation of his friends, that ' a democratic revolution was not to be accomplished by aristo- cratic perverts.' His own programme, as he now unfolded it, included local government, the reform of the land laws, revision of taxation, control of the liquor traffic, the question of the State Church, free schools, the abolition of the game laws, and the greater security of life at sea. ' We cannot,' he said, ' trust the solution of these questions to the forced consent of the Tory party, to be refused as long as pos- sible, to be conceded with reluctance, to be granted only when further resistance has become dangerous and impossible.' On the evening that he was at Hackney, nearly 300 Liberal peers and members of the House of Commons attended a banquet to Lord Spencer, in honour of his Irish vice-royalty. Lord Hartington presided, and Mr. John Bright joined in the demonstration. The absence of the two most prominent Radicals was noted with displeasure. ' Amongst those who were present,' writes Mr. Goschen's biographer, ' a strong feeling undoubtedly prevailed that Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Charles Dilke were shirking their responsibility for the unpopular acts of the late Cabinet.' ^ There was, indeed, little room in their hearts for sympathy with a colleague who had administered coercion. The publication in July of The Radical Programme, comprising a series of articles which had appeared in the Fortnightly Review, and bearing on its red cover the attractive adverstisement ' with a preface by the Rt. Hon. J. Chamberlain, M.P.,' was an important factor in the political controversy. ' Radicalism which has been the creed of the most numerous section of the Liberal party outside the House of Commons will henceforth,' said the writer of the preface, ' be a powerful factor inside the walls of the popular Chamber. The stage of agitation has passed and the time for action has come. . . . New conceptions of public duty, new developments of social enterprise, new estimates of the natural obligations of the members of the community to one another have come into view and demand consideration.' He did not pledge himself to all the proposals contained in the book, but the belief was that it had been written under his inspiration, and it gave increased impetus to the Radical movement. Among the projects which it set forth were ' manhood suffrage, equal electoral districts, payment of members, disestablishment and disendowment of the Church of England, creation of national coimcils for Scotland, Ireland and Wales, progressive taxation of incomes and of realized property, reform of land tenure, and free education.' Nearly the whole of this pro- gramme was advocated also on the platform by Mr. Chamberlain. * Life of Lord Goschen, by the Hon. Arthur D. Elliot. 96 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Radicals who attended his meetings went home to read the^ volume'"; others bought the printed word who could not hear the voice. The book had a large circulation throughout the country and was read with eagerness and fascination as the gospel of a social millennium. A doubly terrific aspect was given in the minds of Whigs and Con- servatives to the new proposals, on account of the Socialistic sentiments with which their author surrounded them. He spoke of ' the excessive aggregation of wealth in a few hands, ' and in recommending land reforms he remarked that ' the sanctity of private property is no doubt an important principle, but the public good is a greater and higher object than any private interest, and the comfort and happiness of the people and the prosperity of the country must never be sacrified to the exag- gerated claims of a privileged class who are now the exclusive possessors of the great gift of the Almighty to the human race.' Again : ' Our object is the elevation of the poor, of the masses of the people — a levelling up of them, by which we shall do something to remove the excessive inequality in social life which is now one of the greatest dangers, as well as a great injury, to the State.' Naturally such aspirations dis- turbed the sleep of those who believed that ' whatever is, is best. ' Well might Lord Hartington lament the rate at which they were moving in the Socialist direction ! Renewed sneers and rebukes and reproaches were flung at the offender by prominent journals and politicians but they failed to repress or intimidate Mr. Chamberlain. He agreed with Mr. Cobden that the opposition of The Times was an indispensable condition of any success- ful prosecution of Liberal reform ; and he repaid aU critics in their own coin, with interest added. ' I am not discouraged,' he said in August, ' I am not repentant.' A month later he boasted that ' like the great Lord Clive,' he was astonished at his own moderation. In the autumn he made a triumphant tour through the Highlands, where the enthusiasm excited by his speeches reached an enormous height. ' I say that men are born with natural rights, with the right to existence and the right to a fair and reasonable opportunity of enjoying it.' This was the keynote of the gospel which he carried to the crofters, and his words were as manna in the wilderness to men with land-hunger. 'Let us look,' he said, 'this fetish in the face ; let us examine these sacred rights of property ; let us see on what they are founded ; and let us see whether there ought not to be some limitation to the exorbitant pretensions with which they have been accompanied.' The eloquent agitator, in tones which resounded throughout the whole country, denounced a system ' which postpones the good of the community to the interests of individuals, which loses sight altogether of the obligations of property in a servile adulation of its rights ; ' he complained of rights-of-way being closed ; he pro- THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP 97 posed that the local authorities should have power to take land com- pulsorily at its fair value and let it for crofters' holdings ; he demanded the restriction of deer forests and their special taxation. ' My pro- posals,' he remarked, ' have been described by those who think the phrase a sufficient condemnation as Socialistic : but those persons have forgotten to tell you that they are also Christian.' He lived to admit that the word ' ransom ' was not very well chosen, but during his Radical propaganda it represented in his mind the loftiest of doctrines. The opinion of a friend on his Highland tour may be found in a letter from Dr. Dale.^ When all men were taking sides for or against the Radical leader, Dr. Dale wrote to him : ' I congratulate you very heartily on your recent speeches in the North ; apart from the sub- stance of them, which was admirable, the form — in which I include all the rhetorical elements — reached a level which, I think, you never touched before, and which I hope you will keep. It is a great thing for a man to make an advance of this kind when he has touched fifty.' ' This criticism,' modestly added his friend, ' is rather presumptuous for a person like myself to offer to an ex-Cabinet minister ; but the delight one has in watching the growing strength of one's comrades remains when a comrade has become a chief, and when one has lost the right to speak to him in this way.' It would be a libel on Mr. Chamber- lain to suspect that his speeches at this period did not represent his genuine feeling. His tone became different in later years, and while some of the unauthorised proposals were carried out with his assistance or support, other reforms advocated in 1885 faded to matters of theory, to questions which he treated ' in the abstract.' But certainly when he extolled them in the hearing of excited multitudes his sin- cerity was unquestioned. The pathos and the passion he displayed, the eloquence of his speeches and the enthusiasm of his audiences testi- fied to his earnestness. The pages and pictures of Punch show how Mr. Chamberlain had advanced in notoriety. In the early portion of his official career he played a minor role. For instance, at the beginning of 1881, in a Twelfth-Night procession at St. Stephen's, he was a page-boy with a basket. Gradually he came to the front and challenged attention as a leading figure. By December, 1883, he was Hamlet, Prince of Birmingham, with Lord Hartington emiong the players to whom he gave directions. In those days, the cartoonists were inclined to depict him with heavy features and thick lips, and his side whiskers looked clumsy. There is, however, thorough alertness in his figure at the beginning of 1884 when he appears as a juggler, and also a year later in the picture of ' Joey,' the clown, who with the Socialist poker hits * an old party,' engrossed in The Times, and exclaims : — ^ Life of R. W. Dale, of Birmingham. 98 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Whoop ! Didn't stolid Harty give a start ? And didn't Pussy Granville give a jump ? In the autumn of 1885 Mr. Chamberlain was the most familiar of Punch's companions. One week he and Lord Hartington are out as sportsmen with their guns, the Whig wishing to stick to the old ground and the Radical with a fancy for breaking up new ; and in the following week he is engaged in a polo match with Lord Randolph Churchill, the one riding Socialism and the other Tory democracy. He looks smarter when his whiskers disappear, and his face gradually assxmies the sharper aspect so familiar in later years. Mr. Chamberlain's relationship with Mr. Gladstone was much discussed during his advocacy of the unauthorised programme. He was taking the old chief's place in many minds and hearts, and it was assumed that his ambition would not fall short of his opportunities. If, however, he had hoped or expected that there would be an early vacancy in the leadership he was disappointed. Mr. Gladstone's authorized manifesto, in view of the approaching general election, appeared when the Radical agitator was in the north of Scotland. It put an end to the idea of his resignation, and it largely affected his lieutenant's outlook. Mr. Chamberlain's reference to it at Inverness excited surprise. ' I have had,' he said, ' no pretensions at all to lay down any complete or exhaustive Liberal programme. That is the duty of a greater man than I. That duty has been discharged by Mr. Gladstone in the manifesto which he has published, and which will be welcomed throughout the United Kingdom, not merely as a clear and eloquent exposition of Liberal policy, but also as a welcome assurance that the chief who on so many previous occasions has led us to victory will lead us once more in the coming struggle ! ' A more correct, submissive attitude could not have been taken by a conventional place-man, nor could the most polite and considerate of colleagues have shown better taste. The differences between the two pro- grammes were described by conciliatory people as differences of dimen- sion. A French observer expressed their opinion when he remarked that Mr. Gladstone's programme was a minimum of necessary reforms, Mr. Chamberlain's a maximum of possible reforms. All who wished to see unity in the Liberal party were delighted to think that while holding himself free to advocate his own proposals, the Radical propa- gandist was ready to co-operate with his famous chief in carrying out the authorised policy so far as it went. Their satisfaction was of short duration. The belief in Mr. Cham- berlain's complaisance was^ sharply dispelled at a meeting which he addressed in the Victoria Hall, London, on September 24, — a meeting memorable even in the autumn campaign for its enthusiasm. Mr. Chamberlain himself and Mr. Morley, who was chairman, experienced THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP 99 considerable difficulty in obtaining admission on account of the large crowd at the doors, twenty stewards being required to clear a passage for them. The popular agitator was greeted with the most fervent cheers. He was a conquering hero. Fresh from his tour in Scotland he looked full of vigour and confidence ; his voice surprised some of those who had heard it only a few months previously. It displayed a richness and variety of tone of which many persons had considered it incapable. The matter of the two programmes was dealt with discreetly by the chairman. Lord Iddesleigh (as Sir Stafford Northcote had become) had remarked that the old moon lying in the lap of the new moon was a sign of squally weather, whereupon Mr. Morley retorted that Liberals ought to be able to make a great many stars out of their old moon. Mr. Chamberlain, however, was not now content to be a star. He had changed since he was at Inverness. After dealing with such projects as free education and the compulsory acquisition of land, he said : ' Whether they will be included in the programme of the Liberal party or not does not depend upon me. It docs not depend upon any individual leader, however influential and highly placed he may be. It rests with the constituencies themselves and their representatives. ... If I am right these views will find adequate expression, and they will receive due weight and attention from the party leaders. If I am disappointed, then my course is clear. I cannot press the views of the minority against the conclusions of the majority of the party ; but it would be, on the other hand, dishonourable in me, and lowering the high tone which ought to prevail in public life, if I, having com- mitted myself personally, as I have done, to the expediency of these proposals, were to take my place in any Government which excluded them from its programme.' This announcement, which Mr. Morley, in less sympathetic days, described as melodramatic, suited the ardent temper of the Radicals in the Victoria Hall, but disappointed the peace-makers of the party, and the Whigs commented on it in the tone of men who found their worst fears justified. It sounded like a direct appeal to the electors to choose between Mr. Chamberlain's programme and another programme — to choose between himself and the old chief. Unfriendly critics said he was trying to drive Mr. Gladstone into retirement. Fifteen years later he told a famous journalist that in 1885 he was certainly resolved to be Prime Minister in the Liberal succession.^ But, as some observers who were shrewd as well as charitable recognized at the time, the appeal was not necessarily against Mr. Gladstone. Perhaps Mr. Chamberlain was merely guarding the succession against the Whigs who were struggling for control of the party policy. It might ' Sixty Years in the Wilderness, by Sir Henry Lucy. 100 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN well be that he cared much more for policy than for position. On October i, at Bradford, he replied to the accusation that he was dictating terms to the party and its leader. ' Office for me,' he said, ' has no attraction unless it be made to serve the cause I have under- taken to promote, and if that reward is denied me, or is beyond my grasp, I will be content to leave to others the spoils of victory.' A week later he visited Mr. Gladstone at Hawarden, but from the point of view of an agreement on policy the meeting proved useless. Some of his latter-day followers would have consigned to oblivion the speeches of his Radical prime, but not only were they printed in the newspapers but they were collected in a volume, issued at the end of 1885, which was edited by Sir H. W. Lucy ; and it was noted that he had been good enough to look over the proofs. The editor wrote that, ' the almost meteoric movement that Mr. Chamberlain has made on the political horizon within the last ten years justifies the belief that his career is boimded only by the attainment of the highest office in the State open to an English citizen.' The speeches in the volume indicated the policy which, if he had reached that office in his Radical days, he would have carried out. They included the ' toil not, neither do they spin ' speech ; the plain words to peers at Denbigh ; the Ran- som declaration ; and several of the orations of the autumn of 1885. The attacks of Conservative statesmen and moderate Liberals became sharper and sharper as the struggle drew towards the first election in which the new voters were to take part. Their language was described by Mr. Chamberlain as malignant and scurrilous. He was denounced as an anarchist, and accused of the policy of Jack Sheppard ; Mr. Goschen sneered at the Radicals whom he led as the Salvation Army of politics ; Lord Salisbury, whose cool contempt was exasperating, ridiculed his land proposals as those of inveterate Cock- neys who had never gone beyond a smoky town or the neighbourhood of a big town hall, and declared that his doctrines of ransom were no new discovery ; they were the common property of every barbarous and uncivilized Government since the beginning of the world. To Jack Cade he was compared by Lord Iddesleigh. ' I hope,' said that noble lord at Aberdeen on Sept. 22, ' it will not offend many of his friends when I say that it struck me when I read some of Mr. Chamberlain's speeches in which he expressed his admiration for those who taught that the lower and working classes of this country were better off in the 15th century than they are now that he would have had considerable sympathy with the great popular leader, John Cade.' Fighting the battle of Radicalism with a courage, an ardour, and an ability which excited the amazement of the whole country and the admiration of a host of followers, Mr. Chamberlain returned quite as hard blows as he received. There was an air of mockery in his THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP loi replies to the Whigs. Feelings which had been suppressed in the severe atmosphere of the Cabinet room in Downing Street were relieved in the sympathetic surroundings of the popular platform. When Lord Hartington criticised some parts of the new gospel its exponent made a sharp retort which the political world did not for twenty years let slip into oblivion. ' It is perfectly futile and ridiculous,' he said, ' for any political Rip Van Winkle to come down from the mountain on which he has been slumbering, and to tell us that these things are to be excluded from the Liberal programme. The world has moved on while these dreamers have been sleeping.' At the critic who was the first to describe his proposals as the unauthorised programme, he flung equally stinging personal allusion. ' Mr. Goschen is very great at finding difficulties, but he would be greater still if he would only remember that it is the business of a statesman to overcome them. To scent out difficulties in the way of every reform — that is the congenial task of a man of the world who coldly recognizes the evils from which he does not suffer himself, and reserves his chief enthusiasm for the critical examination of every proposal for their redress, and for a scathing denunciation of the poor enthusiast who will not let well alone, and who cannot preserve the serene equanimity of superior persons : — Well, well, it's a mercy we have men to tell us The rights and the wrongs of these things anyhow, An^ that Providence sends us oracular fellows To sit on the fence and slang those at the plough.' *■ On a previous occa.sion the Radical dictator had said that if Mr. Goschen could not honestly go with the stream the stream would pass him by, and he would be stranded on the beach. This was naturally inter- preted by the Whig statesman as an order to stand aside, but Mr. Chamberlain sarcastically pretended : ' We cannot spare him. He performs in the Liberal party the useful part of the skeleton at the Egyptian feasts. He there is to repress oiu" enthusiasm and to moderate our joy.' Allusions to Rip Van Winkle and the skeleton at the feast were recalled in many controversies, sometimes by one party, sometimes by another, but the statesmen thus described spent a considerable portion of their mature and tolerant lives as the allies and colleagues of the impatient reformer, and if they recalled the gibes it may have been only as subjects for jest. The retorts to Conservative critics were characterised by political * Wal, it's a marcy we've gut folks to tell us The rights an' the wrongs o' these matters, I vow, — God sends country lawyers, an' other wise fellers To start the world's team wen it gits in a slough. — (The Biglow Papers.) 102 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN rather than personal feehng. Mr. Chamberlain professed to receive in very good part the comparison which ' so good-tempered an opponent ' as Lord Iddesleigh instituted between himself and Mr. John Cade, who at least, as Mr. Morley pointed out, had this resem- blance with him that the initials of his name were the same. ' Knowing as I do,' he said, ' of what Tory misrepresentation is capable, I am inclined to think that Jack Cade was an ill-used and much misunder- stood gentleman who happened to have a sympathy with the poor and the oppressed, and who therefore was made the mark for the malignant hatred of the aristocratic and land-owning classes, who combined to burlesque his opinions and to put him out of the way.' Lord Salisbury's reference to inveterate Cockneys galled a politician who was bom in Camberwell. He replied by ridiculing the idea that no one was entitled to form an opinion on agricultural questions except members of ' that fortunate but limited class which has contrived to obtain for its exclusive possession the greater part of the land of the country, and which has had, owing to our imperfect representative system, an altogether disproportionate influence in legislation.' He could not recollect any great or beneficent reform which had emanated from the landed gentry nor one which had not received their persistent hostility. It was, he added, two ' inveterate Cockneys ' — Mr. Bright and Mr. Cobden — who aroused the nation to a sense of the iniquities of a system which taxed the bread of the people in order to raise the rents of the landlords. On every opportunity Mr. Chamberlain continued passionately to preach ' the gospel of political humanity.' Rebuking the ' con- venient cant of selfish wealth ' he became, in a sense, the Friend of Humanity like the Knife-Grinder whom he quoted in one of his earliest gibes at Mr. Gladstone.^ In a thrilling voice, which was echoed in every corner of the land, he expressed the feelings of the class which had hitherto been almost dumb. At a great meeting at Bradford in connection with the National Liberal Federation, he repeated the stern warning of Longfellow : — There is a poor blind Samson in this land, Shorn of his strength and bound in bonds of steel, Who may in some grim revel raise his hand And shake the pillars of this commonweal. Frequently in those days he resorted to the poets for language in which to embody his thoughts. In a reply to Lord Salisbury, describ- ing the life of the agricultural labourers, he asserted that it might be said of them as truly as it was in the time of the Corn Law rhymer that they were : — ^ Fortnightly Review, September, 1873. THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP 103 Landless, restless, joyless, hopeless. Gasping still for bread and breath, To their graves by trouble hunted Albion's Helots toil for death. On the stop-gap Government Mr. Chamberlain's attacks during the autumn never relaxed. Although Lord Salisbury was Prime Minister, and Sir Michael Hicks-Beach leader of the House of Commons, the chief Conservative electioneerer was Lord Randolph Churchill, whose democratic policy, however embarrassing in practice, was very useful in platform speeches. On all these statesmen the Radical leader poured his copious invective and raillery, his scorn and his sarcasm. Taunting them with the number of aliases they assumed — Constitutionalists, Liberal-Conservatives, Tory democrats — he re- marked that the Tories had many previous convictions recorded against them, and asked what proof there was that their recent adversity had exercised a chastening effect. He complained also that they were acting and speaking in office in absolute contradiction to all they said and did in Opposition. ' This was conduct which was lowering to the dignity of public life by whomsoever it was practised.* An attempt was made to draw Lord Hartington to the Conservative cause. Lord Randolph Churchill expressed the hope that he and other moderates might break away from the Radicals and come over to the opposite party.i Mr. Chamberlain, although recently rough in liis references to one who had been his colleague, did not on the eve of the election encourage these overtures. On the contrary, he remarked that ' our LiberaUsm is broad enough and free enough to include within its borders all the friends of progress. We may differ among ourselves, as we have done at every period of our history, as to the order or even as to the nature of the measures that we shall take to give application to our principles, but these difficulties we will settle amongst ourselves and without Tory assistance.' Lord Hartington never yielded to rancour, and never allowed personal feeUng to influence his pohtical conduct. He was looking rather to an entire release from active political life than to a new combination, and instead of accepting Lord Randolph's overtures he stated that he had no confi- dence whatever in the Conservative leaders. This statement he made in the course of a speech in which he protested against Mr. Chamber- lain's programme and insisted that no professions should be put forth by the Liberal party which they were not reasonably certain they would be able to fulfil. Mr. Morley had remarked concerning a previous speech by the Whig statesman, that ' a wet blanket was not a good ensign of battle ', but in an amiable reply he declared that • When Lord Randolph appealed to Lord Hartington to ' come over and help us,' it was comically suggested, says Mr. Churchill, that the Whig leader wrote to inquire. Who's ' us,' and received the answer ' Us is me.' 104 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN the necessary political confidence continued to exist between himself and the colleagues with whom he had acted. In spite of discouragement Lord Randolph persisted in his idea. As early as November, before Mr. Gladstone's conversion to Home Rule was known, he suggested to Lord Salisbury a coalition be- tween the Tories and the Whigs, with Lord Hartington as leader of the House of Commons. The Conservative chief was not in such a hurry as his colleague or did not see so far ahead. He thought the time for a coalition had not come yet, and remarked to Lord Randolph : ' The Whigs hate me as much as they hate you.'^ Meanwhile the Tory democrat offended the moderate Liberal by comparing him to a boa-constrictor. ' The British public,' he said, ' can trace the digestion and the deglutition by the Marquis of Hartington of the various morsels of the Chamberlain programme which from time to time are handed to him ; and the only difference between the boa- constrictor and the Marquis of Hartington is this — that the boa- constrictor enjoys his food and thrives on it and Lord Hartington loathes his food and it makes him sick.' Lord Salisbury, who sometimes used the language of the turf, although he may have never seen a race, ' put his money ' on the Radical. ' Which of these contending powers of the Liberal party, ' he asked, ' is likely to carry the victory ? Have you any doubt ? You see Mr. Chamberlain, with his decided opinions and his resolute action on the one side, and you see Rip Van Winkle and the skeleton on the other. Do you think that Rip Van Winkle and the skeleton are likely to beat Mr. Chamberlain ? ' Such rivalry was distasteful to at least one of the leaders. Lord Hartington appealed to Liberals for unity and co-operation, and made the generous admission : ' You want all the energy, all the quick sympathy in the wants and wishes of the people, of Mr. Chamberlain.' To this appeal, while the ballot- boxes were being prepared, the Radical responded with what the Whig aristocrat considered ' patronising protection.' Although Mr. Cham- berlain continued to protest against the idea of restricting the Liberal diet to suit Mr. Goschen's ' Conservative digestion,' he admitted that in consideration of Lord Hartington's past services they were bound to do all in their power to meet his views, and if possible over- come his objections. In one respect he also met Mr. Gladstone's wishes, and reassured Liberal Churchmen by stating that there was no chance whatever that the question of disestablishment would receive its final settlement in the Parliament which was about to assemble. So great, however, had been the disruptive effect of Mr. Chamber- lain's speeches that observers doubted if the Moderates and the Radicals * Lord Randolph Churchill, by W. S. Churchill. THE LIBERAL LEADERSHIP 105 would ever act together again in office. Lord Hartington himself shared this doubt. ' Chamberlain ' — he wrote to Mr. Goschen on December 6 — ' has evidently no intention of making things easy for a Liberal Government, and after his abominable speech on Thursday I confess I should have great difficulty in sitting in the same Cabinet with him.' ^ The ' abominable ' speech was one in which the Radical orator pungently protested against the whittling away of his programme by ' some of those who call themselves our friends.' A powerful organ said during the general election in December that the Liberals had to thank Mr. Chamberlain for the irremediable disruption and hopeless disorganisation of their party with its high historic past and its high claims to national gratitude. ' His achievement,' the oracle added, 'may give him such immortality as was won by the man who burned down the Temple of Diana at Ephesus.' He lived to burn down another Temple, but the censor of 1885 abstained from rebuke in 1905. * Life of Lord Goschen, by the Hon. Arthur D. Elliot. ■ XV HOME RULE DESTINY played impishly with Mr. Chamberlain at the close of 1885. He had almost reached the prize when it was drawn hastily from his outstretched hand. In all Radical quarters he was recognized as the heir to the party leadership. The Rev. W. Tuckwell in Reminiscences of a Radical Parson, says his influence with the democracy at this time exceeded Mr. Gladstone's ; if audiences cheered Mr. Gladstone's name for two minutes they cheered the yormger man's for five. An expectation in many minds was frankly expressed in Mr. B. C. Skottowe's Life of Joseph Chamberlain, an interesting and careful book published in Birmingham. ' It seems pretty certain,' wrote the author, ' that in the natural course of events the leadership of the Liberal party must soon become vacant, and there is very little reason for doubting that in a comparatively short time Mr. Chamberlain will succeed to the place so long held by Mr. Gladstone, and that the Radical party will be the Liberal party of the future.' Mr. Labouchere, with equal frankness, in a speech at a Radical Club in November 1885, expressed the hope that Mr. Chamberlain would succeed Mr. Gladstone as Prime Minister. It was considered probable that the leadership of the member for Birmingham would deprive Liberalism of the services of Lord Hartington, but the aggres- sive section, while not ungrateful to the Whig, pressed for the mastery, and felt sure of success. The sphinx, with the secrets of the future, mocked their shortness of vision. New discord, a fresh test of Liber- alism, was being prepared by the honoured chief who had counselled warring lieutenants to try to act together. The riddle of Home Rule and of Mr. Chamberlain's relation to it remain unsolved. His action, when the question was presented in a practical form by Mr. Gladstone, was attributed to ruffled vanity, to pique, to baffled ambition, to jealousy, and to other personal motives. He more than any one else had prepared the public mind for a great scheme of devolution. On the other hand he challenged his opponents to prove that he had ever advocated such a plan as was flung before the Liberal party. His references to the subject had been of a varied character. On the one hand he had insisted on the necessity for a vast extension of local government in Ireland, and on the other hand he 106 HOME RULE 107 had laid down certain vital restrictions. Much depended on what ' Home Rule ' meant, and his interpretation at the period of the proposed legislation did not agree with the interpretation which had been placed on his words by those who wished to realize his aspirations in their own manner. Mr. Chamberlain admitted, nay boasted, in 1887,* that he was a Home Ruler long before Mr. Gladstone. This claim can be easily justified. Speaking as a candidate at Sheffield in January, 1874, the mayor of Birmingham said he held that Irishmen had a right to govern themselves and their own affairs, and he was willing to concede Home Rule. ' It would be an advantage to both parties. The Irish would be satisfied, and the Legislature would move on at an accelerated pace without the Irish members. At present they only travelled by Parlia- mentary train, and that was not quick enough for him.' This was a characteristic utterance of his ardent days. For a time he used more qualified language after he entered Parliament. Early in 1880, when he may have anticipated his introduction to office, he said, ' I have never voted for inquiry into Home Rule and I do not intend to do so. While I agree with what I believe to be the ends and objects which Home Rule is believed by the Irish members to be likely to secure, I differ altogether from the means by which they propose to secure these ends and objects.' Again at Liverpool in 1881, after eighteen months of Cabinet experience, while he advocated the steering of an even course between extremes, Mr. Chamberlain remarked that he could not contemplate the establishment of a hostile Power within striking distance of England. The Nationalists, however, were en- couraged by the language which he began to use in 1883. Standing at the table of the House of Commons in February of that year, he spoke of Ireland as ' a Poland within four hours of our shores,' and an observer on the opposite side (Mr. Chaplin) recorded that there were looks of blank dismay on the Treasury bench when he gave utterance to that ' very foolish and painful statement.' The statement was made the very day after Lord Hartington had declared that the Irish Executive could not safely be deprived of any of its powers. The Radical leader's views on self-government were regarded by the Whig lord as madness. A scheme for the establishment in Ireland of an elective national Council was early in 1885 submitted to Mr. Gladstone and the Cabinet by Mr. Chamberlain. The Council, as Lord Granville recorded, was to be based on indirect election by the county Boards. Mr. Chamber- lain's own explanation, given in a speech at Glasgow, was as follows — I have proposed that there should be estabUshed in Ireland and in Scotland, perhaps also in Wales and in England, national councils for deaUng with aSairs 1 Dingwall, April l8, 1887. io8 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN which, although they are national, are yet not of imperial concern. I have thought that to such councils might be referred the local control and adminis- tration which is now exercised by official Boards in Dublin and in Edinburgh, and by the departments of the Government in London. Perhaps that would be as far as it would be wise to go in the first instance ; but if these councils were approved, if the work were satisfactory, then I think we might hereafter even go further, and we might entrust to them the duty of preparing legislation — legislation on national, as contrasted with imperial interests. In an interview for the Life of C. S. Parnell Mr. Chamberlain told Mr. Barry O'Brien that his idea was that the Irish Council should take over the administrative work of all the Boards existing in Dublin. It might, besides, deal with such subjects as land and education and other local matters. A bill passed through the Council should lie on the table of the House of Commons for, say, forty days and then, if nothing was done upon it, it would become law. ' That,' said Mr. Barry O'Brien, ' was a bigger scheme than what one ordinarily under- stands by local government.' ' Certainly,' replied Mr. Chamberlain, ' it was a very big scheme.' The fact that it was not a mere case of decentralization or devolution to local bodies was pointed out by Mr. Goschen in a letter to Mr. Gladstone. The proposed Councils, as he noted, were to be established ' on the very ground of the existence of national differences in the United Kingdom.' ^ This scheme went too far for the moderate Liberals. A writer in the Fortnightly, in an article which Mr. Chamberlain revised, stated that it was assured of the support of the Nationalist leaders, but was rejected owing to the ' unreasonable timidity ' of the Whig members of the Cabinet, and Lord Eversley mentions in his book on Gladstone and Ireland that ' all the peers plus Lord Hartington were against the scheme ; all the Commoners in favour of it.' Its rejection widened the rift in the Ministerial lute, and increased the discontent of those Radical statesmen who, as we have seen, added to the troubles of a distressed Government in the Spring of 1885 by objecting to the renewal of the Crimes Act. A few days before the defeat of the Ministry in June, Mr. Chamber- lain urged upon his constituents the importance of giving, in Mr. Gladstone's words, the widest possible self-government to Ireland which was consistent with the maintenance of the integrity of the empire. 'While we have,' he said in careful phrases, 'to conciliate the national sentiment of Ireland, we have to find a safe mean between separation on the one hand — which would be disastrous to Ireland and dangerous to England — and on the other hand that excessive centra- lization which throws upon the English Parliament, and upon English officials the duty and burden of supervising every petty detail of Irish local affairs.' After the resignation of the Government his desire for * Lifg of Lord Goschen, by the Hon. Arthur D. Elliot. HOME RULE 109 reform burned fiercer than ever. It was, as he declared, a con- solation to Sir Charles Dilke and himself for the blow they had sus- tained in the House of Commons that their hands were now free, and that their voices might be lifted up in the cause of freedom and of justice. During the interregnum in which Lord Salisbury exacted conditions on his acceptance of office, the Radical leader advocated ' some great measure of devolution under which the Imperial Parlia- ment, while maintaining its supremacy shall relegate to subordinate authorities the control and administration of local business.' He ridiculed the attempt of one nation to interfere with the domestic and social economy of another ' whose genius it does not understand ' ; and he went on to say : ' I look forward with confidence to the opportunity which will be afforded in the new Parliament for the consideration of this most momentous question, and I believe that in the successful accomplishment of its solution lies the only hope of the pacification of Ireland, and of the maintenance of the strength and integrity of the Empire which are in danger, which are gravely compromised so long as an integral portion of Her Majesty's dominions can only be governed by exceptional legislation, and so long as it in consequence continues to be discontented and estranged.' While there was still doubt as to whether Mr. Gladstone might not be obliged to resume office, Mr. Chamberlain expressed the belief that the pacification of Ireland depended on the concession to it of the right to govern itself in the matter of its purely domestic business. Lan- guage was used by the Radical leader on this occasion which Nation- alists adopted as a sort of political charter, and which they flung back at him when they stood on opposite sides of the controversy. ' The existing system of rule in Ireland,' he said, ' is a system which is founded on the bayonets of thirty thousand soldiers encamped per- manently as in a hostile country. It is a system as completely cen- tralized and bureaucratic as that with which Russia governs Poland, or as that which was common in Venice under the Austrian rule.' He spoke also of the English government in Ireland as ' a foreign govern- ment.' Over the next scene in the drama an air of mystery hovers. A visit to Ireland was contemplated by Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Charles Dilke, with the view of expounding the Radical policy and directly ascertain- ing the grievances and the desires of the people. At first the Nation- alists who were consulted were encouraging in their attitude, but soon after the accession of the Conservatives to office a change became visible in Mr. Pamell and his colleagues, and Mr, Chamberlain aban- doned the project because, as he afterwards asserted, the persons who promised him introductions to the leading members of the Roman Catholic hierarchy and the representatives of national opinion with- no JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN drew their promises. ' I found that if I went to Ireland I should be boycotted.' Nationalists then pooh-poohed the affair and said the member for Birmingham wished to advertise himself and that he could go or stay as he pleased. Radicals suspected that the change in their mood was due to the great expectations excited by the Conservatives, fostered as these were by an interview which took place in a deserted drawing-room in Grosvenor Square between Lord Carnarvon, the new Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland and Mr. Parnell ; and probably the Nationalists and the priests ^ feared the intrusion in their own territory of an English statesman who, whatever might be his sympathy, would naturally look at the Irish question from the point of view of British politics. The abandonment of the projected visit marked the close of Mr. Chamberlain's championship of Home Rule. It is too much to say that a personal rebuff led to a sudden change in his views on a great question. The incident was a symptom of change rather than its prime cause. Undoubtedly, however, his zeal was chilled by the con- duct of his old Irish friends. They dispensed with his championship and he devoted it to other objects. When Mr. Parnell, excited (as Mr. Gladstone conjectured) by the high biddings of the Tories, raised his terms and demanded the re- storation of a national parliament the Radical leader declined to enter into the competition for his alliance. He said on September 8 that this new programme involved a great extension of anything that had been hitherto understood by Home Rule. If it were carried out we should, he argued, establish within less than thirty miles of our own shores a new foreign country, animated from the outset with unfriendly intentions towards ourselves. A policy like that would be disastrous to Ireland, and dangerous to the security of this country, and in the circumstances he held that we were ' bound to take every step in our power to avert so great a calamity.' This was a completely new tone. It revealed an attitude of hostile suspicion instead of the former attitude of sympathy and encouragement. The oppressed Poland within four hours of our shores whose genius England did not under- stand was to prove an unfriendly foreign country if it received a national parliament ! During the election campaign the Irish question was kept by ad- vocates of the unauthorized programme as far as possible in the back- ground. British reforms — free education, allotments and small hold- ings, readjustment of taxation, local government in the counties — proved sufficient for electioneering, the cry of three- acres- and- a-cow, with which Mr. Chamberlain's friend, Mr. Jesse Collings, was associated, ^ An ex-Irish member has stated that he aroused episcopal suspicion with reference to the proposed visit. HOME RULE iii specially appealing to the new electors in the rural districts. In- structions were issued on behalf of the Nationalist party to their fellow-countrymen in Great Britain to support Conservative candidates, and Mr. Gladstone on the other hand made a pathetic appeal for the return of ' a party totally independent of the Irish vote.' It has been explained that he desired an independent majority, not to resist the claims of Mr. Pamell but to secure the ' equitable settlement,' which he advocated in his manifesto. He did not obtain it. The Liberals had remarkable victories in the counties, but numerous defeats in the boroughs. The result of the election was satisfactory only to the Nationalists. It made them the holders of the balance in Parliament. There were eighty-six Home Rulers, just enough with the Conserva- tives to render the ill-assorted allies equal to the Liberals. Rumours of Mr. Gladstone's readiness to deal with the Irish question began to circulate in the middle of December. On the 17th the Liberal leader wrote in reply to an inquiry from Lord Hartington : ' I consider that Ireland has now spoken ; and that an effort ought to be made by the Government without delay to meet her demands for the manage- ment by an Irish legislative body of Irish, as distinct from imperial affairs. ' Most of the members of the last Liberal Government were as startled as the country at large by so sudden an adoption of a new policy. Although Mr. Gladstone's biography has revealed the fact that his opinions had been tending for a considerable period in this direction, he had given no unmistakable public hint of the fresh mould- ing of his mind, and indeed, at the end of September he advised Mr. Childers, who wished to make an announcement in favour of Home Rule, not to go beyond general indications. It was believed that his decision was quickened and his action accelerated by the mysterious interview between Lord Carnarvon and Mr. Pamell, about which he had been told, and also by hearing that the Viceroy had informed Mr. McCarthy that there was a chance of the Conservative Government agreeing to an inquiry into Home Rule. What would be Mr. Chamberlain's attitude ? Would he acquiesce in the new policy, or would he resent its interference with his own social programme ? It was popularly assumed that, notwithstanding his recent coldhess, he could not withhold support from any concession to the Irish which might be proposed by Mr. Gladstone, and this belief was encouraged by a reference which he made to the subject on the day that the first nunour was published. Speaking at the Birmingham Reform Club, he alluded to the Liberal leader's readiness to give to Ireland the largest possible measure of local government that could be proposed consistently with the integrity of the Empire and the supre- macy of the Crown, and he stated — ' I entirely agree with those prin- ciples, and I have so much faith in the experience and patriotism of 112 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Mr. Gladstone, that I cannot doubt that if he should ever see his way to propose any scheme of arrangement I shall be able conscientiously to give it my humble support.' At the same time he declared that in his judgment the time had hardly arrived when the Liberal party could interfere safely, or with advantage, to settle the question. This qualified and guarded statement was strikingly in contrast with Lord Hartington's emphatic protest against the new policy, which Mr. Gladstone read in The Times a few days later, ' with no small surprise.' One of the strange circumstances of the case was that Mr. Gladstone did not consult Mr. Chamberlain. Lord Granville was partly taken into his confidence ; he confided his ideas also to Lord Spencer and Lord Rosebery ; communications were made to Lord Hartington, and indirectly to Sir William Harcourt, Lord Northbrook, and Lord Derby ; but Mr. Chamberlain was ignored. The well-informed Radical parson, whose Reminiscences have been already quoted in these pages,^ mentions a report that certain politicians wrote to Mr. Gladstone proposing to arrange a Liberal programme. He sent them in return a sketch of the Home Rule scheme. In great alarm they went to him. ' Are we to make this public ? ' 'As you please.' ' Have you shown it to Mr. Chamberlain ? ' 'I don't care that for Mr. Chamber- lain.' ' Will you show it to Lord Hartington ? ' 'I can answer for Lord Hartington.' So the story runs. It is not quite Gladstonian in form, but it has been confirmed by the disclosure that Mr. Chamber- lain wrote to Mr. Gladstone for information without getting a direct reply. Although the Liberal chief could not ' answer for ' Lord Hart- ington after the middle of December, his reliance on the Whigs might have explained his apparent indifference to their rival. He might have imagined that the Radicals could not withhold support from a scheme which was acquiesced in by the Moderates, or that if the Moderates supported it he could carry it without the aid of the Radical leader. Those who search for personal motives suspect that Mr. Gladstone resented the airs with which the unauthorized programme had been presented to the country. Although a magnanimous man, he was also a proud man, and he was leader in act so long as he was leader in name. Mr. Chamberlain had laid down the conditions on which he would take office ; he had appealed to the electors on his own proposals ; and now Mr. Gladstone formulated an altogether different policy. In these circumstances the chief preferred to take older friends into his con- fidence. Pride owed no debt to prudence in this matter. The country, however, did not yet concern itself much with these personalities. It was generally assumed at the end of 1885 that a Home Rule scheme would receive no more enthusiastic support than that of the Radical statesman who had vehemently denounced the existing centralized * Reminiscences of a Radical Parson, by Rev. W. Tuckwell. HOME RULE 113 and bureaucratic system of Irish government. His mind, as his letters show, was still busy at this time with his own changing ideas for dealing with the problem. One week he suggested the adoption of the American Constitution ; next week he wrote ^ that if they were to give way it must be by calling Ireland a protected state, confining England's responsibility to the protection of the country against foreign aggres- sion and providing Ireland with a Governor (empowered to dissolve Parliament), a Senate and a House of Commons. * Life of Henry Lahouchert, Algar Thorold. s XVI THE CROSS ROADS THE new Parliament which assembled on January 12, 1886, was the shortest and one of the most important in recent times, changing the fortunes of statesmen and the characters of great parties. Things were never again as they were when it met. From first to last it was a Parliament of strange, unsettling, dramatic events. It marked off the Parliaments which went before from those which followed after. It saw the introduction of a project which deeply influenced the politics of the country for a quarter of a century, it saw two sections lopped off from the Liberal party, and it saw several of the leading men in that party forsaking old colleagues and seeking new comrades. And the statesman whom it most affected was Mr. Cham- berlain. It was, in a special sense, the turning-point of his career. As the Conservatives, who relied, till the elections were over, on the ordinary law in Ireland, were again devising coercion, and as Mr. Gladstone, on the other hand, was willing to examine the demand now made through five-sixths of her representatives for a national legis- lature, Mr. Parnell and his followers arranged to vote with the Liberals in order to turn out the Salisbury Government which they had brought into existence seven months previously. The instrument chosen was not an Irish motion, but an amendment submitted by Mr. Jesse CoUings in favour of the scheme of allotments and small holdings, popularly known as the policy of three-acres-and-a-cow. Mr. Gladstone having supported the amendment, Mr. Goschen ironically congratulated his ' triumphant friend,' the member for West Birmingham,^ on the officias adoption of this item of the unauthorized programme, and Mr. Arthur Balfour described the debate as the concluding scene of a drama acted during the previous six months, in which the Whig and the Radical had been struggling over the body of the Liberal leader. Neither Mr. Balfour nor his colleagues imagined that the Radical might become their ally. Mr. Chaplin and Sir Michael Hicks-Beach scolded him for the ' mischievous,' the ' astounding,' promises he had given to the agricultural labourers. ' It is,' said Sir Michael, who was then leader of the House, ' of a piece with his past conduct that he should use * Birmingham was divided into seven constituencies under the Redistribu- tion Act and Mr. Chamberlain was returned for the West Division. 114 THE CROSS ROADS 115 this motion as a party move to turn the Government out of office.' Although Lord Hartington and a group of his Whig followers, knowing what lay behind this movement, voted with the Conservatives, and a larger section of Liberals took no part in the division, the three- acres-and-a-cow amendment was carried by a majority of seventy-nine. Lord Salisbury consequently resigned, and the way was cleared by Mr. Chamberlain for the return to power of a statesman who was sym- pathetically considering the demand for Home Rule. His own dis- position to govern Ireland according to Irish ideas was shown by an article in the Fortnightly, in which it was recommended that Mr. Parnell or Mr. Healy should be invited to become Chief Secretary. ' Mr. Parnell himself,' the writer Sciid, ' should be challenged in the interests of his constituents, to take up the burden of office, and to co-operate with Enghsh statesmen in the solution of a problem — (the land question) — which lies at the root of Irish misery and Irish discontent. ... If the leader of the Irish party shrinks from this responsibility, as his enemies proclaim that he will, an offer should be made, in turn, to other chiefs of the National party, some of whom, and notably Mr. Healey,^ have shown a remarkable constructive capacity and resource.' The article was signed merely ' A Radical,' but Mr. Morley in a speech a few months after its appearance attributed the authorship to Mr. Chamberlain. His suggestion as to the Chief Secretaryship was not carried out. The post was given, not to an Irish Nationalist, but to Mr. Morley, who devoted heart and brain to Mr. Gladstone's service. Again, as in 1880, there were surmises and speculations with re- gaid to Mr. Chamberlain's position. On the formation of the former Liberal Government politicians had wondered if he would receive office. Now they wondered what post he would take. Six years had left deep marks on the Liberal party, and while time had destroyed several reputations it had raised Mr. Chamberlain to the rank of a leader who might expect to make his own terms. With the Caucus he assisted to secure the victory of 1880 ; with the unauthorized pro- gramme he enabled the Liberals to regain office in the new ParUament. No position seemed beyond the reach of the statesman who stood second only to Mr. Gladstone in the esteem of the party throughout the country. Nevertheless he accepted a secondary post. The office which he was offered by the Prime Minister was that of First Lord of the Admiralty, but this he declined on the plea that ' it was hardly congenial or consistent with a Radical's position that he should occupy the headship of one of the great spending and fighting offices of the State.' * He preferred to go to the Local Government ' Mr. Kealy's name was, strange to say, spelt wrongly in the article. • It was through the doors of the Admiralty that his son entered the official arena. Ii6 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Board, because there he might be able to do something to carry out the policy which he supported before the General Election. In taking this post, which had been occupied for half a year by Mr. Arthur Balfour, he proved his disregard for money, the salary attached to it being then only £2,000 as compared with £5,000 in the case of the First Lordship of the Admiralty. Some of his critics, however, said he was so rich that a few thousands did not matter much, and others convinced themselves in the light of after events that he foresaw he would not draw any salary very long. Was Mr. Chamberlain disappointed ? The popular impression at the time is recorded in An Autobiography by Dr. Guinness Rogers, who, although a whole-hearted supporter of the Home Rule Scheme, admits that if Mr. Gladstone had been a little disposed to recognize his remark- able ability, the Liberal party might have been saved from the terrible disaster which followed. Mr. Sexton asserted in the House of Commons, in 1886, that the Radical leader desired the Secretaryship for the Colonies, and Lord Granville subsequently expressed a doubt, as Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice states in his biography, whether he himself had adopted a wise course in accepting that office because he arrived at the conclusion that Mr. Chamberlain might have occupied it, and that in that event some of Mr. Gladstone's subsequent difficulties might have been diminished or modified. If the member for West Birmingham was ambitious to be Colonial Secretary he waited for nine years to gratify his ambition. Mr. Gladstone appears to have heard that he coveted the Irish Secretaryship which could not at that time be given to him without irritating the Nationalists who had lost confi- dence in their former friend. On the other hand Mr. Morley remarks that he was not much concerned about the particular office. ' What- ever its place in the hierarchy, he knew that he could trust himself to make it as important as he pleased.' ^ On account of the attitude which he adopted a few weeks later, Mr. Chamberlain's acceptance of office was much canvassed. Lord Hartington, Mr. Goschen and Sir Henry James decHned to join the Government, the last-named exciting the surprise of aU who held a low view of the political convictions of Parliamentary lawyers by his self-denial in refusing the Lord Chancellorship as well as the Home Secretaryship. The conduct of these statesmen was afterwards contrasted favourably with Mr. Chamberlain's. His critics asserted that he must have known that he could not remain in the Government, and that he entered it to spy out the policy of the Prime Minister. This was an insinuation which he resented. When offered office, he frankly expressed doubt as to whether in view of Mr. Gladstone's ^ Life of Gladstone. THE CROSS ROADS 117 intentions with regard to Ireland, he could be of service in the new Administration. According to his judgment it would not be found possible to reconcile the conditions which the Prime Minister had laid down as to the security of the Empire and the supremacy of Parha- ment with the establishment of a national legislative body sitting in Dublin, and he indicated his own preference for an attempt to come to terms with the Irish members on the basis of a more hmited scheme of local government, coupled with proposals for a settlement of the land, and perhaps also of the education question. Being assured, however, that he would have ' unhmited liberty of judgment and rejection ' on any scheme that might be proposed, and declaring his readiness to give an unprejudiced examination to the more exten- sive proposals that might be made, he accepted a place in the Govern- ment. The conditions of his acceptance he set out in a letter to ' My dear Mr. Gladstone,' on January 30, and he informed the House of Commons that all that the Prime Minister asked his colleagues to do was to join with him in an inquiry and examination as to how far it was or was not practicable to meet the wishes of the great proportion of the Irish people, to form something in the nature of a legislative body sitting in DubUn. ' I told the Prime Minister that this was an inquiry of which I approved, and which indeed I thought had become indispensable.' At Downing Street the President of the Local Government Board found congenial company. While the moderate Liberals, with whom he had waged war, were absent. Sir William Harcourt had become Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Rosebery was Foreign Secretary, Mr. Campbell-Bannerman Secretary for War, and his fellow-fighter in the Sheffield contest, Mr. Mundella, was President of the Board of Trade. Among other personal friends was Mr. Morley, who began an official career in circumstances trying to Mr. Chamberlain. Their hves had touched at many points. Twelve or thirteen years had passed since the then editor of the Fortnightly made the acquaintance of the aspiring Birmingham pohtician ; he had more recently advocated in the Pall Mall Gazette the pohcy pursued by the Radical leader, and when Mr. Chamberlain introduced him to the House in 1883, they looked forward to intimate association in its work. Each liked, admired and respected the other. Mr. Chamberlain, praising Mr. Mor- ley in April, 1885, said his Life of Burke would ' make us regret that he had ever left the pleasant paths of Uterature for the thorny road of poUtics, if he had not given us some evidence that in his new career he will do as great or even more signal service than in his old one.' Now in a sense they were rivals — rivals for influence over Mr. Gladstone, or at any rate rivals in shaping Liberal pohcy. Tenniel depicted them in the ' Pas de Fascination.' Signor Gladstonio dances ii8 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN with Madame Josephine and Signorina Morleena ; and to the latter he gives the bouquet. The veteran in old age was drawn to the man of letters, from whom he differed sharply on some of the highest themes. It was peculiarly true in their case, according to the Carlyle formula, that except in opinion they did not disagree. When they agreed in opinion also their personal sympathy rendered their union very close and touching. Mr. Morley loved the ' grand old man ' with an affection which grew with intimacy, and his career was henceforth intertwined with Mr. Gladstone's. In the company of the skilled veteran he was an active, animated, confident, powerful Parliamentarian ; when Mr. Glad- stone retired, Mr. Morley became silent, less sanguine, more inclined to hve apart. It was in 1886 perhaps that he made the greatest impress on political history, for then he did much to sway the Prime Minister and to shape the most important measure of our time. Then unfortunately his relations with his old Radical friend became strained. A glimpse into the inner life of the Cabinet soon after it was formed has been given by Mr. Chamberlain. Having an interview with the Prime Minister, he ventured to say to him : ' Mr. Gladstone, I sup- pose you are now conducting the inquiry into the demands of the Irish members which you have undertaken to make. I do not know at what conclusion you have arrived, but I think it my duty to tell you what is my honest and sincere conviction if you should decide to intro- duce a measure to establish a separate Parhament in Ireland. You will be beaten in the House of Commons, and you will be beaten in the country.' Mr. Gladstone said to him, with all the emphasis which he used when he was interested in a subject : ' I shall never go to the country upon this subject. I do not know at what conclusion — I have not made up my mind — I ought to arrive. But if it should be the one you indicate I. will put my views and propositions before the House of Commons, and accept their decision. But I would never appeal to the country on such a matter. I would not take that responsibility, knowing it would break up the Liberal party, that it would dissolve old friendships and be a calamity.' This conversation proved a lack of confidence. Mr. Gladstone subsequently informed the House that long before the Home Rule scheme was submitted to the Cabinet ' the subject of the Bill, and its leading details, had been matter of anxious consideration between himself and his nearest political friends.' Among these Mr. Chamberlain was not included. When the time came to speak out he complained bitterly that the Prime Minister did not even take his colleagues into his confidence. Liberals justfied this reticence in his own case on the ground that he was an unsjonpathetic member of the Government ; but he was there on the invitation of its chief. THE CROSS ROADS 119 On March 13 a Home Rule Bill was mentioned in the Cabinet, and events marched rapidly to the catcistrophe. Rumour of Ministerial dissension became the daily excitement of poUticians. One day they learned that Mr. Chamberlain had resigned ; next day a compromise was reported ; and on the third day a rupture was declared inevitable ; and thus the uncertainty was maintained. Rumour proved a more reliable jade than usual. Resignation was tendered, withheld, and finally insisted upon. On March 15, immediately after definite Irish proposals were formulated in the Cabinet, Mr. Chamberlain offered to resign. A scheme of land purchase which was submitted would, in his opinion, commit the British taxpayer to tremendous obhga- tions, accompanied with serious risk of ultimate loss. He gathered also that the Prime Minister was now convinced of the necessity of conceding a separate legislative assembly to Ireland with fuU powers to deal with all Irish affairs, and to this policy he opposed his own public utterances and conscientious convictions, but as he explained to the House of Commons, he ' did not resign upon the scheme of Home Rule alone ' ; he tendered his resignation in consequence of the pro- duction of the Land Bill. At the Prime Minister's request he postponed the decisive step, but when Mr. Gladstone made a statement to the Cabinet on the Home Rule scheme on March 26, he repeated his resignation and it was accepted the next day. Thus Mr. Chamberlain was scarcely two months in the Government, and apparently he had not been at any time within its inner circle. So far as the evidence of speeches and published letters goes Mr. Gladstone took no great pains to conciliate him. The masterful chief may have considered that the ideas of his colleague could not be merged in his own. Either the one or the other must prevail. Mr. Gladstone proceeded upon his own course, and Mr. Chamberlain parted from him for ever.. Now and again the Radical statesman appeared to look back, but he never turned. The Liberals lost in him a politician of amazing resource and dexterity, a matchless electioneer, and a debater who in the modern style has never been surpassed. On his own part he lost irrecoverably the succession to the Liberal leadership. The breach which was begun in 1886 gradually widened, and while the majority of the party treated Mr. Chamberlain as a deserter, he assisted in driving the followers of Mr. Gladstone into the wilderness and in. keeping them there many years. XVII THE QUARREL FROM resignation to attack on political colleagues the journey is as a rule tragically short. ' Political friendships, when paths diverge are,' as Lord Rosebery has testified, ' more difficult to maintain than men themselves realize at the moment of separation.' Lamentable bitterness was displayed in the controversies between Mr. Chamberlain and old comrades, and some of those who had been most closely attached to him reviled him most. Their familiar accusation, in the words of Sir William Harcourt, was that ' he had no objections to Home Rule but objected to Mr. Gladstone carrying it out.' ' His grievance,' said an Irish member to his face, ' is that he is not Prime Minister of England.' This taunt was revived as late as 1905 by Mr. Labouchere, who may have forgotten that he did his best to puff up Mr. Chamberlain in 1885 by reports of his popu- larity. 'In his Radical days,' wrote the owner of Truth, ' he was somewhat jealous of Mr. Gladstone, and somewhat disposed to rebel against his great influence with the Liberal party. When, therefore, Mr. Gladstone declared himself in favour of Home Rule, his lieutenant declared himself against it.' The imputation of jealousy started by a section of politicians living in a heated party atmosphere was sorrowfully repeated by many simple Radical electors, who were unable to reconcile the action of Mr. Chamberlain with the former speeches of the man in whom they had placed so much hope. His adherents, on the other hand, pointed out that if he were really a self-seeking monster influenced by personal ambition and dominated by desire to grasp the highest position, he must have made a mis- calculation which would be inconceivable in so clever a tactician, seeing that if he had remained with Mr. Gladstone he would have been his successor and that by separating himself from the Govern- ment he forfeited his heritage. To this his critics retorted that he had been carried away by the success of his unauthorized programme, that he was in too great a hurry to seize the leadership, and that he still expected to secure the support of the mass of the Radicals, No sooner was he out of the Government at the end of March, 1886, than he discussed his views and plans with Lord Randolph Churchill who, as a democrat in S5mipathy with some of his aspira- 120 THE QUARREL 121 tions, formed a link between the arch-Radical and the Conservatives. ' The two men dined together often,' as we learn from Mr. Churchill ; ' they corresponded freely, they consulted almost every day.' Lord Randolph kept the Marquis of Salisbury informed as to ' the great Joe,' ' my friend Joe,' and ' Joe's conversation,' so that the Tory chief was familiar with the outline of Mr. Gladstone's scheme before it was introduced. It appeared that from the middle of February till his resignation at the end of March, ' Joe ' had not exchanged a word with his colleague, Mr. John Morley. But while off with his old love, he was not yet on with the new. There was naturally a want of confidence between himself and the Whig leader. Lord Hartington was ' rather fluttered, for fear he should be cut out by Chamberlain taking the lead,' and the services of the Tory democrat (who himself showed an absence of personal jealousy) were required in order to secure an arrangement between the two Liberal statesmen even as to the order of debate. ' I am certain,' he wrote to the Radical Unionist, ' Hartington means nothing but what is right and fair to- wards you, but you know there are one or two round him who are very jealous of you.' Lord Randolph Churchill also assured Mr. Chamberlain that he had many friends among the Conservatives and at the same time encouraged the latter to put trust in their former adversary. He persuaded his ' friend Joe ' and Lord Salisbury to meet. The Turf Club was the neutral ground selected. ' Thither Lord Salisbury repaired — not, as it appears, without trepidation and misgivings — and in the little dingy downstairs room where visitors are received was begun that strange alliance afterwards so powerfully to affect the course of history.' ^ The pain of ' a separation from one whom I have followed and honoured for so many years ' was alluded to by Mr. Chamberlain in the debate on the first reading of the Home Rule Bill. Mr. Gladstone introduced it on April 8. Next day his resigned Radical colleague rose from the comer of the second bench below the gangway — the comer usually occupied by Mr. Bright. Across the gangway sat Lord Hartington in the place left vacant by Mr. Forster, who died four days before the victorious opponent of his administration ex- plained his own dissent from a later development of Irish policy. Around Mr. Chamberlain were sore and sorrowing friends ; Nationalists on the opposite side scowled at him ; Ministers on the Treasury bench were vigilant ; occupants of the front Opposition bench, who had been bruised by his numerous blows, watched the strange scene with piquant curiosity and satisfaction. It was suggested that, ob- serving the onslaught made by the Roderigo of Birmingham upon 1 Lord Randolph Churchill, by W. S. Churchill. 122 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Mr. Gladstone, the Cassio of Midlothian, Lord Randolph Churchill might say — Now, whether he kill Cassio Or Cassio him, or each do kill the other, Every way makes my gain. The key to Mr. Chamberlain's claim to consistency lay in his contention that Mr. Gladstone's scheme meant separation and not Home Rule. Reviewing Mr. Churchill's biography of his father in January, 1906, the Athenceum, which was owned by Sir Charles Dilke, stated that the phrase ' Home Rule ' was used among politicians before July, 1885, in a wholly different sense from that in which it has been used since the early part of 1886. The phrase in the former period, it appears, stood for milder schemes than an Irish parliament ; and ' with this key,' the writer said, ' it is possible to unlock the secrets of the early summer of 1885.' Mr. Chamberlain's own Home Rule, however, was not a mild affair. He had suggested a National Council for Ireland, a system based on the American Constitution, the making of Ireland a protected state with a Governor, a Senate and a House of Commons, and also a process of federation on the Canadian pattern. At the crisis in 1886 Mr. Chamberlain was still unashamed of the name of Home Ruler, and he did not yet treat the difference with his old friends as involving a permanent schism in the party. On April 16, while specially attacking the Land Purchase Bill, but referring generally to Irish policy, he expressed the hope that his separation from Mr. Gladstone might be for only a short time. ' I am not an irreconcilable opponent,' he said, amid the loud cheers of Liberals who thought they saw signs of repentance. This utterance was specially significant, in view of the fact that two days previously in Her Majesty's Opera House Lord Hartington and other Whig opponents of Home Rule had stood on the same political platform as Lord Salisbury. In the first visible alliance between the two parties Mr. Chamberlain did not take any part. Indeed he told his Liberal fellow-townsmen at Easter that his opposi- tion to the bill was only conditional. ' If certain alterations were made, all the anomalies which I have described to you, most of the objections which I have taken, would disappear.' He emphatically declared his party loyalty. ' I am not going,' he said, ' to enter any cave ; I am not going to join any coalition of discordant elements and parties.' Mr. Linley Sambourne in Punch depicted him at dinner at the Conservative leader's in Arlington Street. Lord Salisbury, assisting him to Irish stew, says : ' If you'll come to me, I'll give you my receipt for the dish.' ' No, thank you, my lord,' replies Mr. Chamberlain ; ' there's such a lot of pepper in it that it quite over- powers the pleasant flavour of the Union.' He thought, rather, THE QUARREL 123 that for a time he would have to occupy a solitary position, remarking to a friend that ' if the worst comes to the worst I can always go back to my private life.'^ On one point Mr. Gladstone corroborated his personal vindication. It had been suggested that he joined the Government with the pre- conceived determination to leave it at the first opportunity. ' That statement,' Mr. Chamberlain warmly declared, ' is not only untrue but it is ridiculous,' and the Prime Minister uttered a distinct ' hear, hear.' Similar generosity was not shown by all from whom he differed. Mr. Healy, for instance, accused him of trying to deal a deadly blow at Mr. Gladstone, and with equal bitterness on another occasion denounced him as the ally of the Tories, the confederate of the Whigs, the deserter of his party. Day after day, and in every Irish debate, he was told by Radicals as well as by Nationalists that in retiring from the Government and in opposing the Home Rule Bill he was animated by personal spite and spleen. A crisis in Mr. Chamberlain's connexion with Birmingham occurred at the meeting of the Liberal Two Thousand, on April 21. There was a struggle for the local mastery between himself and the representa- tives of the official Liberal party. Many of those present were divided between allegiance to the head of the party and confidence in the fellow-citizen of whom they were so proud. Mr. Chamberlain, while professing conciliatory sentiments on the principle of Home Rule, criticized Mr. Gladstone's two Irish measures with great dexterity and power. A safe motion which Mr. Schnadhorst submitted, declar- ing that he had been guided by a high sense of personal honour and of public duty, was passed with enthusiasm, and then a struggle in tactics took place. Those who desired to prevent any breach with Mr. Gladstone pressed for an adjournment on the question of princi- ple, but the resigned minister, recognizing that the meeting was with him, appealed for an immediate decision. ' Hitherto,' he said, ' you men of Birmingham have led the van. ... I ask you for guidance and counsel.' Dr. Dale pleaded that they had not been accustomed to force a vote, but Mr. Jesse CoUings rejoined that it was not the practice of Birmingham to wait. As usual, Mr. Chamberlain pre- vailed and, striking while the iron was hot, he received a vote of confidence from an overwhelming majority. Thus he committed the Association to his course. Testimony to his disinterestedness was given in a conciliatory speech by Dr. Dale. ' I do not believe,' he said with a rather sorrowful heart, ' that Mr. Chamberlain could have honourably remained in the Cabinet, But I protest — I protest most earnestly — against those who treat this great subject as though it were a question whether » Memoirs of Fifty Years, Lady St. Helier. 124 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN we should follow the leadership of Mr. Chamberlain or of Mr. Glad- stone. We need them both.' The high-minded preacher went on to remark that ' the Liberal party had a right to demand Mr. Chamber- lain's judgment at such a time as this — his frank and honest judg- ment. He has given it. He would have been a traitor to us, a traitor to his chief, a traitor to his country, if he had not given it frankly.' In a letter to Mr. Gladstone, who thanked him for his friendly utter- ance, Dr. Dale wrote : ' I need not say how great a grief it is to me that Mr. Chamberlain should have been bound in honour — as I think he was — to leave the Ministry at such a time as this. I have worked with him for eighteen years, and though, of course, I have seen less of him since he became a minister, our relations, which have often been extremely intimate, have been maintained. As the result of his temperament, education and environment — all so different from your own — he was certain to approach nearly every political question with different assumptions, and in a different spirit, and to deal with them in a different method. But I know that when he entered the Ministry he was drawn to you very strongly, and it seems to me a calamity that his future political life should miss the benefit it would derive from continued work under your leadership.' When personal and political ties were snapping under the strain of the dissensions which had been raised, Mr. Chamberlain entreated his constituents so to continue the discussion that when the time of trial was passed they might once more unite, without embittered memories, without unkind reflections, to carry forward the great work upon which hitherto they had been unanimous. The appeal was made in vain. Example was called for rather than precept. One side threw the responsibility on the other, but whichever was to blame, the fact certainly was that the dispute was conducted by both sections with fierce vehemence and intense bitterness. Mr. Chamber- lain was irritated by aspersions on his motives, and on the other hand many of his old friends were exasperated by the cheers which he courted from the Tories who so recently had denounced him as a danger to the State. Those who, like Dr. Dale, tried to follow both leaders found that they were going in different directions. Doubt was subsequently cast by Mr. Chamberlain himself on the sincerity of his conciliatory professions. Although he opposed the scheme for buying out the Irish landlords and creating a peasant proprietary he believed that in principle this was the right way to settle the agrarian question. His main object, he confessed, was to kill the Home Rule Bill. Still he felt the necessity of keeping up appearances for the sake of his friends in the country. A cynical view of his attitude as well as Mr. Gladstone's is presented in a letter written by Lord Randolph Churchill on the morrow of the Land THE QUARREL 125 Purchase debate. ' Gladstone,' Lord Randolph said, ' is pretending to make up to Joe, in order to pass his bill ; and Joe is pretending to make up to Gladstone, in order to throw out his bill. Diamond cut diamond.' As long, however, as the bill was before the House of Commons and the country, Mr. Chamberlain continued to indicate that his opposition was conditional. In this respect he differed from Lord Hartington, whose opposition was fundamental. On May 6 the Radical statesman wrote that ' the key of the position was to maintain the representation of Ireland in the imperial Parliament and her full responsibility for all imperial affairs.' This ' key ' he abandoned seven years later, but in the first conflict he expressed the hope that if the concession which is suggested were made the ' imminent danger of a fatal breach in the ranks of the Liberal party might be happily averted.' Negotiations were carried on through the medium of Mr. Labou- chere, an old Radical admirer, who was still anxious that Mr. Chamberlain should be ' the EHsha of the aged Elijah,' and at one point the issue seemed hopeful. Mr. Chamberlain gathered from the go-between on May 8 that the retention of the Irish members was to be granted. At any rate he assumed that the concession was made and he sent a telegram to several friends announcing the ' surrender ' of the Prime Minister. This indiscretion led to anxious inquiries at Downing Street, and the reply obtained was treated as a contradiction. There was suspicion on both sides. Members of the Government resented what they considered an attempt on Mr. Chamberlain's part to coerce them and he in turn was sceptical as to their disposition to meet him. The Whig and Radical opponents of the bill were graduaJly organ- ized for the purpose of united resistance. As the struggle proceeded the Radical leader entered into close consultation with the Whig statesman with whom he had a few months previously conducted a stiff and stem dispute with regard to the whole tendency of Liberal policy. Together they planned the defeat of their common chief. On May 12 fifty-two members met Mr. Chamberlain in conference. Next day Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman stated on behalf of the Government in the House of Commons that they were willing to ' consider with the most friendly mind all suggestions that might be made for enabling the Irish members to take part in our discussions,' but Mr. Chamberlain was quite dissatisfied with this intimation. When he heard it he tore up the notes which he had taken and walked out. On the 14th he attended a meeting at Devonshire House where sixty-four Liberals assembled, and hostile arrangements were continued by the two sections of ' dissentients.' Social influences were effectively employed on the Unionist side. Statesmen who had hitherto ignored 126 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN obscure members now stooped to ' lobby ' and solicit support. The combined influence of Whig and Radical proved formidable. One severe check, however, was sustained by Mr. Chamberlain. The Caucus, which had been so powerful an instrument in his hands, turned against him. At a meeting of the Council of the National Liberal Federation on May 15 his Birmingham friends were defeated, and an amendment was carried by a very large majority approving of the bill and assuring Mr. Gladstone of earnest support. Having to choose between the old leader and the younger politician who had taken the most conspicuous part in its foundation it stood by the former, and at the same time the experienced organizer, Mr. Schnad- horst, who had been associated with Mr. Chamberlain in many move- ments, threw in his lot with the Prime Minister. While debate on the second reading was conducted in a great style, and while negotiations were still flickering, an adroit suggestion by Mr. Gladstone weakened for a time the position of the Radical Unionists. At a meeting of the Liberal party on May 27 the Prime Minister said that all that the Government desired at that stage was to establish the principle of the Bill and if the second reading were passed it would be withdrawn and a new measure introduced in an autumn session. In a sharp debate the Conservatives brought into prominence the fact that the promise of reconstruction applied only to the clauses dealing with the position of the Irish representatives ; but as this was the section on which the opposition of Radical Unionists had been concentrated, Mr. Chamberlain appeared to be afraid that he might not in the new circumstances carry his friends with him into the lobby against the Bill. In a letter to Lord Randolph, quoted by Mr. Churchill, he stated reasons which made for abstention instead of a hostile vote. His Tory friend wrote imploring him to stick to his guns. Everjrthing, he replied, would turn on the meeting of his followers. The decision of the members acting with Mr. Chamberlain was influenced — and the fate of the Bill determined, to a great degree — by a letter from Mr. Bright. Although Bright had been on the popular Irish side during the greater part of his life, his sympathy was to some extent chilled by the obstruction and crime associated with the Parnel- lite movement and by the attacks made upon himself for supporting coercion. He thought that the Home Rule Bill would cause constant friction between the two countries and that it would be better for the Parliament at Westminster to go on trying by good laws to remove Irish grievances. His personal regard for Mr. Gladstone withheld him from taking a conspicuous part in opposition to the Bill, and for a short time his views were not precisely known, but in response to a request, he wrote a letter which was produced at a meeting attended THE QUARREL 127 by fifty-four members, with Mr. Chamberlain in the chair, on May 31. To this meeting were summoned all ' who being in favour of some sort of autonomy in Ireland disapprove of the Government Bills in their present shape,' and it was held in Committee Room, No. 15, celebrated in a later Irish controversy. For Mr. Bright 's letter a newspaper manager offered £100 to Mr. W. S. Caine, the Radical Unionist Whip, but it was not communicated to the press. The statement was made, and frequently repeated in after years, that Mr. Caine merely indicated the contents of the docu- ment to the meeting and that he then tore it up. This assertion, however, was declared by Mr. Austen Chamberlain in 191 3 to be un- founded, and a few weeks after his denial the letter, which had been preserved among his father's papers, was published in Mr. G. M. Trevelyan's biography of Mr. Bright. In this famous document Mr. Bright wrote that his own intention was to vote against the second reading, but that he was not willing to take the responsibility of advising others. ' If they can,' he said, ' content themselves with abstaining from the division I shall be glad.' The different reports of the letter given by Liberals in after years showed how varied were the impressions derived from it. Some of Mr. Gladstone's adherents who heard of it said it was misinterpreted or misunderstood. There is no doubt, however, that the determining point in it was the intimation that Mr. Bright 's own intention was to vote against the second reading. His example rather than his advice was followed. Four of the members at the meeting wished to abstain and three were prepared to support the second reading, but after a second vote a resolution to oppose it was adopted with practical imanimity. On hearing of the effect of his letter Mr. Bright expressed surprise and regret to friends at the Reform Club, and he wrote to Mr. Chamber- lain on the first of June offering, if not too late, to join with him in abstaining in order to avert a dissolution. It was, however, too late. The doubts of waverers had been removed when they learned of Mr. Bright's intention to vote against the Bill. With him in the hostile lobby, they would not be afraid to strike. Their decision, moreover, was what Mr. Chamberlain desired. He meant sooner or later to kill Gladstonian Home Rule. On the day after the fateful meeting Mr. Chamberlain, in the course of the second reading debate made piquant allusion to his own position. ' There is not,' he said, ' a man here who does not know that every personal and political interest would lead me to cast in my lot with the Prime Minister. Why, sir, not a day passes in which I do not receive dozens or scores of letters urging me, for my own sake, to vote for the Bill and dish the Whigs ! Well, sir, the temptation is no doubt a great one, but after all I am not base enough to serve my 128 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN ■personal ambition by betraying my country.' His critics retorted that he was at this point desirous not of dishing the Whigs but of dishing Mr. Gladstone. According to his own statement, however, he was reluctantly forced into a hostile attitude by the sincere conviction that Mr, Gladstone's proposals would weaken the supremacy of the imperial Parliament. He made an important qualification. ' It is,' he explained, ' upon the method and plan of the Bill that we are going to the country, and not upon its principle. I have said it before, and I say it again : give me the principle without the Bill and I will vote for it.' This view of the issue only confirmed the suspicion of the official Liberals that what he objected to was not the scheme but its author. A final and flattering appeal was addressed to Mr. Chamberlain in a letter written by Mr. Labouchere on behalf of a large number of Radical members who had always looked to him as ' the leader of their phase of political thought.' The issue, as they believed, was entirely in his hands, and they dreaded a General Election without him on their side. ' When Achilles returned to his tent the Greeks were defeated ; what would it have been,' asked Mr. Labouchere, ' had Achilles lent the weight of his arm to the Trojans ? ' Mr. Chamberlain was not turned aside by the appeal. His reply to ' My dear Labouchere ' was prompt and emphatic. ' We are ready,' he wrote, ' to accept as a principle the expediency of establishing some kind of legislative authority in Ireland, subject to the conditions which Mr. Gladstone himself has laid down, but we honestly believe that none of these con- ditions are satisfactorily secured by the plan which has been placed before us.' Mr. Gladstone's reply to Mr. Chamberlain at the end of the second reading debate, delivered in a tone of irony with a touch of scorn, dealt with the indefiniteness of his attitude. The Radical leader had boasted that a dissolution had no terrors for him. ' I do not wonder at it ' (said Mr. Gladstone). ' I do not see how a dissolu- tion can have any terrors for him. He has trimmed his vessel, and he has touched his rudder in such a masterly way that in whichever direction the winds of heaven may blow, they must fill his sails. Supposing that at an election public opinion should be very strong in favour of the Bill, my right honourable friend would then be perfectly prepared to meet that public opinion, and tell it " I declared strongly that I adopted the principle of the Bill." On the other hand, if public opinion were very adverse to the Bill he again is in complete armour because he says, " Yes, I voted against the Bill." Supposing again public opinion is in favour of a very large plan for Ireland, my right honourable friend is per- fectly provided for that case also. The Government plan was not large enough for him, and he proposed in his speech on the introduction of the Bill that we should have a measure on the basis of federation, which goes beyond this Bill. Lastly — and now I have very nearly boxed the compass — supposing that put lie opinion should take quite a different turn, and instead of wanting very large measures for Ireland should demand very small measures for Ireland, still the resources of my right honourable friend are not exhausted, because he is then THE QUARREL 129 able to point out that the last of his plans was for four provincial circuits con- trolled from London.' All these alternatives and provisions were, in Mr. Glad- stone's opinion, ' creations of the vivid imagination, bom of the hour and perishing with the hour, totally unavailable for the solution of a great and difficult problem.' The fatal division on the night of June 7 placed the Government in a minority of thirty. As many as ninety-three Liberals voted against the Bill, among them being Mr. Bright, the venerated friend of Gladstone, Lord Hartington, Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Goschen and Sir Henry James, as well as Sir George Trevelyan, who had taken office and had resigned. ' Judas ! ' ' Traitor ! ' cried the Nationalists, as they glared across the House at the member for West Birmingham, while the Conser- vatives cheered for the second time within twelve months at the down- fall of a Gladstone Administration. The feelings of the defeated were expressed elsewhere in a dramatic style by Mr. Morley, who, deploring the fatal attack on the Liberal chief by former associates and colleagues, quoted from the funeral oration of Mark Antony over the mantle of the great Caesar : — Look ! in this place, ran Cassius' dagger through ; See, what a rent the envious Casca made : Through this, the well-beloved Brutus stabb'd. It was explained by the commentators that Cassius stood for Lord Hartington and Brutus for Mr. Bright, and every one guessed who was the envious Casca of the Home Rule tragedy. The tragedy em- bittered and darkened political life for many years, one section of Liberals blaming Mr. Gladstone for precipitancy, and the other de- nouncing Mr. Chamberlain for desertion. Once more Dr. Dale entered a protest on behalf of his friend.^ ' How is it,' he asked, ' that Mr. Chamberlain is the object of so much bitterness ? Lord Hartington and Mr. Bright are just as responsible as he is for throwing out the Bill. . . . He may be mistaken as other men have been ; but he stands by the faith which he has professed, and has made the heaviest personal sacrifices in dong so. Had he remained in the Ministry after Lord Hartington refused to join it, he would have been heir-apparent to the leadership of the Commons.' In another letter Dr. Dale, referring to this sacrifice and to the prospect of unpopularity for Mr. Chamberlain, remarked : ' It is rather dangerous political morality to suggest that a man is playing for his own hand when in harmony with his avowed convictions he feels obliged to separate himself from his party at such a cost as this.' The adherents of the Prime Minister doubted whether his former lieutenant had really followed his avowed convictions. Their anger was due partly to the consideration that whereas the natural ten^ * Life of R. W. Dale, of Birmingham. 130 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN dency of the Whigs might have been to leave the Gladstone Government, there ought to have been no such bias on the part of the Birmingham Radicals. They believed that Mr. Chamberlain might have consist- ently voted for the second reading of the Bill, and the reservations he continued to make on the principle strengthened their suspicion of his motives. Addressing his constituents on June 26, he said : ' At the last General Election you know that the very idea of Home Rule was scouted by the vast majority of the Liberal party. Not by me ! (cheers). No, not by me ! because I have always been a Home Ruler.' A General Election being decided upon Mr. Chamberlain acted with his usual promptitude and energy. At first he held aloof from the Liberal Unionist Association, which had been formed by Lord Hartington's followers. He favoured for a time an independent course on the part of his own supporters, and at a consultation with them at his residence it was decided to start the National Radical Union. Under his presidency this organization was inaugurated at Birmingham in June, the Radicals who promoted it being in favour of a uniform scheme of local self-government for all parts of the United Kingdom under the supreme authority of the imperial Parliament. While taking this action Mr. Chamberlain assured himself of the sup- port of his constituency and his town. At a great meeting of the electors his action was endorsed except by a very small minority. ' Tremendous enthusiasm,' he reported, ' and the G.O.M. not in it. They would have hooted him if I had asked them.' ^ The rapid swing of politics caused excitement throughout the country, and the struggle was characterised by unusual passion. Mr. Chamberlain, speaking at numerous meetings, attacked his friends vdth an even keener ardour than he had displayed against the Tories. The missionary of political humanity became the missionary of a legislative union. His tone with reference to Mr. Gladstone under- went a sharp change. He accused his chief of juggling with words, just as a few months previously he had accused Lord Salisbury. His rhetoric was never more spirited or incisive. Denouncing both the Land Purchase and the Home Rule Bills at Birmingham on July 2, he said : — You are asked to pay ;^ 150,000,000 to set up a rival Parliament in Dublin : aye, a rival and a competitor to the great Parliament at Westminster, the mother of Parliaments, the type and model of free institutions throughout the globe, and the one only security and guarantee for the rights and the liberties and the property of all Her Majesty's subjects. . . . You are asked to stake upon the hazard of a die the authority and the influence, perhaps even the existence of the empire. All I can say is that for my part I will never be a party to such a dangerous and a ruinous speculation. . . . These bills are not a concession to justice ; they are not a concession to the intelligent demands of the Irish people ; 1 W. S. Caine, M.P. THE QUARREL 131 all the intelligence of Ireland is opposed to them. They are a surrender to Mr. Parnell and to the forces behind him. . . . This is an unexampled crisis in our national history ; it is an unparalleled chapter in our annals. You have a P'rime Minister in the very height of his popularity turning round upon himself, upon all that he has said, upon all that he has been understood to say, for I know not how many years, and making an abject surrender to the vile conspiracy which has endeavoured, I fear not altogether without success, to shake the constancy of English statesmen by threats of outrage and assassination. Will you share in this humiliation ? Will you be a party to this surrender ? These sentences, which may enable the reader to understand the fury which Mr. Chamberlain excited in Home Rule quarters, will show also the nature of the new arguments and appeals which he addressed to the electors. The key, although pitched very high, was not above the occasion ; and he maintained it for several weeks. There is a passage in his speech at Cardiff on July 6, which recalls the fervent passion of his protests against the tyranny of the peers. Other tyrants now aroused his anger : — Gentlemen, (he said), your ancestors have met great difficulties and dangers, and have confronted them successfully. They have arrested the tyranny of kings ; they have borne without flinching the terrors of a persecuting Church ; they have again and again rolled back the tide of foreign invasion from our shores ; they have overcome the most powerful combination of their foes ; and now will you, their descendants — you, upon whose shoulders the burden of their empire has fallen — will you be so poor-spirited as to break up your ancient constitution, to destroy your venerable Parliament, and to surrender your well-earned supre- macy to the vile and ignoble force of anarchy and disorder ? Praise came to the orator from quarters in which for years he had received unsparing censure. The Times, in whose opposition he had formerly gloried, took him into favour. Reviewing the stormy Parhamentary strifes of the year, it commented on his growing powers of reasoning and expression. ' The danger with which the separatist heresy threatened the splendid fabric of the British Empire, stirred up emotions in Mr. Chamberlain which gave to his speeches a force, a largeness and a patriotic ring previously wanting in them. Not only did Mr. Chamberlain thus produce unwonted effect by appealing to a higher order of conceptions, but in doing so his own ideas expanded and acquired a healthier vitality by contact with living facts.' Similar encouragement was given by Lord Randolph Churchill, who wrote that he had reasserted his position as leader of the Radical party, and on questions of Imperial policy had gained the confidence of the country. Undoubtedly he threw off the parochial-mindedness of which he boasted in 1880, and soared to imperial heights. One of his earlier efforts in this direction was seen in his speech explaining his resigna- tion. ' Since I have been in pubhc affairs I have called myself, I think not altogether without reason, a Radical. But that title has never prevented me from giving great consideration to imperial 132 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN interests. I have cared for the honour, and the influence, and the integrity of the empire, and it is because I believe these things are now in danger that I have felt myself called upon to make the greatest sacrifice that any public man can make.' Again on the night before his election, in language which aroused immense enthusiasm, Mr. Chamberlain appealed to the sceptre of dominion. ' It was the stabiUty of a great empire which they were guarding from attack. Ireland was much but the empire was more. . . . All the world would wait to see if England kept intact that which her forefathers had handed down, or if she sold her birthright, not for a mess of pottage but from sheer weakness.' XVIII THE ROUND TABLE AS the result of the disruption of the Liberal Party the Conserva- tives occupied ofi&ce for sixteen out of the next nineteen years. Mr. Gladstone's defect at the General Election in July, 1886, was decisive. The Unionists were returned to the new Parhament with a majority of no and even without their aUies the Conservatives had a majority of thirty-six over the combined Home Rulers, British and Irish. They could only be defeated if the Liberal Unionists were to vote with the other sections of the House against them and such a combination was soon proved improbable. It was said that the miUions proposed to be given to the Irish landlords under the Land Purchase Bill did the mischief. Anyhow, the cause of Home Rule was overthrown. Mr. Chamberlain carried Birmingham with him, and instead of returning seven members to vote with Mr. Gladstone it elected six Liberal Unionists and one Conservative ally of the former Conservative ' bogey.' When Mr. Gladstone resigned. Lord SaUsbury, on being sent for by Queen Victoria, held a consultation with Lord Hartington. The Conservative leader offered to serve under the Whig statesman but the time for an official coahtion had not yet arrived. Even if the Whig were wiUing he might have been deterred by the fear that precipitate action would throw Mr. Chamberlain and his Radical followers back to Mr. Gladstone. Certainly Mr. Chamberlain ridiculed the idea of his joining a Coalition, nor was Lord Sahsbiu-y yet ready to sit with him in the same Cabinet. This, as Lord Salisbury told his Whig friend, ' would be too sharp a curve for both.' ^ Lord Hartington informed a meeting at Devonshire House — at which Mr. Chamberlain accepted his leadership — that he had declined to form a Government because it would have made the breach in the Liberal party irreparable. He and his friends were not to cease to be Liberals and they did not intend to provide any pretext for denying them that title. At the same time he promised independent support to the Conservative Administration. The Liberal Unionists crossed with the ' Glad- stonians ' to the opposition side of the House but assisted Lord Sahs- ^ See letter from Lord Hartington to Mr. Goschen, of July 24, 1886, in Life of Lord Goschen, by Mr. Arthur Elliot. 133 134 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN bury's colleagues in debate and voted with them in the division lobby. Courtesies passed between the estranged Liberal leaders when they met in the new Parliament. Lord Hartington greeted Mr. Gladstone in a friendly, respectful manner, and the beaten old man held out his hand to Mr. Chamberlain who took it while he raised his hat. Recriminations were, however, revived in debate on the Address. While Lord Hartington's followers were, to their annoyance, described as dissentients, Mr. Gladstone's adherents were insulted as ' separa- tists.' Mr. Chamberlain, speaking on August 6, provoked many jeers by declaring that he was not going to do anything to turn out the Conservative Government as long as the party which would take its place was committed to a separatist pohcy. His speech was full of gibes at old friends, and was much cheered by new allies. Refer- ence had been made to his ' honour,' but Mr. Sexton, a very able and eloquent Irish member, in a pitiless passage, said, as Lady Teazle said to Joseph Surface : ' Don't you think we may as well leave honour out of the argument ? ' Sir Wilfrid Lawson sneered at him as the autocrat of the new Government and when he complained that he had been ostracised by the Liberal party. Sir WiUiam Harcourt retorted that it was rather the other way, and that he had ostracised every one but his single self. Mr. Gladstone after the fall of his Ministry ' was persuaded, mainly through the influence of Lord Granville, to have an interview with Mr. Chamberlain ; but it led to no satisfactory result.' ^ The rebelling Radical was impenitent. ' He had antici- pated,' wrote Mr. Labouchere nineteen years later, ' that the Liberal party would side with him. Finding that Mr. Gladstone was stronger than himself in the party he went over to the Conservatives.' There was, however, one brief period of wavering in his career ; one point in his journey with the Conservatives when he halted and hesitated. The halt was occasioned by a politician whose history continued to be as strange and exciting as his own. Lord Randolph Churchill on being appointed in 1885 as Secretary of State for India had turned his back, like Henry V, on his former self, and revealed high quahties as a responsible statesman ; and on the formation of Lord Salisbury's second Government in 1886 he became Chancellor of the Exchequer and leader of the House of Conmions. Occupying those high posts at the age of thirty-seven the Tory democrat seemed to be entering on a briUiant official career. Two days before Christmas, however, he startled the country by the announcement that he had resigned. The immediate cause of this step was his inabihty to support the military estimates of his colleagues. That was a sufficient reason, although others were suspected, as Lord Randolph's mind * Life of Lord Granvillf, by Lard Edmond Fitzmaurice. THE ROUND TABLE 135 was cast in a different mould from the Marquis of Salisbury's and his ambition was restless. In Mr. Chamberlain's view the political situation was transformed by his democratic friend's resignation. On the day it was annoimced, he told his constituents that he feared the old Tory influences had gained the upper hand, and that they might be face to face with a Government whose proposals no consistent Liberal would be able to support. He caused almost as much commotion as Lord Randolph's resignation had excited, by pleading for reunion. 'We Liberals,' he said, ' are agreed upon ninety-nine points of our pro- gramme. ... I say even upon Irish matters when I look into the thing, I am more surprised at the number of points upon which we agree than at the remainder upon which for the present we may be content to differ.' Sitting round a table and coming together in a spirit of compromise and conciliation, almost any three men, leaders of the Liberal party, although they might hold opposite views upon another branch of the question, would yet, as he declared, be able to arrange some scheme. He had spent a couple of months in eastern Europe, and as these amicable words fell from his lips soon after his return, trusting Liberals surmised that he had seen the error of his ways and wished to return to the old flag. Those who build vast speculations on trifling circumstances detected significance in the visit that Mr. Morley and Mr. Chamberlain paid together to the Lyceum Theatre on the last night of 1886. Their comradeship, it was conjectured, would not have been publicly renewed unless there were sanguine hope of a political reconciliation. Light has been thrown on Mr. Chamberlain's motives and calcula- tions by the publication of a letter which he wrote to Lord Randolph on hearing of his resignation. ' The Government,' he said, ' is doomed, and I suspect we may have to re-form parties on a new basis. You and I are equally adrift from the old organizations.' And again : ' The party tie is the strongest sentiment in this country — stronger than patriotism or even self-interest. But it will come all right in the end for both of us.' These expressions indicate that while suggest- ing the round-table conference, Mr. Chamberlain's aim or expectation was not reunion with his former colleagues. He was contemplating the formation of a new party. His conciliatory overtures were not received cordially by all Liberals. Some of them were indifferent as to his return. They thought that if he wanted to come back he might find his way without assistance from their leaders. His own view was of quite another sort. He believed he was master of the situation. ' My speech,' he wrote to Lord Randolph Churchill on December 26, ' has fluttered the dovecotes tremendously, and my correspondence shows that many 136 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN of the Gladstonians are very uncomfortable and anxious to come to terms.' ' But I do not believe/ he added, * that there will be any practical result.' ^ Mr. Gladstone was not much, if at all, more sanguine. Large and final arrangements from a conference it would be rash, he thought, to expect, but he had himself, as he told Lord Acton, laboured in a conciliatory sense, and he did not allow the possibility of a reunion to pass. He considered the Birmingham speech to be an important fact of which due note ought to be taken. If he had ignored it he would have played into the hands of a man who might have desired to show that his overtures were repulsed. Sir William Harcourt and Mr. Morley believed in the bona fides of Mr. Chamberlain, but another old colleague was inclined to suspect that he was only trying to put himself right with the large body of Liberals, without any prospect of coming to an arrangement. With these varied feelings in the minds of the leaders the conference ' round a table ' was arranged. Sir William Harcourt, Mr. Morley, and Lord Herschell representing the official section of the party, and Mr. Chamberlain and Sir George Trevelyan representing some at least of those who had voted against the Home Rule Bill. When Mr. Chamberlain was thus fluttering his former friends with prospects of reunion Lord Hartington was in Italy and thither, when Lord Randolph Churchill resigned, an urgent message was sent by Lord Salisbury. According to an amused observer, ' a Whig nobleman who was studying antiquities in Rome ' was ' hurried home to save the political antiquities at the Carlton Club.' The idea of a coalition was renewed, and again the Conservative leader offered to serve under his Whig ally. Lord Hartington still preferred to maintain an independent position, but with his entire concurrence Mr. Goschen joined the Government as Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Lord Randolph Churchill found his place filled much more easily than he had considered possible. If he had acted in the belief that he was necessary at the Treasury he ' forgot Goschen.' The Ad- ministration became, in fact, more homogeneous under the fresh arrangement, for the Whig financier had more in common with the Prime Minister than his Tory predecessor. Mr. W. H. Smith was appointed leader of the House of Commons, and when he died, re- gretted by all parties, Lord Randolph Churchill's opportunity had passed. Another statesman had by that time reached the front rank, and while the once brilliant ' Randy ' sank in ill-health to an early grave, Mr. Arthur Balfour secured the position which led to the office of Prime Minister. In reopening negotiations with the Gladstonian Liberals the 1 Lord Randolph Churchill, by W. S. Churchill. THE ROUND TABLE 137 member for West Birmingham was regarded by his resigned ally as pursuing an erroneous course. Lord Randolph Churchill, speaking in Parliament, delighted the Home Rulers by a gibe at his ' extra- ordinary gyrations.' This comment drew from Mr. Chamberlain a letter of expostulation. ' Surely,' he concluded, ' we shall have our hands fully occupied without tearing out each other's eyes.' Lord Randolph, as usual, responded amicably, so far as the personal ques- tion was concerned. ' I do not think,' he wrote, ' I said anything which ought even to ruffle our private friendship, which — though it may seem a paradox to say so — is one of the chief and few remaining attractions of political life.' * The history of the Round Table Conference, which forms one of the most puzzling passages in a puzzling career, has been told in countless speeches and newspapers, but the historians have not agreed. Those who took part in it at Sir William Harcourt's house in Grafton Street, carried away conflicting impressions. There were preliminary meetings of the distinguished statesmen in the middle of January, 1887, which led Mr. Chamberlain to speak hope- fully of a settlement, and their deliberations were resumed a month later. Some disparaging remarks on Gladstonians made in a speech at Birmingham by its celebrated citizen, caused irritation at the Round Table, but this was removed at ' a good dinner ' at Sir George Trevelyan's and the conference proceeded. Contradictory accounts were given in subsequent times of the measure of agreement secured on the question of Home Rule. On the one hand Mr. Chamberlain complained that he failed to obtain any pledge that Mr. Gladstone and his friends would accept any of the conditions which had been laid down as essential by Lord Hartington and himself. On the other hand Sir William Harcourt declared that upon most fundamental points the statesmen at the conference were in entire accord. At the end of February, whatever may have been the course of the deliberations, the representatives of the Liberal party laid the results so far achieved before their leader, who agreed to set forth in a memorandum his view on the whole question. A letter from Mr. Chamberlain published in the Baptist and re- printed in the daily press put an end to the high hopes of an arrange- ment. The writer contended that Home Rule was leading to the indefinite postponement of just and pressing reforms such as Welsh disestablishment and made offensive reference not only to the new policy but to its advocates who proposed ' handing over the minority in Ireland to the tender mercies of Mr. Parnell and the Irish League,' ' Thirty-two millions of people, ' he wrote, ' must go without much- needed legislation because three millions are disloyal, while nearly » Lord Raniolph Churchill, by W. S. Churchill. 138 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN six hundred members of the imperial Parliament will be reduced to forced inactivity because some eighty delegates, representing the policy and receiving the pay of the Chicago Convention, are determined to obstruct all business until their demands have been conceded.' By this letter, according to one of those engaged in the conference, ' all the old bitterness, the old irritation, and the old offences were renewed, revived and repeated.' A friend to whom the writer showed it beforehand warned him of what would be its consequences, but those could have been surmised by no one more shrewdly than by himself. The conference, suspended in order that Mr. Gladstone might sum up the result of the communications of his colleagues, was never resumed. He held that the Baptist letter interposed an unexpected obstacle in his way, and it was subsequently treated by his friends as the cause of the rupture, although Mr. Chamberlain pointed out that after it appeared Sir William Harcourt publicly declared that the differences at the Round Table were few and secondary. He on his own part insisted that the negotiations broke down because there was a power behind the Liberal leaders which they did not dare to face, and which prevented them from granting adequate concessions.^ ' We appear to be as far from a settlement as ever,' reported Mr. Chamberlain to his friends in Birmingham, on March 12 ; and he added that personally he had done what he could. Even in the speech on this occasion in which he defined the position of ' every leading member of the Unionist Liberal party,' he said they had no difference with Mr. Gladstone except upon one single point, and on this point they objected not to the principle but to the methods. If certain objections could be met they were ready to ' accept any scheme for conferring on Ireland legislative authority to deal with its exclusively domestic concerns.' This passage has embarrassed some of the apologists who try to prove that Home Rule as conceived by its early advocate was fundamentally different from the system proposed by Mr. Gladstone. At the time of the conference, or a little later, Mr. Chamberlain wrote to Mr. Morley to tell him that so earnestly did he desire the imion of the Liberals and the settlement of the Irish question that if it was considered that any objection to himself stood in the way of an agreement or an amicable arrangement, he was personally pre- pared, if that agreement was arrived at, to retire altogether from public life. The offer was not accepted. Mr. Morley would be the * Mr. Chamberlain said to Mr. Barry O'Brien, ' I revived my National Coun- cils scheme at the Round Table Conference. I believe they were willing to accept it. They asked Parnell. Parnell would not have it, and that of course made an end in the matter.' — Life of C. S. Parnell. THE ROUND TABLE 139 last man to impose so great a sacrifice on any friend, and it is evident, now at any rate, that the sori; of agreement which was to be the pre- Uminary to resignation was impossible. The story of the offer was told by Mr. Chamberiain himself in 1892, in order to rebut the charge of personal ambition which was then brought against him. Mystery has continued to surround his motives at the period of the conference, and the views which politicians take of his con- duct in suggesting it and subsequently in writing the provocative letter to the Baptist are influenced in many cases by preconceived notions. Unsympathetic critics suggest that his aim, as Lord Gran- ville suspected, was merely to put himself right with the large body of Liberals. They suppose that he was still hopeful of winning the majority to his side, and that by inducing the negotiators to agree to his proposals he expected to make Mr. Gladstone's retention of the leadership impossible. His letters to Lord Randolph Churchill indicate also, as we have seen, that his aim was not reunion on the old lines. On the other hand the plea which he put forward that the Liberal leaders were prevented by Mr. Parnell from making satisfactory concessions was accepted by Unionists as an adequate explanation. Lord Hartington and others who considered the conference premature or ill-advised had not been sanguine as to its results. It enabled Mr. Chamberlain, however, to convince his friends that he had done his best to promote conciliation. Henceforward he acted with the Con- servatives. Coercion became the test of politics. When a new stiffening of the Irish criminal law was proposed by the Government in 1887 the Liberals expected that the Radical section of Unionists would be driven back on their old party. Seeing that Mr. Chamberlain had threatened to resign in 1885 rather than renew the coercion which then existed, it was supposed that whatever might have been the cause of the failure of the Round Table Conference he would now refuse to vote with the Conservatives. His Unionism, however, stood the strain. He supported the Crimes Bill in speeches which fanned the flame of national feeling. His tone was defiant. He anticipated that he would be taunted with his alliance with the Tories. ' At least our allies,' he retorted, ' will be English gentlemen, and not the subsidised agents of a foreign conspiracy. I look beyond mere Parliamentary considerations. The Government may be Tory, but if its measures are Liberal I am prepared to discuss them on their merits, and without regard to past controversies.' The fact that threescore Liberals went into the lobby to support a stringent measure of coercion ' without any of the usual evidence and war- rants ' was to Mr. Gladstone ' the bitterest of all disappointments in connexion with this deplorable issue.' He and his friends were 140 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN specially surprised by the devotion of the Chamberlain group to the new Government, and Mr. Morley in the sternest tone denounced them as coercionist Radicals, Gradually Mr. Chamberlain drew further and further away from the Gladstonians. He acted in intimate consultation with Lord Hartington, and their forces throughout the country were jointly organized in 1887. The Liberal Union was formed at Devonshire House in February with the Whig as president and the Radical as a vice-president. At a dinner given in June by the Liberal Union Club, to which his friends moved from the Eighty Club after the latter had refused to entertain him, Mr. Chamberlain declared that he was no longer sanguine of the possibility of reconciliation with old friends and expressed his absolute confidence in Lord Hartington. He had privately continued to advocate provincial Parliaments on the Cana- dian lines, but was dissuaded by his new leader from pushing this pro- ject in public. Responsibility for the disunion of the Liberal party was cast by him on the Home Rule section. * The Gladstonian Liberals,' he said, ' have made their choice. They prefer an alliance with the Pamellites to any chance of reconciliation with their old colleagues and old friends. The men who have surrendered everything to the Irish Party and to their American allies now slam the door in our faces, and in the faces of all who will not join them in their abject surrender.' There was only one point at which he refused to act with his new allies. He voted with the Opposition for a motion protesting against the proclamation of the National League which had risen out of the ashes of the Land League. This was counted to him as a slight sign of grace. On Sir George Trevelyan, who could not long endure Conservative pohcy and who on returning to the Liberal fold was hailed as a repent- ant prodigal, Mr. Chamberlain poured bitter scorn. Instead of repenting he demanded repentance from opponents. He attacked Mr. Gladstone in and out of the House, declaring that without any pre- liminary discussion in the country, and without full or fair consulta- tion with his followers, the veteran leader had flung an apple of discord among them, and thrust down their throats a reversal of all the tradi- tions of the party. To ' the older and nobler creed of Liberahsm ' he himself appealed. An amusing account has been given by Lady Randolph Churchill of an attempt by Mr. Chamberlain in a summer cruise to interest Lord Hartington in a scheme for a National party which he and Lord Randolph were considering.^ One can imagine his own ardour and Lord Hartington 's 'frozen attitude.' The Whig preferred his alliance with the Marquis of SaHsbury to association in a new party with the ^ The Reminiscences of Lady Randolph Churchill. THE ROUND TABLE 141 Tory democrat. The National party was not formed, and indeed its advocates did not always agree. Mr. Chamberlain's angry antagonism to those from whom he had so recently parted led Lord Randolph ChurchiU to make a biting reference to him in August, during discussion on the Irish Land Bill. ' The right honourable gentleman,' said the ex-Conservative Minister, ' evidently does not understand the process of differing from one's party and yet supporting it.' ' Neither,' retorted Mr. Chamberlain, ' am I a member who speaks one way and votes another.' This was a gibe at Lord Randolph's criticism of the Government with which he voted. The tiff led, as on other occasions, to a letter from the Radical statesman who sought persist- ently to keep on good terms with an old friend whose temper was as quick and whose tongue was as sharp as his own. ' I hope,' he said (in a sentence pubhshed by Mr. Churchill), ' that in this case it is ira amantium redintegratio amoris.' XIX AN INTERLUDE AN interlude in Mr. Chamberlain's political career was provided by his appointment in the autumn of 1887 as one of Her Majesty's plenipotentiaries to represent Great Britain on a Commission with reference to North American fisheries. To his selection for this duty some objection was taken by a few Radicals and Nationahsts on the ground that he would be unacceptable to the Irish on the other side of the Atlantic, but there was, except among such extreme oppon- ents, a recognition of his special fitness for the work. The mission, as the Foreign Office testified, was eminently successful in bringing to a conclusion differences which had threatened to strain our relations with the United States. Although the treaty which the negotiators arranged was rejected by the American Senate it was accompanied by a modus vivendi which was renewed again and again. On the vote for the expenses of the mission being taken in the House of Commons the Government expressed hearty acknowledg- ments to Mr. Chamberlain for the services he had rendered to the State. Mr. Labouchere, moved by political hostility, complained that he had cost over £30 a day in performing a duty which should have been entrusted to our regular representative at Washington, and although Mr. Gladstone magnanimously approved of what had been done and praised Mr. Chamberlain's public spirit, Mr. T. P. O'Connor, a leading Nationalist, gave expression to Irish hatred. He attributed to Mr. Chamberlain ' infirmity of temper,' and a ' power of making himself personally obnoxious,' and commented on the ' almost Bel- shazzar-like splendour of his feasts ' in America. ' All the fashion, all the statesmanship, all the wealth, and though last, not least, all the beauty and luxury of America seem to have been invited to the bounteous and hospitable board of the right honourable gentleman.' In spite, however, of prejudice, a hostile amendment was rejected by a majority of 314 to 68. When Mr. Chamberlain reappeared at St. Stephen's, in March, 1888, he was greatly cheered, and many members on both sides shook hands with him. Birmingham enrolled him the first ' honorary freeman ' of his adopted city, and he was entertained to dinner at the Devonshire Club in London by both sections of Liberals. Queen 142 AN INTERLUDE 143 Victoria sent to him a photograph-portrait bearing in her own hand- writing the inscription : ' To the Right Honourable J. Chamberlain, on his return from Washington, Victoria R.' It was stated, apparently on authority, that he was offered a title. Punch expected he would become a baronet. ' Our Fishery-Com- missionery Young Man ' was depicted gaily attired in stars and stripes, saying, ' Sport ? Why, certainly ! Enjoyed myself amazingly, you bet. If I'm asked. What's the net result ? Is it barren ? I shall reply. Sir, the result is barren-net -see ! Guess that's not bad for Joseph.' Four weeks later the comic journal was constrained to give another picture. Joseph is now seen rejecting with scorn the proffered baronetcy at the hands of Lady Tory Diplomacy and chnging to the object of his first love. Dear Democracy. The offer of a title was no doubt in his mind when at a luncheon at Birmingham in the following January, he said with significance scarcely veiled by jocularity : ' My friend Mr. Timmins has spoken of persons, presumably intimate acquaint- ances of his own, who desire to be Dukes of Digbeth or Earls of Edg- baston ; but for my part I say that if I live to be the age of Methuselah I shall wish for, and I shall accept, no higher honour than that of being member for Birmingham.' Out of the Washington visit sprang an incident which increased Mr. Chamberlain's domestic happiness. ' I was fortunate enough,* as he softly boasted, ' to make two treaties. I had my secret docu- ment as well as the public document.' The secret treaty was his engagement to Miss Mary Endicott, only daughter of the Secretary of War in President Cleveland's Administration. He had been introduced to her at a reception at the British Legation in Washington. No formal or pubhc announcement of the engagement was made until Mr. Chamberlain was on the Atlantic in November (1888) on his way back to America for his bride. Then the Birmingham Daily Post informed its readers that Miss Endicott was a member of one of the oldest and most notable famihes in the United States. The name of her ancestor, Governor John Endicott, was intimately associated with the foundation of the Puritan colony which became the State of Massachusetts. ' Since the date when he set foot on New England soil his descendants had lived quietly, usefully and honourably in Salem and its neighbourhood, always eminent among the citizens of Massachusetts but never obtruding claims to distinction founded upon the services of their ancestors. None of them, we believe, had acliieved prominence in pubhc hfe until the time of the present head of the family.' Mr. Endicott 's home in Salem was described by the New York Herald as a roomy and dignified-looking old Cabot mansion in Essex Street, near a century and a quarter old. ' It is a most comfortable 144 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN abiding place and has a magnificent library. In the pleasant social life of Salem, which has a peculiar charm of its own as well as in the gayer circles of the National capital the Endicotts play a leading part, the whole family being much hked.' Lord Selborne, the ex- Lord Chancellor, described Mrs. Chamberlain in the first year of her wedded hfe as ' a young American lady, very good looking, with excellent simple manners, more English of the best type than American.' The marriage, in which people on both sides of the Atlantic took a kindly interest, was solemnized on November 15, in St. John's Protestant Episcopal Church, Washington — the same church in which the father and mother of Charles Stewart Parnell were wedded. Renter's correspondent cabled that the ceremony was extremely simple and that there were no decorations in the sacred edifice. The guests included the President and high officials of the Government ; and the prominent military men in the capital were present in full uniform. The Daily Telegraph recorded that the bride, who wore a grey travelling costume, walked down the main aisle of the church quite self-possessed, her usual bright complexion a trifle dimmed but her appearance having all that dignified charm of manner so well known in Washington society. Mr. Chamberlain wore ' sohd black,' and in the button-hole of his cutaway-coat, as the American reporter observed, was a knot of white violets, while his pearl necktie was held by a broad loop of gold. The New York Herald added some personal touches to the picture : ' The bridegroom met the bride with a smile and outstretched hand at the lower step of the altar. Throughout the ceremony both answered the questions in clear tones and after the last benediction, for which both heads bent low, there was a joyous burst of organ music and Mr. Chamberlain led the way out with his winsome bride, every movement depicting his intense happiness.' It was further mentioned that at the wedding breakfast at Endicott House, in response to the personal congratulations of President Cleve- land, the bridegroom showed much feehng. The flower which he wore at the wedding was discussed as if it were an emblem of much significance. A gossip remarked that no Briton had ever seen him with any other boutonniere than the familiar orchid. The white violet was the favourite flower of his bride, and the World raised the momentous problem ' whether this discard of the orchid was a unique occurrence or whether the scentless exotic had been permanently sacrificed to the sweet -smelling violet.' Events proved that the secret treaty with the bride did not include the aban- donment of the ' scentless exotic' Mr. and Mrs. Chamberlain, after travelHng in America for a short time, came to Europe to complete the honeymoon tour. On Christ- mas Eve they arrived at Birmingham and they ' entered their carriage AN INTERLUDE 145 before the few persons on the platform who recognized them could recover from their surprise or make any attempt at a demonstration.' Mrs. Chamberlain's formal introduction to her husband's fellow-citizens took place at a social ceremony in the Town Hall early in January, 1889, and according to the Daily Post her bright and handsome dignity turned her reception into a triumph. All political parties were represented, and the bride received handsome gifts of jewellery which had been subscribed for by citizens, by women and by constituents. The women in their address told her that ' in coming amongst us, it is your happy lot to be dowered with that wealth of interest, sympathy and kindly affection which Mr. Chamberlain's fellow-townsmen offer as a marriage portion to his bride.' Mr. C. E. Mathews, speaking for the citizens, paid a graceful compliment to the ' charming and winsome ' bride and concluded his congratulations in the words with which Lorenzo greets Portia on her return to Belmont : — Deax lady. Welcome home. A reply, touched by that tenderness which always softened him when he alluded to his wife, was given by Mr. Chamberlain. ' She will tell you,' he said, ' that we have often talked of Birmingham and that I have dwelt upon the peculiar closeness of the ties which bind me to this great constituency, and now she bids me say to you that she shares all the interest that I have ever felt in its institutions and in its people, and in the pubhc and private hfe of the city in which she has elected to dwell. . . . Although I never hope nor desire to lessen her love for the country she has left I know that she is prepared to take up her hfe in the country to which she has come in all its fullness- and that she will say with Ruth of old — Thy people shall be my people.' lO XX TRANSFORMATION FOR six years Mr. Gladstone and his lieutenants, seated on the front Opposition bench, endured the company of the principal Liberal "Unionists, who from that privileged position assailed the conduct and xeplied to the arguments of their former colleagues. The presence of the allies of the Conservative Government on the same bench as the leaders of the Opposition was described by one of the most tolerant of the latter as an unseemly comedy. It was by no means intended as a comedy. Lord Hartington, Mr. Chamberlain and Sir Henry James, who sat together near the gangway, insisted on their right as Privy Councillors to places at the table, and they claimed moreover to belong to the Liberal party. On the other hand the Gladstonians — as the followers of the Grand Old Man were usually called — complained that their leaders might be embarrassed in their consultations by the proximity of Unionists, and probably in their complaint they were influenced by the desire to drive the alHes of the Conservatives -over to the Government side and prejudice them in the opinion of wavering Liberals throughout the country. Lord Hartington said in -effect : ' We will remain here because we are Liberals.' ' What you desire,' retorted the Gladstonians, ' is not to maintain your Liberal character, but to weaken the Opposition by giving the appearance of disunion on our side.' Although the old chief himself scarcely ever betrayed resentment disagreeable scenes took place in the heat and .glare of debate when the so-called ' dissentient ' leaders rose from the bench which he occupied and, standing quite near him, denounced his Irish pohcy or defended the Conservatives from his attacks. The relations of Lord Hartington and Mr. Chamberlain were more confidential during the stormy sessions which followed the disruption of the Liberal party than when they were Cabinet colleagues. Their careers had experienced strange vicissitudes since the one made the acquaintance of the other as Mayor of Birmingham. While Mr. Chamberlain was a new and independent member he censured the Whig leader of the Liberal Opposition ; they were rivals in Mr. Glad- stone's second Government ; they subsequently quarrelled on public platforms over Liberal programmes ; and now in a common estrange- aaent from their common chief they drew closely together, the Whig 146 TRANSFORMATION 147 statesman being faithfully followed by the ambitious Radical who had been suspected of a desire to snatch the leadership from Mr. Gladstone. In resistance to[Home Rule Lord Hartington developed his highest powers, put forth his greatest strength, and obtained his chief Parha- mentary success. Although his abiUty had seldom been questioned his impassive manner often did him injustice, but now he fought with vehemence. His speeches surprised even his friends. Standing at the end of the table, and turning to face Mr. Gladstone, or to indicate him by a gesture, Lord Hartington denounced his Irish policy in strong language and in an animated tone. His nature had been thoroughly aroused. An unsuspected passion in it was revealed. No Liberal doubted his sincerity or his patriotism. Nobody suggested that in so resolutely resisting Home Rule he was actuated by personal motives. It was on the Radical Unionist alone that personal imputa- tions were cast. The special grievance in Mr. Chamberlain's case was that, as the Liberals contended, he had prepared their minds for devolution. However much he might point out that the Home Rule he contemplated was not the Home Rule that Mr. Gladstone proposed, he was treated as a deserter. Lord Hartington on the other hand was regarded as a natural opponent. Mr. Balfour became Chief Secretary for Ireland in 1887, and in the stern administration of the Crimes Act, by which he won his way to leadership, he was steadily supported by the Liberal Unionists. Except Mr. Goschen, he had no colleague on his own side who gave him such able assistance in debate as he received from friendly statesmen sitting in the seats of the Opposition. Without their aid he would have had an unequal conflict with Mr. Gladstone, who waved the green flag and flung himself against coercion with an impetuosity and a courage unsurpassed by the youngest Nationalist. The year 1888 was notable for its passionate Irish controversies. In the debates on the charges brought by The Times against ParneUites and on the Special Commission appointed to inquire into the indict- ment, the passages between Mr. Parnell and Mr. Chamberlain were specially acrimonious. Enraged by a patronizing reference to their early co-operation the ' uncrowned King of Ireland ' accused his former friend of having betrayed Cabinet secrets when in ofiice, and of having put forward others to do what he was afraid to do himself. There was no necessity for Mr. Chamberlain to defend his personal courage. No one really suspected him of the lack of that quahty. He took the opportunity, however, to deny that he had had any direct communication with Mi. Parnell while a member of the Cabinet except, as he was reminded, when the Irish leader came to his house after the Phoenix Park murders. There were indirect communications, 148 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN but he stated that the substance of everything which passed with reference to the release of the prisoners from Kilmainham was made known to Mr. Qadstone and Mr. Forster, and that the Cabinet was informed also of the whole of the proposals with reference to the scheme of National Councils. This declaration was corroborated by Mr. Gladstone. ' My memory,' he said, ' is in accordance with what has been stated by my right honourable friend.' The cry of ' Judas ! ' raised in an earlier session was repeated on March 30, after Mr. Chamberlain had defended his honour against Mr. Parnell's allegations. On the stroke of midnight, when debate stood adjourned, Mr. T. P. O'Connor made a remark which was followed by the laughter of his friends. The Radical Unionist, turning from the front Opposition bench and facing the Nationalists, asked : ' What did he say ? ' 'He called you Judas Chamberlain,' promptly answered Mr. Biggar with an aggravating smile. The insult was so marked that it could not be ignored, and in deference to the Speaker, Mr. O'Connor, after a little altercation, withdrew the offensive epithet. It was used on a future occasion, which will be described at the proper place, when it contributed to the most disgraceful scene witnessed in Parhament for generations. Mr. Chamberlain was not unduly sensitive. He knew that the expression sprang from the embittered feelings of baffled men, and he measured their defeat by their anger. In a later year when a Liberal member took an independent and un- popular course he sarcastically expressed surprise that the regular party men did not call him also ' Judas.' Home Rulers were naturally elated in 1889 by the breakdown of the worst charge of The Times against Mr. Parnell — that of writing a letter apologising for his condemnation of the Phoenix Park murders and saying : ' Though I regret the accident of Lord F. Cavendish's death I cannot refuse to admit that Burke got no more than his deserts.' When Richard Pigott, after giving evidence before the Special Com- mission, confessed that he had forged the letter, fled from England and shot himself dead in Madrid, there was a reaction in the Irish leader's favour and a consequent change in the political situation. Coercion and forgery were unpopular props for any cause. Mr\Cham- 2)erlaip, however, kept the main Irish issue in view, and on the Govern- ment motion, in March, iSgoTto^adopt the report of the Commission he renewed his attack upon Nationalist methods. While Conservative Lord Randolph Churchill censured the Ministers for their partisan procedure they were defended by Radical Mr. Chamberlain. ' Con- spiracy,' Mr. Chamberlain said, ' was cloaked and concealed by what the Nationalists called the constitutional agitation. What guarantee have we that the same thing is not going on now ? What proof have we that if Home Rule is granted we shall not find behind it a Fenian TRANSFORMATION 149 organization using Home Rule as a first step to independence ? ' His point of view had altered since 1886, and Home Rule, instead of being admitted as a principle, was now dreaded as a bogey. He attributed the change to the revelations of the Commission. The evil that a forger could not do to the Irish cause was done by its champion himself. The tide of sympathy which set in after Pigott's confession instantly receded when a court of law found that Mr. Parnell had committed adultery with the wife of the Irish friend who had arranged his liberation from Kilmainham. Public opinion was shocked by his sin, and political considerations were forced to yield to the higher claims of morahty. The O'Shea divorce case led to the most exciting and dramatic controversy which has ever been conducted in a committee room at the House of Commons. When the Nationahst members, at the meeting of Parhament, in November, 1890, with reckless generosity re-elected Mr. Parnell as chairman for the session, their decision produced consternation and dismay among the Liberals, and Mr. Gladstone promptly arranged for the pubUcation of a letter stating that the continuance of the member for Cork at the head of the Irish party would render his own leadership almost a nullity. ' The voter now tells me,' he recorded in a memorandum, ' that he cannot give a vote for making the Mr. Parnell of to-day the ruler of Irish affairs under British sanction.'^ His letter induced the Nationalists to reconsider their decision. Conunittee room No. 15. a handsome chamber overlooking the Thames, became of special interest to Irish visitors as the scene of the debates in which Mr. PameU's fate was settled. Defiant and confident, he refused to resign, but at last after controversy had continued for several days the majority of his colleagues formally deposed him, and in his place elected Mr. Justin McCarthy, the mild-mannered novehst. Thereupon the dethroned ' King,' to whom a considerable minority adhered, cut himself off from the Liberal alliance, flouted Mr. Gladstone as ' that garrulous old gentleman,' and asserted that the Home Rule Bill, which he welcomed in 1886, was not regarded by the Nationalists as a final settlement, but was accepted only as an instalment for what it was worth. His revelation served the cause of the Unionists and set back the stone which Mr. Gladstone, with gigantic efforts, had been rolling up the hill. ' Home Rule,' Mr. Chamberlain boasted on the last day of 1890, ' is as dead as Queen Anne, and we have at last un- masked and revealed in its true colours the greatest fraud and im- posture that was ever sought to be palmed off upon the British nation.' So complete a change of colleagues and conduct as took place in the case of Mr. Chamberlain after the Liberal disruption had not been seen since the alliance of Fox with Lord North. His leader and * Life of Gladstone, by John Morley. 150 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN most intimate associate in high pohtical regions was ' Rip Van Win- kle ' ; he was a confidential ally of ' the armchair politician,' ' the superior person,' ' the skeleton at the feast ' ; he supported the coercion policy of a rising statesman who had denounced his Radical schemes as mischievous and who had declared that his attacks on the House of Lords consisted of bad history, bad logic and bad taste ; he kept in power a Prime Minister with an ' over-bearing attitude ' and ' an air of patrician arrogance,' belonging to the class ' who toil not neither do they spin ' ; he exchanged the comradeship of Sir William Harcourt, Mr. John Morley and Sir Charles Dilke for the flattering company of ' hungry office-seekers ' and ' care-takers ' — the men who in 1885 ' had done more to lessen the authority of the law in Ireland than all the Radicals had said and done during the previous five years,' the men who had hkened him to Jack Cade and the Artful Dodger, who had accused him of profligate promises and who had stormed him with ' torrents of abuse and whirlwinds of invective.' The author of ransom became the favourite of the wealthy. Old Radical friends described him basking in the smiles of duchesses, but the description had a grain of mahce ; Mr. Chamberlain never troubled liimself about the smiles of any set ; he took Ms own course. Un- doubtedly, however, the opinion in which he was held by different classes veered completely. While an Irish member commented upon his ' well-earned reputation for turning somersaults in politics,' the Whig Duke of Argyll, who lectured him a few years previously, informed the House of Lords that Mr. Chamberlain had ' grown in pohtical stature and wisdom.' He was denounced on the one hand by Liberals as an apostate and a renegade, a traitor and a deserter ; and on the other hand he himself said of the Tories and Whigs : ' I have found out that they are very good fellows, and they have found out that my measures are very safe measures.' An attitude of independent support or ' friendly opposition ' to a Government is generally, as Bagehot has pointed out, the most trying to political reputation and it was as alien to the character of Mr. Chamberlain's mind as to Brougham's. He also was a ' rushing man ' with an ' aggressive inteUigence.' Yet so deadly was his dislike of the party which he had quitted and so determined was he to be revenged on his former colleagues that he gave to the Conservative Administration as valuable assistance as any set of statesmen ever received from an ally. Time gradually confirmed the new coalition. The Liberal Union- ists entered into a compact with the Conservatives as to the seats which each section should contest against the common enemy, and Lord Hartington and Mr. Chamberlain developed their new organizations. A Liberal Unionist Association having been established in Birmingham TRANSFORMATION 151 in 1888, Mr. Chamberlain at the first combined meeting of the divisonal councils on May 28, made a characteristic allusion to the political transformation. ' I regret that this new departure should have been forced upon us, but it became probable three years ago when the great leader of the Liberal party at a few weeks' notice turned his back upon aU the old professions and principles that he had advocated during the greater part of his Ufe, and surrendered to a faction whose policy he had denounced in eloquent language.' This was the gist of his contention during the early years of the transformation. ' It is you,' he told the Gladstonians, ' who have changed and not I.' Those who take pleasure in speculation may inquire what would have happened if there had been no disruption of the Liberal party. For many years after that unfortunate occurrence Radicals felt the want of a leader hke Mr. Chamberlain, who could devise ingenious Parlia- mentary tactics and conduct great electioneering campaigns. If he had remained in the party he would admittedly have become chief. What would have been the history of the country under a Radical Government of which he was the head ? Would the land laws have been altered ? Would the power of the House of Lords have been limited ? Would the Chiu-ch have been disestablished ? Would war in the Transvaal have been avoided ? Would the fiscal policy of the country have been left unchallenged ? Would Home Rule of some sort have been granted to Ireland ? Would the House of Com- mons have been dazzled by duels between Mr. Balfour and Mr. Cham- berlain as brilliant as those fought by Gladstone and Disraeli ? However these questions may be answered, it is undoubted that the resignation of Mr. Chamberlain in the spring of 1886 produced effects further-reaching than were dreamt of at the time. Liberals who parted from him with reluctance and regret hardened their hearts as time went on, and many of them when irritated told him that they would not take him back even if he desired to return. The feelings of the men who had ' followed him, honoured him ' were well expressed by Mr. Morley at Ipswich, in September, 1888, in Browning's familiar lines — He alone breaks from the van and the freemen. He alone sinks to the rear and the slaves ! We shall march prospering, — not thro' his presence ; Songs may inspirit us, — not from his lyre ; Deeds will be done, — while he boasts his quiescence. Still bidding crouch whom the rest bade aspire. Those critics, however, who predicted that Mr. Chamberlain, adrift from Mr. Gladstone and the Liberal party and associated with his erstwhile opponents, would sink to a neghgible quantity in politics, were disappointed by the course of events. He became a stiU greater' 152 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN personality : he excited more attention and was even more discussed than before. In his new surroundings he was as restless, as energetic, as persuasive as in the earlier sphere. Sir William Harcourt declared that he had set himself an impossible task in trying to hunt with the dukes and to run with the people, but Mr. Chamberlain, always ^sanguine, confident and resourceful, boasted of a change in policy ' which has made it possible that I, who have been a Radical all my life, and who have not changed one of the opinions which I have ever expressed, should support heartily and cordially a Government, every member of which, with one exception, is a Conservative.' His new friends sometimes found it rather difficult to manage him. When Mr. Bright died in the spring of 1889 Lord Randolph Churchill desired very much to obtain the seat for Central Birmingham which he had formerly contested, and a deputation of the local Conservatives came to the House of Commons with an invitation. The Tory democrat took counsel with Sir Michael Hicks-Beach and, according to an account of the affair by his friend, Mr. Jennings, which his son has published. Lord Hartington informed them that ' Chamberlain was furious at the idea of R. C. going to Birmingham — that he was in a state of extreme irritability.' Lord Randolph was induced to waive his claims, although the Tories of the constituency were so angry at being deprived of a popular candidate that Mr. Balfour had to go and reason with them. Mr. Chamberlain was suspected of a jealous dread of a rival who might win the allegiance of some of his own people. Naturally he disap- proved of two kings of Brentford smelling at the same nosegay. Recrimination between the regular Liberals and Mr. Chamberlain was sharpened to its keenest edge in 1889 by his persistent support of Conservative ministers and measures. Mr. Morley put an extra strain on a much tried friendship by a personal gibe. Noting that the comparison with Jack Cade, formerly apphed to Mr. Chamberlain, had now been instituted by Lord SaUsbury in his own case, he sarcastically said : ' Who knows but that I may be made a Fishery Commissioner and may be even admitted to the society of gentlemen ! ' Mr. Cham- berlain was hurt by this reflection on his American mission and the aristocratic company which he was supposed to keep. He com- plained that Mr. Morley in ' a very bitter and personal speech ' had taken the opportunity to insult ' an old friend who had never personally attacked him, and to whom in times past he was not unwilling to admit considerable obligations.' Sir William Harcourt, never backward in such a controversy, dropped into poetry and acclaimed — When I think of what he is. And what he ought to was, I can't but think he's throwed hisself away Without sufficient cause. TRANSFORMATION 153 With still greater acerbity Mr. Chamberlain retorted by calling Sir William a chameleon and by asserting that his sword was always at the service of the strongest faction. It was only in his old age that some men ceased to call that most steadfast Liberal the Dugald Dalgetty of politics ! XXI RECANTATION * T TIS forward voice now is to speak well of his friend : his back- JLJ. ward voice is to — detract.' Thus it was in the case of Unionist Mr. Chamberlain and his old friend, the Radical. The influence of new ideas and new associates was shown in the manner of his defence of royal grants when provision was made in 1889 for the Prince of Wales's children. Not content with expressing his own opinion that the sum proposed was reasonable and moderate, he sneered with terrible bitterness at the Radicals who had told the House that ' the People with a capital P ' thought it exorbitant. Such members, he said, ' represent the class jealousies, the petty spite, and the enmities which they do their utmost to stimulate ; they represent the superficial, popular prejudices to which they truckle.' Angry voices were buzzing near Mr. Chamberlain, and glances of antipathy were shot at him, but defjang these manifestations and speaking in a tone of rancour he went on : ' Members teU us it is a shameful thing to fawn upon a monarch. So it is ; but it is a much more shameful thing to truckle to a multitude.' The erstwhile Repubhcan who had exalted the voice of the multitude now challenged the Radicals to confess that their object was to make the monarchy unpopular and to prepare the way for its destruction. ' Then,' he concluded, ' we shall see whether the People of whom we hear so much, who enjoy the fullest measure of political hberty under a constitution which is more democratic than exists in any Repubhc of Europe or the world — ^whether the People will be willing, when they understand everything, to enter upon a contest which must be prolonged, which must be exasperating, to throw the Constitution into the melting pot, to postpone indefinitely all hope of practical and material reform in order to accept the pro- gramme of those who caU themselves new Radicals — new because they have nothing in common with the old Radicals, who are destruc- tive in their aims and objects, who have never shown the shghtest constructive capacity, who are in short nothing more nor less than the Nihilists of Enghsh poHtics.' Few speeches have produced a more painful impression of in- consistency or have done more to alienate friends. Mr. Labouchere sneered at Mr. Chamberlain as a new recruit to the Gentlemen of 154 RECANTATION 155 England, and a merciless reply was given by Sir William Harcourt, who spoke with unusual severity. The right honourable gentleman (said Sir William) talks of the cant of the new Radicalism. I will borrow a well-known saying of Lord John Russell that there was something more sickening than the cant of new Radicalism and that was the recant of old Radicalism.^ He talked of the People with a great P. Well, he has betaken himself now to greater people than he formerly associated with. He has spoken with spite and condemnation of those who stir up ani- mosities and jealousies among classes. Yes, but this lecture comes to us from the great preacher on the text which speaks of those ' who toil not neither do they spin.' According to him, we are Nihilists on this bench. I wonder my right honourable friend chooses a seat in such a very inflammable and dangerous quarter of the House. I confess that I am almost alarmed for his personal safety. As he stood at the box lecturing us on loyalty to our leader I could not help thinking it was a dissentient leader reproving sin.* I do not think that any advantage is to be derived from terming honourable gentlemen who hold one opinion by the name of disloyal, any more than if we were to call those who hold a different opinion parasites and sycophants. An elaborate rebuke which Mr. Chamberlain administered to Lord Randolph Churchill for expounding a policy which was not Conserva- tive showed in the summer of 1889 how far he had wandered from his old standpoint. The offence of the Tory Democrat was aggra- vated by the fact that it was committed in the Midlands. At Walsall he advocated legislation on land and housing and temperance ; and in Birmingham itself he ridiculed Mr. Podsnap who was accustomed to dilate on the hopeless and hereditary wickedness of the Irish people. A few days later Mr. Chamberlain, dealing with the speeches of this ' most distinguished nobleman,' predicted that his programme would be absolutely repudiated by Lord Sahsbury and Mr. Balfour. I dare say (he continued) you have often seen at a bazaar or elsewhere a patchwork quilt brought out for sale, which is made up of scraps from old dresses and from left-off garments which the maker has been able to borrow for the pur- pose. I am told that in America they call a thing of this kind a ' crazy quilt.' I think that the fancy programme which Lord Randolph Churchill put before you the other day may well be described as a ' crazy quilt.' He borrowed from the cast-off policy of all the extreme men of all the different sections. He took his Sociahsm from Mr. Burns and Mr. Hyndman ; he took his Local Option from Sir Wilfrid Lawson ; he took his Egyptian policy from Mr. Illingworth ; he took his Metropolitan reform from Mr. Stuart ; and he took his Irish policy from Mr. John Morley. The new friends of the old Radical attracted the attention of ^ This was an adaptation of what was in Mr. Gladstone's opinion the best repartee ever given in Parliament. Sir Francis Burdett, an ex-Radical, attacking his former associates had said : ' The most offensive thing in the world is the cant of Patriotism.' Lord John Russell replied : ' I quite agree that the cant of Patriotism is a very offensive thing, but the recant of Patriotism is more offensive still.' * ' O Geordie, Jingling Geordie,' as King James says in The Fortunes of Nigel, ' it was grand to hear Baby Charles laying down the guilt of dissimulation and Steenie lecturing on the turpitude of incontinence.' 156 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Punch as early as June, 1888. In a cartoon ' Joey C and Mr. Bung are represented drinking together. The former, in a showy check suit, with a pipe in his hand, holds up his glass and says to Mr. Bung , ' I look towards you,' and the latter replies, ' Sir, I catches yer h'eye.' Bung recalls that he used to frown on vested interests but admits he has improved, whereupon ' Joey C denies that there's any change in him, although ' as touching yourself, I would do the thing handsome.' In another cartoon he is seen walking between Bung and the Bishop ; ^ and this is part of their conversation — Bishop — I am glad, Joe, to find you have altered your mind About Secular Schooling. Your late recantation — Brum — Further light, my dear Sir, dawns on all — save the blind. But recant ? — oh ! pray spare me that insinuation — A term that is too theological ! The idea of his friendship with ' Mr. Bung ' was suggested by his support of the clauses of the Local Government Bill sanctioning com- pensation for extinguished licenses. In May, 1888, licence-holders of the Birmingham district interviewed the members for the locality with regard to these proposals and Mr. Chamberlain laid down the principle that when any legitimate interest, which had been brought into existence with the sanction of the Legislature, was interfered with on public grounds it was the duty of the community to compensate those whose interest was disturbed. He was, he said, strongly of opinion that compensation ought to be given to the publicans. So thorough was he in his championship of the Government that when Mr. Caine, the Liberal Unionist Whip, in 1890 opposed the provision in Mr. Goschen's Budget for the buying up of licences he showed great displeasure and a breach was caused between the old friends which was followed by Mr. Caine's abandonment of the Unionist party. Recantation was offered by the old Radical on a variety of subjects before the Parliament elected in 1886 was dissolved in 1892. Although he said in an early stage of his friendship with the Conservatives that he had not changed any of his opinions, yet on Home Rule he frankly confessed in a letter, dated July 10, 1891, that ' all that has happened since 1885 has shaken my confidence in the particular solution of the Irish question which I was then prepared heartily to support.' This referred to the scheme of National Councils. With regard to the doctrine of Ransom, Mr. Chamberlain pleaded at the end of 1891, in Birmingham, where he had propounded it in 1885, that the ' word was not very well chosen to express my own * In the Fortnightly for October, 1874, Mr. Chamberlain had included the licensed victualler and the Established Church parson among the holders of special immunities and advantages who ' combine to resist the aggression which threatens any of their separate interests.' RECANTATION 157 meaning.' In the following March, on being challenged as to whether he receded from the doctrine, he wrote to say that the expression had been misrepresented and distorted by The Times when he was accused of advocating a policy of blackmail on the richer classes. To show that this charge was entirely mitrue, he mentioned a number of points, in his unauthorized programme which had been dealt with by the Conservative Government, and he added that ' he had never in any way withdrawn the opinions which he expressed in 1885, but he had in several speeches admitted that the word ransom (which was not his own, but which was really borrowed from a member of the Conserva- tive party) was open to misrepresentation, and was not the best for the purpose of expressing his meaning.' This was regarded as a diplomatic abandonment of the doctrine. Again, the Radical who had strongly denounced plural representa- tion in other days, adopted in 1891 a dilatory attitude when Mr. Stans- feld moved in favour of ' one man one vote ' and the reduction of the term of qualification. While declaring that he maintained his former opinions he placed himself in line with the Conservatives by saying : ' You have enough of reform for any reasonable purpose. You have a House which now is both willing and capable to deal with questions which I believe are first in the hearts of the people. ... I say dis- tinctly that as far as I am concerned I think the time has not yet come for a new Reform Bill, and that what we have to do is to make the best of the old one.' He was reminded that in 1885 he pressed eagerly for reforms such as now in 1891 he considered premature, and he was taunted with having become a convert to the idea, which he formerly ridiculed, that the highest aim of statesmanship was — To promise, pause, prepare, postpone. And end by letting things alone. To keep Mr. Gladstone out of office, however, was now his dominating impulse. Old friends sorrowed specially when he parted from them on the education question. This they regarded as a touchstone. It was on account of concessions to Churchmen that Mr. Chamberlain in the early seventies denounced Mr. Forster, threatened Mr. Gladstone and withheld support from Liberal candidates. In those days he was! for a universal scheme of unsectarian schools under local control.! He declared in 1868 that the motive of the clergy in establishing and maintaining schools had been ' not the education of the people as a thing which is good in itself but the maintenance of the doctrines of the Church of England.' In 1872 he insisted that ' the representatives of the ratepayer must have absolute control of all national funds applied to secular education ; all grants for this purpose made to 158 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN denominational bodies must be withdrawn ; religious teaching should be relegated to religious bodies, each at its own time and in its own buildings.' His doctrine was summed up that year in a paper read at a Suffolk Nonconformist Conference — Let the State keep to its proper work and fit its children to take their places as citizens of a great empire, and let it leave their religious training and all that concerns their education for the kingdom which is not of this world to the care of the Churches and the responsibility of the parents. At the General Election in 1874 he signed an appeal issued by the National Education League exhorting the electors to obtain pledges from candidates to resist any further concessions to denom- inational interests, and ' generally to promote the objects contem- plated by the advocates of an unsectarian system of national education, controlled by the elected representatives of the ratepayers.' On the same occasion, at Sheffield, he said as regarded the schools he was willing that Scripture should be read and religious instruction given, but not at the expense of the ratepayers. Again in January, 1877, he wrote — The efforts of all lovers of justice, and of all friends of education, must now be directed to the establishment of the principle that representation shall go hand in hand with taxation, and that no grant of national or local funds shall be made to any school, a majority of whose managing body does not consist of representatives elected by the district for the purpose. To the close of his connexion with the Liberal party, Mr. Chamber- lain maintained his early convictions. He said at Bradford in October, 1885 : * Whenever the time comes for the discussion of the question of sectarian schools I for one shall not hesitate to express my opinion that contributions of Government money, whether great or small, ought in all cases to be accompanied by some form of representative control. To my mind the spectacle of so-called national schools, turned into a private preserve by clerical managers, and used for exclusive purposes of politics or religion, is one which the law ought not to tolerate.' These declarations were recalled in 1888, when his name was cheered at a meeting of the National Society for Promoting the Educa^- tion of the Poor in the Principles of the Church of England. In opening a Board school at Birmingham he pointed out how greatly the denominational system had benefited by the Act of 1870, and he urged its friends to rest satisfied with the system as it stood, warning them that they would have to submit to local control if they accepted aid from the rates. At the same time, as the number of denomina- tional schools had enormously increased, he said he did not think the nation was prepared even for their ' painless extraction.' ' No practical statesman would,' in his opinion, ' dare to propose a RECANTATION 159 measure which would be followed by the immediate withdrawal or ex- tinction of this system and by the consequent enormous expense which that would involve.' This statement was regarded as deeply signifi- cant by grateful Churchmen. The Archbishop of Canterbury, at a meeting of the National Society, described it as a recognition of the place that voluntary schools must have in the education of the people. ' The words,' as he said, ' were the more weighty because the speaker of them was making a recantation of former opinions.' Punch promptly seized the new friendship for its cartoon, and in vain did Mr. Chamberlain object to * recantation.' When the subject of free schools was raised in 1890 it became necessary for him to get into line with the Conservatives. His plea now was that the denominational question ought not to be re-opened. Liberals who had sat at his feet and learned the doctrines quoted in these pages contended that if additional grants were given there should be popular control. ' Why ! ' exclaimed Mr. Chamberlain, ' this proposal is on the face of it ridiculous. The supporters of voluntary schools would not accept it ; therefore it means the ex- tinction of the voluntary system, and that is a practically intolerable proposition.' If volimtary schools were abolished we would have to provide for a capital expenditure of £28,000,000 to £40,000,000 and an annual charge of £1,680,000, in addition to the existing rates. ' As a practical man,' he was not prepared to face such an enormous burden. His new doctrine was cheered by his old adversaries. ' It is not the doctrine,' remarked Sir William Harcourt, ' that I learned from him in the days of the Birmingham League.' In 1891, when the fee-grant was proposed by the Conservatives^ Mr. Chamberlain definitely renounced an early belief. He had, he said, come to the conclusion that it was ' not desirable, practicable or politic ' to ask for public control over denominational schools. He urged the Churchmen to accept some sort of popular representa- tion, but when Sir Henry Fowler submitted an amendment requiring the introduction of local representation in denominational schools receiving the fee-grant, he opposed it on the plea that it would be impossible to force such a system upon them. Universal Board schools were ' only a counsel of perfection,' and he did not think the desire for popular control would induce people to put their hands deeply into their pockets. When another amendment was moved that no religious catechism or formulary distinctive of any particular de- nomination should be taught in any school obtaining the fee-grant, Mr. Chamberlain taunted its supporters with subordinating the interests of education to the interests of aggressive Nonconformity. In sorrow Mr. Mundella said he seemed to have turned his back on aH. his former convictions. Dr. Dale vouched from personal knowledge i6o JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN that the line he followed at this stage was absolutely consistent with the course he took in 1885, but the variations in his public utterances at different periods were obvious to everybody. On Irish land legislation his versatility was almost equally con- spicuous. A Liberal statesman remarked that he had spent months in discussing his numerous land purchase plans. They had all been ingenious and remarkable, and they had all been different. Mr. Chamberlain opposed Mr. Gladstone's Land Bill of 1886, on account of the obligations and risk it imposed on the British taxpayer. He displayed ingenuity in reconciling this opposition with the support which he gave to Mr. Balfour's proposals. According to the criticism of Sir WiUiam Harcourt he skated on thin ice, and formed the figure eight with agility and skill. He objected to some of the provisions of the Conservative bill of 1890, which was dropped, and his objections were removed by the bill passed in the following year. The founda- tion of the new scheme, he admitted, was the use of British credit, but he explained that his former pledges were not violated by his support of this measure, because Ireland was now retained as an integral part of the United Kingdom. What he had ' always ' objected to was the use or risk of British credit for a country to be placed in an independent position. It may be pointed out, however, that at the Round Table Conference, even while insisting that any system of Home Rule should preserve the unquestioned supremacy of the imperial Parliament, he contended that the land scheme should be based entirely upon Irish credit and Irish resources. An acrimonious temper continued through all these controversies to characterize the warring Liberal sections. Mr. Chamberlain charged the Gladstonians with being ' a party of disintegration,' and with deserting the principles of a lifetime at the bidding of ' an imperious leader.' When taunted on his own alHance with the Tories, he re- torted by scolding old friends for their alliance with a party which desired to separate Ireland from Great Britain. Scorn was heaped with unmeasured hand upon the Liberal Unionists, Mr. Gladstone describing them as ' that unhappy, unfortunate, ill-starred abortion of a party.' When Mr. Chamberlain referred with disapproval to the action of the Government of 1880-85 Mr. Morley severely censured the conduct of a man who sat at a council table with colleagues, and who after a few years had elapsed, to serve some paltry purpose of the moment, held them up to obloquy and contempt. Such conduct, in his opinion, was a case of hitting below the belt, for which they did not find a parallel in the worst times of our political history. The penitent insisted, however, on his right to acknowledge mistakes in action for which he was jointly responsible. ' He is free,' retorted his old friend, ' if he is so minded to figure in a white sheet ; he is not RECANTATION i6r free to plant his colleagues in the pillory and pelt them with missiles. ' /"'^ The Unionist alliance was strengthened in(''i89a Mr. Chamberlain appeared then in Birmingham on a common^^plafform with the Con- servatives. Addressing a joint Unionist meeting and referring to his co-operation with those who were formerly his opponents, he said : ' We have both of us to put a good number of our prejudices and our opinions in our pockets. In some respects in which they think I was going too far, I am content to wait ; in some respects in which I do not think they are going far enough they are content to go further.' A few days later a demonstration, promoted by the two local sections of the Unionist party, took place in the Town Hall, and was addressed by Mr. Matthews, the Home Secretary in the Conservative Government, as well as by Mr. Chamberlain. Thus the Radical Unionists followed in the step which the leader of the Whig Unionists took five years earlier. The local coalition was completed at a luncheon on November 25, when both branches of the predominant party in Birmingham entertained Lord Salisbury who declared that the Conservatives had received from their allies a measure of unstinted support which was new to Parliamentary history. Mr. Chamberlain, alluding to his former hope of reconciliation with the Liberals, took this notable occasion to say that now he neither looked for nor desired reunion. In this manner he threw down the last remnant of the bridge between himself and the party led by Mr. Gladstone,. In legislation the effect of the alliance was obvious. The author of the unauthorized Liberal programme boasted that the Conservative Government had carried out the whole of it ' in principle at all events.' Certainly, under intuition of ' a minister without a portfolio ' they made remarkable progress in reform. County Councils were estab- lished in England, Wales, and Scotland (1888-89) » ^'"^^ education, won by the ingenuity of the Scots in 1889, was extended to the re- mainder of the country in 1891, the Government yielding in this matter to pressure by the Liberals ; and facilities were granted for the obtaining of allotments and small holdings, although they were so limited and restricted that they proved of less value than their pro- moters expected. Mr. Chamberlain, grateful for what he could get, refrained from driving his friends on the Treasury bench too hard. For instance, when compulsory powers were proposed in connection with the Small Holdings Bill (1892) he opposed the amendment because the Government would not agree to it, and it would therefore be fatal to the measure. His consideration for Conservative feelings drew upon him an outburst of sarcasm from Mr. Gladstone, who appealed for ' a little of the ancient faith which he used to have.' II i62 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN I do not ask him to urge all his principles and all his opinions with the vehem- ence, and in the alarming terms by which in other days he excited such horror among honourable members opposite, by which he contrived to scare from the Liberal party many good though timid men who are now associated with him in the closest and most harmonious relations ; I will not ask him to revert to his famous dicta, by which he earned an immortaUty, not perhaps altogether accept- able to his present humour ; but I ask him in some degree to recall the senti- ments cherished by him in his youth, and in his middle age, to join with us — at least so far as reason will support our proposition — in something better than referring to the discretion and arbitrary will of the Government opposite, to say whether some improvement in our law shall take place or not. This passage, spoken in a mocking tone by the Grand Old Man as he stood beside his former Heutenant, was driven home by the cheers of the Liberals. V XXII NEW LEADERS AND NEW CRIES THE formal leadership of a Parliamentary party was at last obtained by Mr. Chamberlain in 1892. Lord Hartington, whose steadfast, disinterested support of the Conservative Govern-' ment contributed to its long life, had succeeded his father as Duke of Devonshire, and on February 8, at a meeting of the Liberal Unionist members, his RadiCcJ colleague was appointed their leader in the House of Commons. The duke described him as the most brilliant member of the advanced section of the Liberal party, and Sir Henry James, who might have been set up as a rival, spoke of him as the one man who could fill the vacant position. Mr. Chamberlain said he had always been an advanced Liberal and had in no sense changed his views. At the same time he made a significant remark with reference to disestablishment. He stated that he had been, and still was willing to subordinate his opinions on that subject to the interests of the Union, but subject to this reservation, he retained his freedom to put them forward when he thought right to do so. This was a reservation which betrayed imeasiness either on his own part or on the part of some of those with whom he was acting. Con- servative journalists, with obvious misgivings, urged him to be pru- dent, now that he was in a position of responsibility. ' The statesman,' one of his monitors wrote, ' who has to act as guide and moderator at St. Stephen's will be careful, no doubt, not to compromise his authority by an indiscreet or extravagant insistence on remote and contentious issues.' Mr. Chamberlain's leadership increased the antipathy between Liberals and Liberal Unionists. Lord Hartington had not incurred personal dislike. Although he struck hard, he provoked no ill-will. Radicals concentrated their anger on the politician from whom they had expected most, and whose motives they impugned. After his declaration in the hearing of Lord Salisbury at the end of 1891, that he neither looked for nor desired reunion with his former colleagues, renewed objection was taken to his presence near Mr. Gladstone on the front Opposition bench. He still insisted, however, on his right to a seat there. ' Where are the Whigs ? ' he scornfully asked, in his first authoritative speech — a speech in which he defended Lord 163 i64 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Salisbury, and challenged his opponents to declare their policy on Ireland and Egypt. Amid great cheering Mr. Morley retorted by asking — ' Where is the Radical ? ' Two other new chiefs appeared at the beginning of 1892. Mr. W. H. Smith, one of the least eloquent men who ever led the House of Commons,^ died during the recess, and his place was taken by Mr. Balfour ; Mr. Parnell's life had at the same time expired in gloom, and his group was henceforth directed by Mr. John Redmond, under whom all the Nationalists were subsequently joined. Mr. Chamber- lain's relations with Mr. Smith's successor became thoroughly cordial. There was little in common between them in tradition or temperament but they were united in a determination to resist ' Gladstonianism,' and especially to defeat Home Rule. With this object, as Mr. Cham- berlain said, both put a good number of their opinions in their pockets. Some of his own slipped out and disappeared. The old Liberal chief was meanwhile preparing for the final effort of his life, and as the struggle approached, his former lieutenant's attacks upon him swelled in vehemence. He showed no feeling of respect in strictures on ' the imperious leader.' While more than ever considering him a giant among pygmies, Mr. Chamberlain re- marked with regret that Mr. Gladstone had allowed his great name and reputation to cover the proceedings of persons who were alto- gether unworthy of him, and to cloak the designs and the methods of a faction whom, in the maturity of his judgment, he described as the enemies of his country. An impression of the reserve which had crept into their communications may be gathered from the following minute account, given by the present writer at the time of an incident which occurred in March, 1892, on the aged statesman's return from a sojourn in France : ^ — When Mr. Chamberlain arrived at the House, he found Mr. Gladstone in the corner usually occupied by himself. The member for Midlothian had moved there in order to hear the speeches of his Irish friends on the Belfast Bill. Mr. Chamberlain, seeing the position of affairs, did not advance beyond the bar. A quarter of an hour later he looked in from behind the Speaker's chair, and re- mained a few minutes, but his old chief was still in the corner, and he did not seek to disturb him. So he went away again. When he came back once more just as questions were commencing, his seat was occupied by Mr. Robert Spencer. He advanced to claim it, and on seeing him Mr. Spencer at once moved to another place. Mr. Chamberlain now found himself the neighbour of Mr. Gladstone. The position of the two gentlemen was observed by the whole House, and evi- ^ A man, says Mr. Massey in his history, who speaks seldom and who speaks ill is the best leader of the House of Commons. ' And, no doubt,' adds Mr. Bagehot, ' the slow-speeched English gentleman rather sympathizes with slow speech in others.' Mr. Smith was slow-speeched, but while he spoke seldom he spoke sensibly. • Aberdeen Free Press. NEW LEADERS AND NEW CRIES 165 dently much interest was felt as to what would happen. There was a consider- able space between them, so that no recognition was absolutely necessary. Mr. Chamberlain, however, moved up to Mr. Gladstone and shook hands with him. The member for Midlothian was as courteous as usual, but seemed cold in manner. He conversed for a few moments with his former lieutenant, holding his hand behind his ear, and looking grave and stern. Then he turned round, as if to listen to what was being said in the House, and Mr. Chamberlain promptly with- drew to his own place. During the General Election in summer the Unionist champion caused deep offence by his harsh allusions to Mr. Gladstone. At Birmingham he remarked : ' In the last few years we have seen a section of the Liberal party — alas ! that I should stand here and be obliged to confess it — we have seen them exhibiting a blind sub- servience to a leader who in his old age has forgotten the principles which he expounded so eloquently in his splendid maturity.' A fortnight later he spoke in a similar strain. ' It is sad to think/ said Mr. Chamberlain, ' that now in his old age the dignified statesman should give place to the furious mob orator. He appears to be losing his head and losing his temper.' Taunts such as these embittered a quarrel which was sufficiently lamentable without any aggravation. Dr. Dale felt constrained to write that the split in the party had made an immense difference in his private life. It sundered friendships even in Birmingham. The electioneering argument presented incisively by Mr. Chamber- lain might be summed up in his words : ' From Unionists you wiill get a policy of reform ; from the Home Rulers you can get Home 1/ Rule and nothing else.' Even in the case of Ireland, he boasted of I the record of the Conservative Government : peace and tranquillity restored, the benefits of Mr. Gladstone's Land Act conferred upon leaseholders, three Land Purchase Acts carried, and a system of relief for congested districts introduced. We have seen that several points in his own programme had been adopted. As for the future, he con- tended that the Unionists alone could carry the measures desired by the Liberals. He told the Welsh that by the introduction of Home Rule the question of religious equality was indefinitely postponed. A letter from him read at a meeting at Ruabon on December 29, 1 891, caused a great deal of comment and among his Conservative allies not a little consternation. ' I am convinced,' he wrote, 'that the only chance for the speedy satisfaction of the legitimate claims of . Welsh Nonconformity is to be found in the defeat of Home Rule. Every Welsh Dissenter who votes for a Gladstonian at the next' election votes, first, for the indefinite postponement of Welsh dis- establishment and land reform.' This attempt to catch votes with the bait of disestablishment was ridiculed by Liberals, who predicted that Mr. Chamberlain would secure only a very small basket, while i66 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Conservatives disliked its use by one with whom they might be associated in Government. Another bait was offered in the form of old age pensions. Mr. Chamberlain, as the reader will see, denied in after years that he had ever given a definite promise of pensions, but at this crisis he dangled them before the voters. At several meetings in 1891 he proposed them in lieu of Home Rule, and during the Election in 1892 he brought the proposal ' into the front rank of political questions.' There is no doubt that the prospect of provision for old age excited the expectations of many poor people. It is equally certain that Mr. Chamberlain's sanguine temperament led him to believe that a pension scheme was within the range of practical politics. If he deceived others, he deceived also himself. Enormous energy was displayed by Mr. Chamberlain during Mr. Gladstone's final appeal for power. He delivered more speeches in July, 1892, than in any other month in his life. His vigour and enthusi- asm aroused the Midlands, and stimulated Unionists everywhere*! in the country. To keep his old chief out — or at any rate to prevent him from having a working majority — was the object to which he devoted all his e'ectioneering resources. His quarrel with the Gladstonians was not now limited to the Irish question, but extended to the whole scope and range of politics, and it was intensified by personal feeling to a much greater extent than the ordinary struggles between the two great parties in the State. The real leader on the Government side was not any Conservative holder of office but the Liberal statesman who had been ' a Minister without a portfolio.' While he spoke professedly as a Radical, he fought whole-heartedly for aU the Con- servative causes, and it was against him chiefly that the chafnpions on the other side pressed. He was a conspicuous target in the field, and all aimed at him their hardest blows. The battle went slightly in favour of the Home Rulers, taking the United Kingdom as a whole, but Mr. Chamberlain came out of it with honour. Speaking of the four counties of which Birmingham is the metropolis, he was able to boast that the Unionists had almost swept their enemies from the ground. He found additional consolation in the fact that they had obtained a majority in Great Britain itself. Mr. Gladstone was disappointed. His electioneerers had been, as in 1886, too confident, although not so far astray as then. He had expected to outnumber his opponents by eighty or a hundred, and instead of that the combined Liberals and Nationalists were in a majority of only forty. A remarkable scene was witnessed in the new Parliament, when Mr. Chamberlain rising again from the front Opposition bench, took part in the debate which preceded the change of Government. Mr. NEW LEADERS AND NEW CRIES 167 Asquith from a back seat had in his cool, trenchant style, and with his finished rhetoric, moved an amendment of no confidence in the Con- servative advisers of Her Majesty. His motion was submitted on August 8, and three days later the House was crowded to a degree reached only on the very rarest occasions. The benches were supple- mented by chairs, which were placed near the bar. Mr. Chamberlain, greeted by the newly-chosen Unionists with an enthusiasm which expressed their pride and gratitude, delivered a brilliant speech expos- ing the different policies of the different sections of the Home Rule majority, and cross-examining the leaders as to their views on great topics. He expressed the fear that a Liberal Government would decide on an immediate, or at all events an early evacuation of Egypt. Ten years previously he had ridiculed the idea of annexation or of a Protectorate, or even of an indefinite supervision of the country on the Nile. ' We think,' he then said, ' our possessions are sufficiently ample, our duties and responsibilities too onerous and complicated.' But in the interval he had cast off his ' parochial-mindedness ' and now his tone was imperial. ' I do not believe that democracies are anything but keenly sensitive to the honour and interests of the nation to which they belong, and I do not beheve that the British democracy will favour a policy of scuttle.' This was one of his parting declara-- tions as he quitted the company of Mr. Gladstone and the Liberal lieutenants, never again to sit with them on the same bench. When he returned to the front Opposition bench he was in the company of Conservatives. That, however, was many years later. An interesting French view of Mr. Chamberlain at this period was given by Monsieur Filon.^ It is sympathetic, and not without dis- crimination. ' He is,' writes the French observer, ' the man of the present hour ; he marks the second age of democracy, that in which, after having destroyed, it has the mission and the duty to rebuild. . . . Mr. Chamberlain is more powerful than ever. ... He triumphs in the midst of the defeat of his party. In his first speech in this Par- liament he has displayed all his oratorical mastery, that smiling force, that mixture of energy and finesse which characterizes him, with that intelligence of the time, that touch of modernity which makes of him the first interpreter and the sole possible regulator of the needs and the passions of the democracy.' Before following the fighter to his fierce, final struggle with his old chief, the reader may turn for a moment to Highbury, and obtain a glimpse of a dinner party at his home. The picture is given by observ- ant and friendly Dr. Crosskey, who in failing health, writes at the close of 1892 : ' Last week I confess to a rather adventurous expedi- tion in the shape of a dinner at Chamberlain's, where luxuries were ' Profits anglais, by A. Filon. i68 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN not exactly the product of invalid cookery. But it was to meet a bishop, and therefore, of course, a temptation to such a hybrid ecclesi- astic as I am. But the occasion was a remarkable instance of the thorough way Chamberlain does things. You know the Bishop of Chester has been propounding a scheme about the Drink traffic, in which Chamberlain is greatly interested, and he therefore invites him to dinner, and asks to meet him one of the chief Brewers of Birmingham, one of the strongest of Teetotallers, another Bishop (Coventry), and some leading clergy. Dale and myself as Nonconformists, and some few others, Tories and Gladstonians. After dinner he (as it were) took the chair, and opened a discussion on the subject, in which teetotallers, publicans and sinners, and dignitaries of the church, and dissenters took part in a perfectly frank and good-tempered way, while Chamber- lain kept on the watch for something that might be practicable in the strife of parties.' ^ The open-minded impartiality of Highbury was in vivid contrast to the emphasis and pugnacity of Parliament and the public platform. ^ Henry William Crosskey : His Life and Work, by R. A. Armstrong. XXIII LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE ' A LOST soul ' was the hideous aspect in which an Irish member l\, and journalist with the eyes of resentment saw Mr. Chamber- lain at the opening of his final struggle with Mr. Gladstone. The phrase, like the repeated cry of ' Judas ! ' revealed the passion of the time. It recalled what Macaulay wrote in a letter describing the carrying of the Reform Bill in 1831 : ' And the jaw ef Peel fell ; and the face of Twiss was as the face of a damned soul ; and Herries looked like Judas taking his necktie off for the last operation.' The hate of the Home Rulers was concentrated on Mr. Chamberlain. He was their arch-enemy — the man who, as they said, betrayed Mr. Gladstone, and who was now most greatly to be feared. He crossed the floor of the House with the Liberals when his old chief took office for the last time, forty-eight Unionists sitting below the Ministerial gangway, and their leader occupying the comer at the head of the third bench. From this post, with constant vigilance and unwavering tenacity, he waged war on the new Government, while the Nationalists looked across at him with hate. His terrible feeling against his former friends was commented upon even by his principal colleague. In a letter to Mr. Goschen, who had decided to join the Conservative party, the Duke of Devonshire wrote on January 10, 1893 : ' To tell the absolute truth, in confidence, I think that Chamberlain, though his tone was perfectly friendly towards you, will be more at ease when he knows of your decision. Both Chamberlain and H. James are in high spirits and are full of fight. The animosity of the former against the Government is something quite remarkable.'^ The presence of Unionists in the midst of the Gladstonians when Home Rule was the supreme issue, was considered no less disagreeable than had been the company of their leaders on the front Opposition bench in the previous Parliament. If parties had been arranged according to their political inclinations, the NationaHsts would have gone with the Liberals to the Government side, and Mr. Chamberlain's followers would have sat with the Conservatives on the Opposition benches, but this plan could not be carried out, as the Irish Home * Life of Lord Goschen, by the Hon. Arthur D. Elliot. 169 170 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Rulers always maintain the same position in the House. Whichever party is in power they remain in an attitude of formal aloofness and independence. It was decided that two benches on the Ministerial side should be reserved for the Liberal Unionists, but unpleasantness was not prevented by this allocation of seats. Gladstonians resented the presence of enemies in their camp and Mr. Chamberlain was described as stabbing their leader in the back. Never did he in Par- liament confront Mr, Gladstone face to face. They were always bodily on the same side. Their prolonged duel over the Home Rule Bill of 1893 was the most desperate and brilliant in modem Parliamentary warfare. No mercy was shown by either. The memory of other days, when as leader and lieutenant they stood shoulder to shoulder, served only to intensify their passion. Sometimes victory leaned to one side, sometimes to the other. The Liberal chief with expiring energy put forth his splen- did matchless powers. In the colleague whom he had raised to the Cabinet he met an antagonist who excited him to the highest efforts, and spectators were thrilled by the flashing features, the grand gestures, the swelling tones of the veteran as he turned on nimble- witted Mr. Chamberlain, and met taunts with raillery and con- suming scorn. Sometimes he sat huddled on the Treasury bench, looking as if exhausted by the cares of State, with face puckered, and hand coiled behind ear. Then suddenly he would spring to his feet, his figure would expand, his deep voice would clutch the House, and he would show no less physical vigour than intellectual force. With amazement, and even with awe — We watch' d the fount of fiery life Which served for that titanic strife. In his leadership Mr. Gladstone received all the assistance which party loyalty and personal affection could prompt from his deputy. Sir William Harcourt, who relieved him in the late hours whenever he could be induced to stay away. The arrangement was described by a witty lawyer who rose to the bench as that of ' the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night.' Mr. Asquith, who had entered the Cabinet as Home Secretary, gave brilliant aid, and Mr. Morley, although not so prominant as in 1886, was a stiff fighter for the Home Rule Bill. Mr. Gladstone inspired all his col- leagues with zeal. They thought it an honour to serve so famous a chief. On himself, however, fell the principal duty and labour in defence of Home Rule. It was to carry out his Irish policy that he spent his old age in the political arena ; this was his final fight in a scene where he had stood foremost, and he would not have been mortal if he were not touched in some degree by personal rivalry. In Glad- stone, as in Savonarola, there was ' the blending of ambition with the LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE 171 highest motives.' Conviction and ambition incited him now to an effort worthy of his fame. On the front Opposition bench sat several skilful debaters — Mr. Balfour, Mr. Goschen, and Sir Michael Hicks-Beach. Along with them was Lord Randolph Churchill. No place had been found for him in Lord Salisbury's Government after he quitted it at the end of 1886, but now that the Conservatives were in Opposition he was ^^- welcomed back among^fhe leaders. Great expectations were enter- tained when he rose once more at the table to take part in debate. The Prince of Wales came to hear him, and the chamber was crammed to every comer. Few persons, however, who were present at the opening of the speech in which the once audacious fighter, now ill and nervous, craved the indulgence of the House, would desire to see again such a pathetic picture. The trembling voice, the twitching face, the restless hands, gave pain to men who recalled the bold, dash- ing, reckless leader of the Fourth Party. There were a few flashes in this and subsequent speeches, but they were merely the flickers of an expiring career, and the combatant, who crossed swords with Mr. Chamberlain in other days, and whose ally he had become, was doomed to eat his heart out in failing health, while the other led 1/ the resistance to what he described as ' the great betrayal.' ^ p.* Mr. Chamberlain was always in the thickest of the fight. His — '^ l^'t^ speeches were as pungent and vivacious as those he delivered against the Tories in 1885. Night after night he dashed into conflict, attacking with inexhaustible devices the provisions of the bill, denouncing the Liberal leaders and exposing the tactics of the Nationalists. He received stinging provocation in the gibes and jeers of Home Rulers, and his retort was always ready and always merciless. His favourite hour was ten o'clock, an hour at which the House was usually respon- sive. In evening dress, with eye-glass adjusted, the picture of keen- ness and ruthlessness, the master of every art of controversy, he would rise at his comer and by a phrase or a tone arrest the attention and stimulate the ardour of the antagonists. His aggressive face was in itself an incitement. In his absence, the fight might be aimless and languid, but as soon as he re-entered it the animation of all parties was revived. In words which Mr. Morley applied to Robert Lowe's opposition to the Reform Bill his resistance might be described as ' glittering, energetic, direct and swift.' Even names continued to be matter of reproach and recrimination. Followers of Mr. Gladstone still gave to Mr. Chamberlain and his friends the title of dissentient Liberals, but against this their old col- leagues always protested warmly, claiming, indeed, to be as good and proper Liberals as Mr. Gladstone. ' We do not call you separatists,' said Mr. Chamberlain to the supporters of the Government, although 172 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN he had previously done so on the platform, ' and I ask you to call us by the name we have chosen.' The independent name of Liberal Unionists was conceded reluctantly. At the same time the main party, although proud of their leader, objected to being called Gladstonians. They insisted on the simple description, ' Liberals.' "^ The introduction of the Home Rule Bill by Mr. Gladstone on Feb- ruary 13, 1893, caused enormous excitement. Members waited for hours before the doors were opened ; when admission was obtained they rushed forward, elbowing and jostling each other ; they strode over benches in their haste to secure seats, and they seized whatever vacant place they could reach, perspiring and panting. Chairs were introduced in front of the bar and also at the upper end of the House. Peers overcrowded their own gallery in a moment, and Lord Rosebery and Lord Spencer found better accommodation among the strangers. The Prince of Wales with his son the Duke of York at his side, sat over the clock, and his future daughter-in-law, then Princess May, was among the ladies behind the grille. When Mr. Gladstone entered, the Nationahsts, followed by the Liberals, sprang to their feet and cheered the old man. It was in these circumstances that the scheme which led to so momentous a struggle was submitted, and the excitement lasted for months. A summary of the debates is not attempted here. Only enough will be reproduced to illustrate the incidents in which Mr. Chamberlain figured. Even in 1893 he was not against Home Rule in the abstract, but he contended that Mr. Gladstone's bill was not consistent with the unity of the Empire, the supremacy of Parhament, or the protection of minorities. It would, in his opinion, lead to separation, and Ireland could not become independent without being a source of danger to the very existence of the empire. ' Her political condition is controlled by her geographical situation, and her interests cannot be allowed to outweigh the interests of the larger country.' In view of Mr.Parnell's revelation of the secret aspirations of Nationahsts, Mr. Chamberlain argued that the restrictions in the bill would prevent the proposed settlement from being final. ' You are sowing the seeds of future discontent. You are sowing the seeds of further demands. The time at which the discontent will manifest itself — the time when those demands will be made, will be the time of England's emergency.' This point he emphasized on the second reading. ' We are asked to stake the dignity, the influence, the honour and the wealth of the nation upon this cast. We are asked to do it because we are told we ought to have faith and trust in honourable members opposite (the Nationalists) ; we are to do it on the assurance that my right honourable friend gives us that a miracle will be wrought in our favour to change the hearts u . LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE 173 of men, and alter the springs of human action. Sir, I say the possible danger is too great, and the possible gain is too small.' In denouncing the bill as a concession to disorder, Mr. Chamberlain made effective use of indiscreet utterances by Nationalist members in Ireland and America. He had a wonderful supply of extracts, and when challenged by the orators as to his version of their views, he would promptly take a corroborative clipping from his pocket. Mr. cs^Ai'^'^'jy* Asquith s cornfu lly described him as ' scavenging in the dust-heap of ' ^^^^ /r* the speeches of Irish members, and gleefully piecing together angry ^J*^ phrases dropped on Irish platforms in moments of e.xasperation and despair.' ' Dust-heaps ! ' ironically exclaimed Mr. Chamberlain, as if the phrase were well appUed. His own speeches were freely quoted by the other side, and so complete was the contrast between his new tone and his old, that Mr. Birrell read his early utterances ' with the kind of melancholy with which one reads the letters of somebody who is dead.' Mr, Morley jeered at him as the greatest reformed character in the House. ' I suppose,' remarked his old friend, ' that many excuses may be made for him : it may be said that in his former speeches he was only sowing his political wild oats, and that he is a most interesting and repentant prodigal. But surely the milk of himian kindness runs so richly in his veins that it should make him a little more charitable to his brother penitents who, like him, have altered their opinions, and who have bidden good-bye to prairie value as he has bidden good-bye to ransom and to natural rights.' A charge of inconsistency did not disturb the Unionist leader. His defence was always ready. When confronted, for instance, with his earlier proposal for an Irish Board of Control, he explained that the exposure of the Nationalists and their methods by the Parnell Commission had changed Iiis opinion as to the pos- sibiUty of entrusting even these limited powers to the present represen- tatives of the majority in Ireland. On one occasion, however, he turned on those who served up extracts in his own fashion. Loosely quoting if?omo/a, he cried disdainfully to Sir William Harcourt : ' Don't you be bringing up my words after swallowing them, and pretend that they are none the worse for the operation.'^ A kindly sentiment, evoked by the maiden speech of Mr. Chamber- lain's son, Austen, softened the hearts of some of the combatants for a brief hour. Austen had been returned for East Worcestershire, and was introduced by his father and his uncle, Mr. Richard Chamberlain. The three were of similar size and figure, and when the young man spoke in the Home Rule debate, his resemblance to the Unionist leader * Niccolo : ' Don't you be bringing up my speeches again after you've swal- lowed them, and handing them about as if they were none the worse.' 174 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN was wonderful. Even the gestures were alike, and there was the same manner of handling an eye-glass. Only the orchid was lacking. Mr. Austen Chamberlain, speaking with clearness and self-possession, alluded to Mr. Gladstone in a tone of irony, but the Grand Old Man who turned to watch him and listened with interest, gave a friendly cheer when he sat down. Afterwards Mr. Asquith went from the Treasury bench to whisper a word of congratulation to the father (who had praised his own maiden speech six years earlier) and a large number of colleagues congratulated the debutant. The most touching incident occurred at a later stage of the debate, when Mr. Gladstone, in his finest manner, alluded to ' a speech that must have been dear and refreshing to a father's heart.' Mr. Chamberlain's pale face quivered as he heard the generous words. The political quarrel was continued, however, with increasing acrimony. ' My right honourable friend and I nowadays seem very sharply divided,' said Mr. Gladstone on one occasion, with a pathetic ring of the voice. Early in the Committee stage the friend who had become his most determined opponent provoked a scene by declaring that the Irish members had been squared. ' How much would it take to square you ? ' asked a Radical. The retort followed hke a flash : ' It would take a great deal more than the honourable member would ever be able to pay.' On another occasion, complaining that the majority had not put down a single amendment to the bill, Mr. Chamberlain sneeringly said : ' They have come here prepared to swallow anything the Government puts before them as a sort of jubilee testi- monial to the Prime Minister.' Mr. Gladstone, in retort, with finger pointed back at him, accused him of infinite reiteration, and declared : ' We do not mean to play his game.' Again, when Mr. Chamberlain, according to his habit, quoted former statements by Irish members, Mr. Gladstone invited him to begin the work of retraction. ' If we are to stand in a white sheet my right honourable friend will wear the ornamental garment of the largest size.' Frequently, indeed, he was answered with reminders of his own past. ' In inconsistencies, in contradictions, in waverings, in violent speeches, made in both ex- tremes, no man in the House,' said Mr. Gladstone, ' can for a moment compete with the member for Birmingham, and it would be an inter- minable task to bring into juxtaposition his innumerable contrarieties against himself.' Dramatic debates followed each other with exciting rapidity, and usually it was Mr. Chamberlain who struck the note of passion. Stand- ing near Liberals whose present dislike was as great as their former affection, he hnked their great leader with the Nationalists in stern denunciation. For instance, when Mr. Gladstone introduced the LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE 175 ' guillotine,' an arbitrary closing of discussion at prescribed periods, Mr. Chamberlain jeered at him as a good man struggling with adver- sity. ' There,' he said, pointing to the Irish benches, ' sit the men who pull the strings of the Prime Minister of England. Under the threats of his Irish masters, under pressure from his least -experienced supporters (indicating the Radicals), he comes down here to move a resolution which is in contradiction to all the principles which he has declared in the whole course of his Parliamentary life.' Later the same day, replying to Sir William Harcourt, he complained of an attempt to erect the name and the age of the Prime Minister into a fetish ' Judas ! ' cried a Nationalist, as if the exclamation were a sufficient reply. ' As watchful as a stag,' Mr. Chamberlain missed no opportunity of prejudicing the cause of the Home Rulers. His merciless methods were seen in an encounter between himself and Mr. John Dillon. He had quoted a speech in which the member for Mayo boasted that when the Irish had a Parliament in Dubhn they would have the police and the constitution under their control and would ' remember those who had been the enemies of the people.' This was seized upon as evidence that the Irish Unionists would be in danger. On hearing the extract quoted, Mr. Dillon desired an opportunity to refresh his recollection of the speech. Subsequently, on being again challenged to disown it, he stated that it was delivered a short time after ' the massacre of Mitchels- town.' This was an affair in which the poUce fired on a crowd, and one man was shot dead and two others were mortally wounded. It caused a painful impression in England, and Mr. Gladstone's ' Remem- ber Mitchelstown ' became a political watchword. Mr. Dillon now gave a pathetic account of the incident, and said the recollection of it was hot in his mind when he used the language to which objection was taken. His plea of provocation, uttered with emotion, moved many members. Mr. Chamberlain, however, listened with an ominous gleam in his eyes. A friend whispered to him on hearing the reference to Mitchelstown, and went out to verify dates. He allowed the eloquent Irishman to proceed with his moving tale, but when it was finished he sprang to his feet, his face now aglow with excitement. He noted the plea that at the time of the threatening speech Mr. Dillon was thrilling with the horrors of the massacre. Here the Liberals cheered. ' Do you know,' he retorted, ' that the massacre of Mitchelstown took place on September 9, 1887, and that the honourable member's speech was delivered nine months previously, on December 5, 1886 ? ' A roar of cheering then came from the Unionists, who exulted without restraint over the discomfiture of the Nationalist. ' He has been unmasked before,' said Mr. Balfour, ' but never so skilfully, never so completely as to-night.' For the error thus exposed Mr.Dillon apologized next day. 176 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Inconsistency was charged against the leader of the Liberal Union- ists in reference to the retention of Irish members. If a Parhament were set up in Ireland, should there still be representatives of that country at Westminster ? Mr. Chamberlain's attitude on this point altered more than once, but he contended that the changes were conse- quent on the varying conditions of the problem. At Sheffield, in 1874, one of the recommendations of Home Rule to his mind was that ' the legislature would move at an accelerated pace without the Irish mem- bers.' In the 1886 bill Mr. Gladstone proposed their total exclusion, but Mr. Chamberlain contended that their inclusion was absolutely necessary. The ' key to the position,' as he then said, was to maintain the representation of Ireland in the imperial Parliament. If this con- cession were made, he hoped that the imminent danger of a fatal breach in the ranks of the Liberal party might be averted. Now, in the 1893 bill, it was proposed that Irish members should be retained at West- minster for imperial affairs, but not for affairs exclusively British. Mr. Chamberlain had said in 1886 that he did not believe there would be really the least difficulty in allowing the Irish members to come to Westminster and there to vote only on questions which were not re- ferred to them at Dublin.^ Now the ' in-and-out ' arrangement excited his ridicule. The Irish delegates, as he remarked, would be neither fish, flesh, fowl, nor good red herring. They would be kept dangling about the lobby — here to-day and gone to-morrow, never knowing when they might be called in to play their part. It was urged by the Opposi- tion, with irresistible force as The Times recorded, that the presence in the imperial Parhament of a body of eighty Irish representatives, not entitled to vote on questions affecting Great Britain only, would make the existence of a stable majority impossible, would turn the House of Commons into an assembly changing its character and com- position from day to day and from hour to hour, would destroy the continuity of our Parhament ary history, and deprive the system of Cabinet Government of its very foundation. Yielding to criticism, the Ministers, who did not feel complete faith in their own plan, consented to retain Irish members for all purposes. This was the concession which Mr. Chamberlain demanded in 1886, Now he rejected it. -^e discovered that if the Irish representatives were retained the interests of Great Britain would be controlled by y delegates, ' nominated by priests, elected by illiterates, and subsidised by the enemies of this country. ^ Home Rulers were furious at his change of front and Sir WiUiam Harcourt accused him of personal hostihty to the Prime Minister. ' Whatever the proposals of Mr. Glad- stone may be, they secure the bitter — I might almost say the venomous — opposition of the right honourable gentleman.' The argument of the ^ Life of Henry Labouchere, Algar Thorold. LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE 177 Unionists was that in demanding the retention of the Irish members in 1886 they contemplated a subordinate legislature in Dublin, whereas the Parliament now proposed would be practically independent, but Sir William Harcourt retorted by pointing out that in 1886 Mr. Cham- berlain held that the authority of the imperial Parliament could be maintained only by keeping the Irish at Westminster. Thus the controversy went on in a circle. The Devil's Advocate was a character in which Mr. Gladstone presented his chief antagonist. The finance provisions being under consideration, Mr. Chamberlain deUvered a long speech, in which he subjected them to a searching examination, and made many piquant personal allusions to the Ministers. Mr. Gladstone, blazing with anger, said he had examined the subject in the spirit of exaggeration and hostility of the Devil's Advocate. ' My right honourable friend,' continued the Prime Minister, as he turned and faced Mr. Chamberlain, ' has a practice which is one of the most unsatisfactory and one of the most mischievous that can be introduced into public life. He con^ stantly and deliberately, and with the utmost confidence and infalli- bility, ascribes to men who have a right to stand on a level with him, and who were at one time his colleagues and were supposed to be his friends, motives for their acts the direct contrary of that which they state themselves, and motives which he knows they indignantly dis- claim.' This rebuke, spoken in tones of mingled sorrow and anger, evoked passionate cheering. Mr. Chamberlain did not quail under it, nor did he take offence at the role which was imputed to him. On the contrary, he adopted the character. ' I would remind my right honourable friend,' he cooly retorted on the following day ' that the function of the Devil's Advocate is one which has often been most use- fully fulfilled. There have been numbers of cases in connection with the ecclesiastical organization of which he forms a part, in which it has been his privilege to expose many doubtful virtues, and to destroy on more than one occasion the angelic theory. Sir, I modestly hope I may enjoy a similar privilege.' A Punch cartoon depicted the protracted duel between the leading foemen, the G. O. M. (as the Grand Old Man was called) fighting on horseback with sword and ' Joe ' on foot, with bayonet ; and in accom- panying hnes we read : — There is not a swordsman like Will, . Has not been since old days of Dizzy ; The foe who would baffle his skill, Will have to look sharp, and be busy. But Joe with his bayonet-prods Is a most unmistakable ' snorter ' ; lie's willing to fight against odds, And he neither gives in, nor gives quarter. 12 178 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN At last the passions of the two sides burst forth with uncontrollable fury on the night of July 27, when the House of Commons was dis- graced by a melee in Which members struck each other with their fists. This was the forty-sixth and last sitting in Committee : the guillotine was to fall finally on debate at ten o'clock. Members were excited when, a few minutes before that hour, Mr. Chamberlain rose from his corner. His face was unusually pale, and his voice emotional as he spoke of the ' discreditable' farce ' to which the mother of Parlia- ments had been reduced by the action of a man whom they were all ready to recognize as. one of the greatest of Parliamentary figures. With taunts he inflamed the passion of parties and with increasing vehemence he proceeded : ' I say that this bill has been changed in its most vital features, and yet it has always been found perfect by mem- bers behind the Treasury Bench. The Prime Minister calls " black," and they say "it is good; "the Prime Minister calls " white," andtheysay " it is better." ' ' It is always,' he declared, as the clock pointed to ten, ' the voice of a god. Never since the time of Herod has there been such slavish adulation.' By the time the last words were uttered the uproar was furious, and amid the clamour Mr. T. P. O'Connor's voice was heard exclaiming ' Judas ! Judas ! Judas ! ' A division being challenged under the guillotine many members proceeded to the lobby. Others remained to shout, and several pointing at Mr. O'Connor, cried ' name ' and ' shame.' Mr. Chamberlain desired that no notice should be taken of the offensive expression to which he had become used, but his friends insisted even amid the turmoil on calhng attention to it, and demanded that the word should be taken down. A private member added a farcical element to the scene by occupying the Speaker's chair. Be- neath him at the table was the Chairman of Committee, nervous and hesitating. Mr. Logan, a Radical, crossed the floor to make a remark to a Conservative, and being told to move on he defiantly sat down on the front Opposition bench beside its regular occupants. Thereupon, two or three members on the second bench — Mr. Hayes Fisher, first of aU — ^placed their hands at his neck and shoulders and pushed him off. This was the signal for the melee. Immediately a number of Nationalists rushed across the gangway among their opponents. Fists were used, and there was much pushing and josthng. Colonel Satmder- son, a popular but aggressive Irish Unionist, was hit twice on the side of the head, and Home Rulers asserted that he in turn struck several of them. Mr. Gladstone, watching the scene from his place on the Treas- ury bench, looked a picture of sorrow and humiliation. A Conserva- tive harangued him from the other side of the table, and others cruelly cried, ' this is your work.' The scuffle continued for five minutes, and LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE 179 members who had gone to the division lobbies returned to see what was occurring. A loud continuous hiss from the strangers, a * sound of pubhc scorn ' never heard before within the memory of the oldest Parliamentarian, made the House conscious of its disgrace, and when Mr. Speaker Peel, who had been sent for, entered and mounted the high chair, looking majestic and terrible, aU members sat down ; and with his calm, stern, dignified ' Order ! order ! ' peace was instantly restored. Charges, reproaches, recriminations followed ; apology was offered at once by Mr. O'Connor, and next day regret was expressed by Mr. Fisher and Mr. Logan ; and the House was enjoined by the Speaker to allow the regrettable incident to pass into oblivion. It could not, however, drop out of the memory of any who witnessed it. Macau- lay's comment on another Pariiamentary episode might be applied to the incident : ' It was hke seeing Caesar stabbed in the Senate House, or seeing Ohver taking the mace from the table ; a sight only to be seen once, and never to be forgotten.' ' The argument of tyrants,' was again detected by the Unionist champion at the next stage of the bill. On August 21, Mr, Gladstone having proposed to closure the discussion on report, Mr. Chamberlain dehvered an animated protest against his ' dictatorship,' and concluded with a furious attack : ' To destroy the Empire ; to punish England for not having given him a majority ; to break up the party to which his fame and reputation owe a great deal : these are not enough for the First Lord of the Treasury ; he inust_also stifle discussion : he must — humihate the House of Commons which has always honoured him as one of its ornaments.' In language such as this, Sir WiUiam Harcourt found violent injustice, exaggerated virulence, and personal rancour towards the Liberal leader. At the final stage, on September i, Mr. Chamberlain uttered a personal appeal. He seemed very earnest as he stood at the end of his bench, with a white o rchid in his black coat, holding in his hand a sheet or two of notes. Inmeasured tones he expostulated with the Liberals on their treatment of himself and other Unionists. They had asserted that he was influenced by personal feeling. He appealed to them to put themselves in his place. ' If you beheved, as we beheve, that the policy of the Government is irreparably fatal, would you think that any opposition could be too strenuous, too prolonged ? ' Thus he spoke for several minutes. His former friends, watching him closely, hstened with attention — perhaps even with respect. On the bill eighty-two sittings were spent by the Conunons ; and j they passed its third reading by a majority of 34. A week later, by a I tX majority of 378, it was thrown out in the House of Lords. Some ' critics said that the protracted opposition and detailed speeches of Unionist members in the House of Commons were both ineffective and •A i8o JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN superfluous, seeing that the measure went through their own Chamber in spite of them and that it would in any case have been rejected by the peers. Mr. Chamberlain and his friends, however, declared that they looked beyond their own walls. Their object was by their exposure of the bill to justify its expected rejection by the Second Chamber, and to educate the country. In that exposure, the most effective part had been undoubtedly played by the statesman who formerly advocated Home Rule. He did more than any one else to thwart the last ambi- tion of his first leader. Mr. Gladstone lingered on the Parhamentary scene till the beginning of the following March, when, baffled by foes, embarrassed by impaired sight and hearing, and out of sympathy with his Cabinet on the ques- tion of navcJ estimates, he handed the controversy with the House of Lords down to his successors. His long day's task was done, and when he took off his armour his opponents tried to forget his political pro- jects, and to think only of his personal merit and genius. A few days after his resignation, Mr. Chamberlain, speaking at Birmingham, described him as the greatest Parhamentary leader of our time. ' Al- though to my deep regret during the last few years I have felt it to be my duty to oppose to the utmost Mr. Gladstone's policy, I have never either in private or in public said one single word derogatory to his transcendant abilities and to his personal worth. Now that he has ceased to occupy his great position, I can only sincerely deplore the loss which the House of Commons has suffered by the withdrawal of its most illustrious member.' In Parliament he spoke in a similar strain. ' All I would wish to say is that at a time when, unfortunately, voices are sometimes raised in order to envenom political differences, and to transform them into personal animosities, we, who were his loyal followers, but who for some seven years have found ourselves, much to our own regret, compelled to come into sharp conflict with him, would now desire to forget the incidents of that contest and only remember the great services he has rendered to this House and the country.' In the autumn of 1894, the Unionist leader was gratified by an allusion made to him by Mr. Gladstone in a letter to the Bishop of Chester on the Gothenburg system. ' I am glad to see,' wrote the retired statesman, ' that Mr. Chamberlain is active in your cause.' Moved by this passing remark, Mr. Chamberlain in an interview with a newspaper^ correspondent dictated the following reference to Mr. Gladstone and himself : ' In the outside world some would have it that they were anything but friends since the political party tie that held them so long in common had been severed. He was glad to say, how- ever, that this was very far from the truth. Amid all the tumult of political strife their personal relationship had continued undiminished ' ■ ^ Birmingham Daily Mail. LAST DUEL WITH GLADSTONE i8i and unbroken. He had received many cherished proofs from Mr. Glad- stone of his continued esteem. It was but very lately that he had visited him, and he had found the magnanimity and charm of his character and grand personality enhanced, if possible, in his retire- ment.' XXIV OLD RADICAL AND NEW CONSERVATIVE ' Circumstances have changed, and not I.' — Mr. Chamberlain. ' A gentleman who, only eight years ago, was a spick and span Radical of V I the very newest type — a gentleman with his pocket full of unauthorized pro- ■P • ^.'' grammes — an apostle of the Ransom school, endeavours to cover his desertion of ^•V I his party by pretending that the party has altered its creed.' — Sir William \!^ Harcourt. WAS Mr. Chamberlain alone trae to the Liberal faith or was his career, as Mr. Healy alleged, cankered with inconsistency ? Was he a deserter from his party, or did his party desert its princi- ples ? During the years of Liberal government, 1892-95, he rarely agreed with the authorized application of Liberal doctrine. His view was scarcely ever the view of Mr. Gladstone or Lord Rosebery, of Sir William Harcourt or Mr. John Morley. Acting with the Con- servatives in resistance to Home Rule, and looking for ward t o coalition "~" with them in office, he exercised his ingenuity in constructing a common platform on which he could stand beside Lord Salisbury and Mr. Balfour. A negative policy did not satisfy a leader who professed still to be a Radical. Material reform became his cry. An imperial note was at the same time struck by Mr. Chamberlain with increasing confidence. Instead of dreading responsibilities - - h e ad vocated expansion. He was one of the leaders of the forward schooTm cTutching Uganda, ' the black pearl of Africa.' Combating the views of a section of Liberals he said in 1893 : ' We cannot imperil our position by refusing to face any responsibilities which come to us in our character as a great nation.' He boasted of the spirit of travel and adventure and enterprise which distinguished the Anglo-Saxon race. ' I and those who agree with me,' he frankly declared, ' believe in the expansion of the empire, and we are not ashamed to confess that we have that feeling ; we are not at all troubled by the accusa- tions of Jingoism.' As the guest of a Conservative Club in Birming- ham, in January, 1894, he proclaimed his new faith. In almost the words of his first political opponent, Mr. Roebuck, he contemplated the creation of a national party above all sectional aims to preserve the welfare and even the safety of the United Kingdom. It should be ' sensible of the responsibilities of empire, mindful of the traditions 182 OLD RADICAL AND NEW CONSERVATIVE 183 of a great governing race, and determined to hand down to future generations the great inheritance of a world-wide dominion.' The national party recommended in vain to Lord Hartington in 1887 was for years one of Mr. Chamberlain's dreams. Perhaps it was realized in the coalition of Liberal Unionists and Conservatives ! But who can say that the joint party was above sectional aims ? Mr. Chamberlain's view of Liberal measures promoted in the 1892- 95 Parliament was expressed in terms which showed how sweeping had grown his quarrel with his former friends. ' The new Radicals are never satisfied with making any one happy unless at the same time they can make somebody else unhappy. Their love for Home Rule is only surpassed by their hatred of the Protestant and British minority in Ulster. Their interest in temperance is conditional upon their being able to ruin the publicans. Their advocacy of com- pensation to workmen is tempered by their desire to do some injury to the employer. Even their love, their affection for the Parish Councils Bill is conditional upon their hostility to the Church.' In this travesty of their aims the Liberals saw proof of pique. Their answer to their censor was given in the biting words of Sir William Harcourt : ' Don't let him pretend that the creed of the Radical party ■ has changed, as an apology for his desertion of the cause of which he once proclaimed himself the self-elected leader.' At the end of 1893 only one of the long list of measures promised by Mr. Gladstone's Government had become law : it was a bill relating to the hours of railway servants. As Mr. Chamberlain said, the Ministers had been engaged in the toil : Of dropping buckets into empty wells And growing old in drawing nothing up. This process, although unproductive, was very arduous. The autimin recess was abnormally brief and there was an adjournment of only a few days at Christmas. Beaten by the Lords on Home Rule the Government turned to the Employers' Liability Bill and the Parish Councils Bill. The former, in the opinion of Mr. Chamberlain, was intended to make the workmen more careful by pimishing his employer, and he encouraged the Peers to insist on a contract ing-out clause which led to its abandonment. Even on the Parish Coxmcils Bill he did not refrain from criticism. He accused the Liberals of putting the Councils into leading strings. ' I know now,' he said, ' why it is that some of my honourable friends are imwilling any longer to extend to me the title of Radical : it appears that modem Radicalism consists of an endeavour to compel somebody or other to do something they don't want to do.' His acrimony drew another strong personal protest from Sir William Harcourt, and relations i84 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN between parties were strained as they had not been, even in 1886. At last the long-drawn-out session, which with brief intervals had continued from the beginning of 1893, closed on March 5, 1894, two days after Mr. Gladstone's resignation, and the new session began a week later with Lord Rosebery in the place in the Govern- ment which — ii there had been no Home Rule disruption — Mr. Chamberlain might have occupied. The new Prime Ministership did not modify his opposition. From his corner seat below the gangway on the Liberal side, amid the cheers of the Conservatives, he continued to flout the Ministers and all their works ; and now that Mr. Gladstone was gone, he became ■even more contemptuous than before. Obstacles were placed by him in the way of reforms with which his own name had been conspicu- ously associated. A bill was again introduced to reduce the period of qualification for voting, to remove the disqualification of non- payment of rates, and to check plural voting. What measure could be more congenial to the author of the unauthorized programme ? Now, however, his ideas and aims were different. He had spoken in favour of manhood suffrage, and in 1885, while advocating the principle of one man one vote, he had said, ' H we are to make a dis- tinction, I am not quite certain whether it is not the poor man who ought to have more votes than the rich one.' Now he complained of the proposed abolition of the ratepaying condition, and asked : 'Is manhood without any condition of any kind to be the one qualifica- tion ? ' * Yes,' said a plain north-country Radical. ' Is my honour- able friend,' retorted Mr. Chamberlain amid the cheers of his allies, ' in favour of placing the pauper on the register ? ' He com- plained, moreover, that plural voting had been brought neck and crop into a bill with which it had no legitimate connexion. In 1885, as Mr. Morley reminded the House, he had treated the abolition of plural voting as urgent, but in 1894 he held it was perfectly ridiculous and unfair of the Liberals to attempt to deal with an acknowledged anomaly of this kind, when it suited their purpose, and to refuse to deal with a still greater anomaly (the inequitable distribution of seats) because it did not suit their purpose. This was the Conservative attitude and Mr. Chamberlain strictly conformed to it when still another attempt was made to legislate on the subject. A speech in which he had attacked the plural representation of property having been quoted, he pleaded that it was ' delivered a very considerable time ago,' and he warned members that they would make a very serious constitutional change if they took plural votes from men who had substantial local interests and qualifications in more than one constituency. Sir William Harcourt's budget greatly increasing the death duties OLD RADICAL AND NEW CONSERVATIVE 185 on a graduated scale applied another test to his consistency. In this matter it stood the test. The old Radical still held that the principle of graduation was right, and although he contended that the principle was not properiy carried out in the Government scheme he left obstruction to the back benches. On the other hand he resisted the unfortunate Local Veto Bill, and took pleasure in opposing Sir George Trevelyan's project for a Grand Committee to deal with Scottish measures. To no man in the House did he show greater animosity than to Macaulay's nephew and biographer. They had been closely associated in the early stages of the Home Rule move- ment, and had together withdrawn from Mr. Gladstone's Government in 1886, but when Sir George repented and returned to the Liberal fold, he was ridiculed by his former friend as the most perfect specimen of the political weathercock. Mr. Chamberlain poured abuse on his scheme of a Scottish Committee. ' We are told it is not Home Rule. No, it is not a proposal for Home Rule ; but it leads directly to Home Rule : it is a preparation for Home Rule.' For that reason it was denounced by one who was ' a Home Ruler long before Mr. Gladstone.' Lively controversies took place between the Liberal Unionist! leader and the Nationalists in 1894 on the Evicted Tenants Bill.l Although Mr. Healy contended that as compared with the Arrears) Act of 1882, which followed the No Rent manifesto, and for which Mr. Chamberlain was partly responsible, this measure for the rein- statement of evicted tenants sank into absolute insignificance, he opposed it on the ground that it would encourage resistance to the law. When he called attention to the fact that Mr. William O'Brien had ominously threatened them with public opinion in Ireland, he was reminded of the public opinion that was brought to bear upon Radical tradesmen in England by Primrose dames, and upon certain Wesleyans by Churchmen at Hatfield. Mr. Chamberlain's retort was of the scathing sort which incited party passion. ' When did Primrose dames, or when did any one at Hatfield, mutilate cattle ? When did the Primrose dames fire into houses ? When did they bring the tenants of a cottage out, and set them up against the walls of their own cottage, and shoot them to their death under the cowardly in- stigation of their advisers ? ' The Evicted Tenants Bill shared the fate of other Liberal measures ; it was thrown out by the House of Lords. The session of 1894 was Sir William Harcourt's session. Except for the Scottish Local Government Bill, the only important legislation was the bill embodying the new death duties. These gave their author a new reputation and proved him to be firm in Radical princi- ples and bold in statesmanship. Even his opponents began to credit i86 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN him with conviction. Mr. Chamberlain said that Sir William, like a statesman of a previous age, was — Prompt to supply whate'er his country lacks ; Skilful to gag, and knowing how to tax. The author of the unauthorized programme must have envied his achievement. XXV PUBLICAN. PARSON AND PEER ' A MONG our members you will find,' Mr. Chamberlain said, JLA. ' the most versatile actors of the day.' He himself displayed genius in versatility. His changes of attitude and tone were so rapid and thorough during the existence of the Liberal Government that even those who knew him best were bewildered. When he dealt with the drink question, with disestablishment and with the House of Lords his former friends were specially amazed for they saw in their old monitor's new declarations on these subjects a sad falling away from his former faith. If he did not abandon his principles he limited their application. Either the circumstances had changed or the method of the Government was wrong, or the time was inopportune for doing what he himself had advocated. He examined everything in its, relation to Home Rule and the promoters of Home Rule. To prevent that project from being carried, and to replace its advocates by other men, were his supreme objects. When the Local Veto Bill was introduced in 1893, Mr. Chamberlain's early admirersTioped tliat he would support it. His record on the subject was recalled. Mr. Samuel Smith, referring to temperance controversies in the early seventies, wrote in his autobiography : ' I remember at one of these meetings a then very youthful-looking man who took a strong line for Local Option. He was reputed to have convinced the Town Council of Birmingham, and to be the rising Hector of the Temperance and Radical party. This was Mr. Joseph Chamberlain.' At a public conference in Birmingham, in September, 1871, he said he was not in favour of absolute prohibition, but he could go a long way with the United Kingdom Alliance, and as far as he understood its aim, would throw in his lot with it. He became a member of the Alliance and a subscriber to its funds. The Gothenburg system was subsequently espoused by Mr. Chamberlain with character- istic enthusiasm. He advocated the plan before the Liberal ' Six Hundred ' at Birmingham in November, 1876 ; he carried a resolution in favour of it at a Town Council meeting early in 1877 ; and in his first important speech in the House of Commons at the same period he moved a resolution empowering municipalities to acquire, on 187 i88 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN payment of fair compensation, the existing interests in the retail sale of intoxicating drinks, and to carry on the trade in such a way that no profit should accrue to any private individual. Moral suasion and extended education were as much recommended then as they are now by temperance reformers who are opposed to temperance legis- lation, but in those days, as noted in an earlier chapter, Mr. Cham- berlain pointed out that moral suasion had been practised for more than thirty years, and had never reduced the returns nor diminished the gains of a single person engaged in the trade, and he expressed the fear that the evidence would not warrant them in believing that any better results would follow the progress of education than had followed the exercise of moral suasion. Local control had a place in the unauthorized Liberal programme. Lord Salisbury's objections to such a scheme were ridiculed by the Radical. The Conservative leader, in 1885, was willing to have local option with reference to Sunday closing, but for the non-thirsty souls to say that the thirsty souls should have nothing at all to drink during the week seemed to him to trench upon the elementary liberties of mankind. At that time Mr. Chamberlain did not think so. He described Lord Salisbury as shivering on the brink and afraid to take the plunge, proposing local option for Sunday and compulsory drinking for the rest of the week. His own view he expressed (on October 14, 1885) in an emphatic sentence. ' We trust the people, and we trust them wholly, and we are willing that the whole of this great question should be left absolutely to the representative authorities which will be elected throughout the country.' An equitable claim to compen- sation on the part of the publicans was recognized by Mr. Chamberlain throughout his parliamentary career. He admitted it in the discussion on the licensing clauses of the County Councils Bill of 1888, but in recommending these clauses to Sir Wilfrid Lawson and his temperance friends he noted that the principle of local option would thereby be accepted, and practically applied. ' There is no doubt,' he said, ' in my mind that under this bill the majority of the inhabitants of any licensing district who will elect representatives to the County Councils, will have the power to do away with every licence in the district if they think fit.' This power he was then prepared to grant. As late as 1892 he expressed the belief that every Unionist, or almost every Unionist, was perfectly willing to vote for the local veto — ' that is to say, the right of any district to decide for itself whether it will have pubhc-houses in its midst or not,' provided that if it were decided to shut up pubhc-houses the men who had been engaged in carrying them on should be properly compensated. This principle he supported on several occasions in the division lobby. Nevertheless, to the bill which Sir William Harcourt introduced PUBLICAN, PARSON AND PEER 189 in 1893, giving the option of prohibition,^ Mr, Chamberlain offered very strong objection. He did not take his stand merely on compen- sation. His opposition went to the principle of the measure. * I made,' he said, ' some inquiries when I was in Canada and the United States, and in both those countries where legislation of this kind has been attempted on a large scale, the testimony of all impartial persons is imiversal that it has only led to the grossest evasion, and also to what is very much to be regretted — a large increase in private drinking.' Next year at Birmingham, Mr. Chamberlain renewed his objection to the bill, which had been returned meanwhile to the pigeon-holes of a department in Whitehall. ' It is not,' he declared, ' in the true sense a bill for local option : it is a bill for restricting local option. The community would only have the power of deciding one question — whether there should be no public-houses, or all that exist at present ! ' On this point Sir William Harcourt met his critic, in the revised measure of 1895, by adding to the option of prohibition the option of reducing the number of public-houses.' Mr. Chamberlain's opposition thereupon took a wider sweep. He denounced the project as class legislation in its worst form. ' If you want to stop drinking — if you think it impossible, which I do not, to stop drunkenness without stopping drinking — then be consistent : take the rich as well as the poor. If you want to stop drinking, have the courage of your opinions and make drinking a penal offence ; or if you won't do that, at all events make laws against the sale and against the manufacture of liquor under all circumstances. But that is not what the bill proposes to do. What it proposes is to interfere with public-houses which are the convenience and the meeting-place of the working classes, and to leave untouched the private cellars, the clubs, and even the railway stations which are frequented by the well-to-do.' The defence of public-houses as the convenience of the working classes startled some of Mr. Chamberlain's friends, and they sorrowfully recalled his former sentiments while he denounced the bill because it took away the property of men who were ' for the most part just as respectable as any other tradesmen.' There was a vast difference between the tone of the speech in 1895 and the spirit of the article in 1876 on ' The Right Method with the Publicans.' The horrors of ' the devil's chain ' were no longer emphasized, and the reformer felt pleasure instead of regret at Sir William Harcourt's inability to proceed with his project. ^ The bill provided, in short, that by a majority of two-thirds of the persons voting in a poll, all licences in an area might be prohibited for three years. ' A resolution for reduction might be carried by a simple majority of the electors, instead of the two-thirds majority required for the veto, and when it was adopted the licences were to be reduced by one-fourth of their number. igo JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN II Separation of Church and State was the principle to which, above all others, Mr. Chamberlain was committed, and, in view of his attitude towards the bill for disestablishment in Wales, his record is worthy of study. His most eloquent speeches, expressing the deepest earnest- ness, were on this subject. He had spoken as one who was proud to share the convictions and aspirations of Nonconformists. Mine is a family of political Dissenters. — (1874.) I am an English Nonconformist, born and bred in dissent. . . . For political as well as for social reasons, and in the interest of religion itself, I am a Libera- tionist. — (September 15, 1885.) All my public life I have been a Libera tionist. — (October 30, 189 1.) In one of the earliest declarations from his pen which received a national circulation,^ Mr. Chamberlain attacked the Established Church. He accused it of being always opposed to popular reforms, and said its interests were bound up with those of wealth and power and vested rights. In October, 1874, after Mr. Gladstone had ' commissioned his son ' to say at Whitby that the page of Liberal history devoted to disestablishment would not bear his name, Mr. Chamberlain warned him to reconsider a decision which might place him at no distant date in opposition to the will of a clear majority of the nation. Again, in his first speech to his constituents, he took political ground as a Liberationist. ' The fact is,' he said, ' that union between Church and State is separation between Church and people. . . . One reason why working men do not go to church may be sought for in the fact that workmen are compelled to look upon it as their opponent in all the political reforms upon which they have set their hearts.' In 1877 he went up and down the country preaching disestablishment. At a meeting of the Leeds Nonconformist Union, he declared that the ecclesiastical establishment was the greatest obstacle to political, social and intellectual progress ; and at Bristol, addressing a meeting in connexion with the Liberation Society, he urged that the Church should be disestablished and disendowed, and asked what were the Liberal party waiting for ? At Bradford, also, in the same year, he spoke most eloquently for the Society. Among his other early declarations were the following — The Church still remains a monument of religious inequality, established and endowed by law. — (Rochdale, November 7, 1877.) The Church by law established is a piece of political carpentry. The nation has made it, and the nation can unmake it. — (West Bromwich, November 19, 1877.) Office and experience did not soften Mr. Chamberlain's feelings. At Denbigh, on October 20, 1884, he made the announcement, which ^ Fortnightly Review, September, 1873. PUBLICAN, PARSON AND PEER 191 was never forgotten by friend or foe : ' I have no spite against the House of Lords, but as a Dissenter I have an account to settle with them, and I promise you I will not forget the reckoning.' At Glasgow, on September 15, 1885, he pronounced in impressive language against anything in the nature of State interference with, or State aid to, religion. He would free the Church from State control, whether in England, in Scotland, or in Wales, and he added the expression of his behef that the appropriation to the service of a single sect of funds which were originally designed for the benefit of the whole nation was an injustice. An entry in Archbishop Benson's diary,^ with reference to dis- establishment, shows the alarm and the anger excited at that period by the utterances of the Radical leader. ' Chamberlain,' writes the Archbishop, ' without any circumlocution, spoke of it as his desire, and as very near, though not perhaps within the next session. Then came out The Radical Programme preface by Chamberlain, with a truculent, wolfish imagining the whole thing down to details, and claiming it.' He intended, according to his own confession, to have given disestablishment the first place in the unauthorized programme, but strong pressure against this procedure was brought to bear upon him, and in the election campaign at the end of 1885 he allowed the question to lie over. He intimated then at Leicester that for the sake of unity the extreme Liberals had put aside their most cherished principles — disestablishment, for instance ; but after the split in the party he assured a Welsh correspondent that his views on its justice and expediency were exactly the same then as they had always been. During the Parliament of 1886-92, even when supporting the Conservative Government, he resumed his advocacy of disestablish- ment, and presented it as a rival to Home Rule. At Birmingham in September, 1887, speaking for the extreme section of the Liberal party, he included religious equality among subjects which were much riper than the Irish question, and which ' ought not to be put aside.' Two years later, in laying the memorial-stone of the Methodist New Connexion School in Birmingham, he paid an eloquent tribute to Dissent and the great part it had played in the history of this country. In February, 1891, he voted for a motion in favour of disestablishment in Wales, and in the course of that year he addressed several remarkable appeals to the Welsh people, warning them that every Dissenter who voted for a Gladstonian was voting for the indefinite postponement of the cause in which they were so much interested. Just as he boasted at Dingwall in 1887 that he was a Home Ruler long before Mr. Gladstone, he boasted in South Wales on October 30, 1891, that he had voted for disestablishment in the Principality long before Mr. * Edward White Benson, Archbishop of Canterbury, by A. C. Benson. 192 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Gladstone discovered that it was a popular cry there, he had voted for disestabhshment in Scotland before Mr. Gladstone was aware that the majority of the Scottish people desired it, and he had voted for disestablishment in England although only a minority of the people wished to see it accomplished. Careless of whether he was in a minority or a majority, he would follow his convictions as long as he lived, but ' I tell you, my fellow-Nonconformists and fellow-Liberationists, that by the introduction of Home Rule the question of religious equality has been indefinitely postponed.' The same electioneering argument was put concisely in the letter quoted in a previous chapter in which Mr. Chamberlain expressed the conviction that the only chance for the speedy satisfaction of the legitimate claims of Welsh Nonconformity was to be found in the defeat of Home Rule. Probably the Conservative Churchmen became alarmed then as the Archbishop was six years earlier by the line their ally was taking. He again, however, changed his tone as the General Election of 1892 drew near. On his appointment as leader of the Liberal Unionists at the beginning of that year, he stated, as we have seen, that while retaining his freedom to put forward his views on disestablishment when he thought right to do so, he was willing to subordinate them to the interests of the Union ; and in the month of March, addressing the Nonconformist Unionist Association in London, he made the following notable announcement : ' I do not think that you will find anywhere a more ardent or a more consistent supporter of disestab- lishment than myself. But it is neither defensible in principle nor in policy to put this question forward to the exclusion of every other. It is not right to do evil in order that good may come. It is not right to purchase the disestablishment of the Church at the price of the disintegration of the empire.' After complaining for years that this I cause was kept in the background he complained now that it was put / in the foreground. Thus we have obtained Mr. Chamberlain's record on a subject which touched his deepest convictions. At the outset of his career, in 1874, he was prepared to dispense with Mr. Gladstone's leadersliip rather than have disestablishment delayed ; in 1885 he desired to give it the first place in his programme but was withheld by Mr. Gladstone ; after the disruption of the Liberal party he contended that it was riper for settlement than Home Rule ; in 1891 an argu- ment used by him against the Gladstonian poHcy was that it meant the indefinite postponement of Welsh disestablishment ; but on the eve of the election of 1892 he objected to an alleged attempt ' to pur- chase the disestablishment of the Church at the price of the disinte- gration of the empire.' The statement that the Nonconformists supported Home Rule in order to get disestabhshment was stigmatized PUBLICAN, PARSON AND PEER 193 by the British Weekly, which spoke with authority on the subject, as the most outrageous of calumnies. ' They were perfectly aware that by supporting Home Rule they were postponing disestablish- ment, but such was their devotion to Mr. Gladstone primarily, and such also, no doubt, their conviction that Home Rule was just, that they were content to put aside personal ends and aims.' We come now to Mr. Chamberlain's action on this matter in the ParUament of 1892-5 during the Administration of Mr. Gladstone and Lord Rosebery. It was curiously chequered action, springing on the one hand from his hfe-long convictions as a Dissenter, and on the other from his determination to thwart the Liberal Govern- ment. Mr. Chamberlain disapproved of their tactics in 1893 in pro- moting the Welsh Suspensory Bill, which provided that thereafter, in the case of appointments by the Crown to hvings in the Principahty, the emoluments should be held subject to the pleasure of Parliament. By this measure, he said, they would hamper the Church without the possibility of dealing finally with the subject for at any rate a con- siderable period. In his opinion it was merely a sop to the Welsh members to keep them quiet while the Home Rule BiU was under consideration. The measure was not proceeded with ; and next year a bill to disestablish the Church in Wales was dropped for want of time but it was again introduced in 1895. Mecintime Mr. Chamberlain used a qualifying phrase. He wrote and spoke of his support of 'the principle ' of disestablishment. In March, 1894, at Edinburgh, when insisting that the decision of the Scottish people on this question must be taken in circumstances in which it could not possibly be denied, he referred to ' those who, like myself, are in favour, as a principle, of disestablishment.' Later, this became a matter of abstract principle. Mr. Chamberlain pained some of his friends and did injustice to his undoubted convictions when, at Heywood, in November, 1894, he said : ' You may, if you like, try to disestabhsh and disendow the Church in Wales, and if you succeed, in my opinion — although I sympathize with the object as a matter of abstract principle — nobody will be one penny the- better for it.' Mr. Morley, much grieved, retorted in sadness that ' human manhood has something apart from the penny.' On any one who respects Mr. Chamberlain's integrity of mind the Heywood phrase jars more than anything else in his career. The conflict of motives in his mind was again shown by the letter dated January 31, 1895, which he addressed to the editor of the Aherystwith Observer. ' Disestablishment in Wales must come,' he wrote, ' and the only question is whether it shall be accompanied by the just treatment of the Church in regard to its funds. This can be secured now by the Unionist party, and Churchmen would be wise 13 194 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN if they were to urge their leaders to devote themselves to this part of the subject.' Churchmen did not feel constrained to accept the advice. At the opening of the session of 1895, when Mr. Chamberlain brought forward a motion demanding a dissolution it was pointed out that this would shelve the Welsh Disestabhshment Bill. Mr. Asquith wanted to know what had happened to the ' cup ' — (the cup of the Dissenters' wrath against the peers) — ^which was nearly full when he spoke at Denbigh, in 1884, and Sir WiUiam Harcourt taunted him with having assured the people of the PrincipaUty that if Home Rule were only out of the way they would have disestabhshment at once. He angrily denied that he had said anything of the kind. ' What I did say was that since Home Rule was introduced the prospect of disestabhshment in Wales had been delayed.' At the second reading of the Disestabhshment Bill in April, Mr. Chamberlain, claiming the hberty of action which, as he said, had been recognized by the leaders of the Conservative Party,^ voted in its favour. Only one other Liberal Unionist followed the same independent course. The defeat of Lord Rosebery's Administration in Jime put an end to the measiu^e, and the Coahtion Government was formed with very different aims from those of the Liberationists. Looking ahead nine years, we find Mr. Chamberlain telegraphing in 1904 to the Western Mail : ' I have always been in favour of dis- estabhshment as a theory although not a practical pohcy.' What was urgent in 1874, and an abstract principle in 1894, had, hke his Repub- hcanism of early years, fallen to a theory. To the theory at any rate he remained steadfast. In the session of 1904, on the Bishoprics of Southwark and Birmingham Bill, he frankly said : — I am not only a Nonconformist, but am, and always have been, in favour of the poUcy of disestablishment. I think myself that the adoption of that policy would really be for the rehef of the Church of England, would increase its spiritual! influence, and save it from the attacks which are now made upon it. Ill No question betrayed the change in Mr. Chamberlain more com- pletely than that raised by the action of the House of Lords. This was the subject on which he had excited the stormiest passions at Radical meetings in 1884 and 1885. On account of their hostihty to the Franchise Bill, Mr. Chamberlain pronounced the tragic doom of the Lords, and in his programme he included ' the question of mending or ending the second Chamber.' In the ten years which followed the Liberal disruption, his point of view was completely altered. He ^ I have always reserved my own liberty of action with regard to this question, and this has been recognized fully by the leaders of the Conservative party — Lord Salisbury and Mr. Balfour (June, 1894). PUBLICAN, PARSON ANT) PEER 195 pretfictcd in 1892, that theHoose irindihe thrpatfnfdwithexrinrtinn m 1884, would remam for several genoatiaos to oooie a pk lui e s que and a statdy. if not a siipiyinfin ly impoctant part precisely the result which the Fair Traders desire to produce in our national relations.' The comedy of the two loaves was produced by Mr. Chamberlain before a huge audience at Birmingham on November 4, when his speech reminded an admiring critic of the triumphs of Demosthenes. Free Traders had gone up and down the country warning the working classes that the new policy meant a little loaf. Taking advantage of some exaggeration in their case, the skilful platform performer got a friend, an Alderman, to bake two loaves, such as would be sold at the 292 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN same price with the tax and without it. That is to say, he wished to illustrate the exact difference which would be made in the size, if the proposed duty on corn were followed by an equivalent reduction in the quantity of bread. With a dramatic air he displayed on the rostrum the two loaves. ' I do not know,' he said, ' whether your eyes are better than mine, but when I first saw these loaves, I was absolutely unable to tell which was the big one. ' Of course the eyes of his audience failed to see what his could not see. On this occasion, flatly contra- dicting what he had said in the same place eighteen years before, Mr. Chamberlain denied that Protection was immediately followed by starvation and destitution, or that Free Trade necessarily brought prosperity. He disputed the assertion that Protection was the cause of the bad trade before the repeal of the Corn Laws, and he declared that the subsequent prosperity of the country had ver\' little to do with the introduction of Free Trade. * To go the whole hog,' a phrase used by Lord Goschen at Liverpool, became one of the battle cries. While prepared to acquiesce in retalia- tion in certain circumstances, those who agreed with him, he said, were not prepared to go the whole hog.^ The phrase provided a popular description for the thorough-going Chamberlainites, who became known even in the House of Commons as whole hoggers. Lord Hugh Cecil contrasted with them the ' little piggers ' or moderate men who sup- ported the temporizing policy of the Government, but although ' little piggers ' amused the House, the name did not share the favour of the other phrase. Lord Goschen nettled the Tariff Reformer by the keenness and vigour of his criticism. ' On a former occasion we difl'ered,' said Mr. Chamberlain, with an allusion to the struggle over the franchise and the unauthorized programme ; ' and I think it is a good augury that on that occasion I proved to be right and Lord Goschen proved to be wrong.' Nevertheless, his ancient adversary, in a sanguine, confident spirit, although without rancour, steadily went on refuting economic fallacies. The relations of the Prime Minister with Mr. Chamberlain continued to be the subject of constant speculation and discussion during the autumn campaign. Their correspondence in September had led to the belief that they were in sympathy, if not in co-operation, and frequent reference was made to the comparison which The Times had drawn between the two statesmen and a pair of accomplished whist-players, but while Tariff Reformers assumed that the Prime Minister was their secret friend, the moderate Free Fooders clung to him for support. A compact or truce, arranged between Mr. Balfour and Sir Michael Hicks- Beach, was celebrated at Bristol in November, when the Conservative * The old ostler in The Romany Rye said when one became a highwayman there was nothing like ' going the whole hog.' PILGRIMAGE OF PASSION 293 chief visited the city which the latter represented. Here he adv^ocated merely the power of retaliation ; and his friend, although a professed Free Trader, declared himself in favour of this policy. Strange to say, Mr. Chamberlain, speaking at Cardiff a week later, ' accepted ' Sir Michael's declaration on the footing that half a loaf was better than none. The Free Trader took the Prime Minister's arm to detach him from the Tariff Reformer, but the Tariff Reformer kept hold of the other arm and tried to look as if he were pleased to see him in such company. How happy the statesman with unsettled affections would have been with either, if the other were away ! Fresh cause of irritation was given to the Unionist Free Traders by a taunting comparison. Rigby in Coningsby denounces as un- English all the views with which he is not in agreement, and in the same spirit Mr. Chamberlain stigmatized an argument used by fiscal opponents as a craven argument, worthy of the Little Englander. Early in 1899 Mr. Chamberlain described the ' Little Englanders ' as men who honestly believe that the expansion of this country carries with it obligations which are out of proportion to its advantages. Later he alluded to them as ' friends of every country but their own,' and in platform controversy the phrase bore the more offensive meaning. The taunting comparison was at once hotly resented by Mr. Ritchie, who said it was little short of an outrage. ' It inflicted,' he said, ' a slur on men who were actuated by as high motives as Mr. Chamberlain was.' Mr. Morley too disclaimed the description. ' I am not a Little Englander,' he protested, ' but I am an Old Englander, and old England knew very well what she was about.' The member for West Birming- ham, however, persisted in treating the controversy as a test of intelligent patriotism ; and in reply to protests from Unionist Free Traders, he said sneeringly ' they seem to me to be Imperialists in theory and Little Englanders in practice.' Sir Michael Hicks-Beach retorted in his biting manner that he was an Imperialist when Mr. Chamberlain's doctrines did not go beyond Birmingham ; and Lord Rosebery also claimed to be an Imperialist at lestst as old as Mr. Chamberlain and at least as sincere. Unionist colleagues by whose side he had fought in many battles took part in an imposing demonstration against his new policy, held under the auspices of the Unionist Free Food League, on November 24. This meeting, in the Queen's Hall, recalled the gathering in Her Majesty's Opera House in April, 1886, at which the Duke of Devon- shire appeared for the first time on a public platform in the company of Lord Salisbury. Several statesmen who accompanied the Duke to the Opera House were with him also in the Queen's Hall. In the long interval they had become old and weary, but though the Duke's hair had grown grey ' the finger stroke of Time ' was scarcely per- 294 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN ceptible on his forehead ; his face retained a healthy hue, his figure was erect, and his voice strong. On the platform were as many as twelve Unionists who had held office. There were differences as to the extent to which a policy of retaliation might be pushed, Sir Michael Hicks- Beach going further in this direction than some of the others, but all were opposed to a protective duty on food. It was with a stem air that their leader denounced Mr. Chamberlain's propaganda. The Prime Minister had said that the taxation of food was not the policy of the Gov- ernment. 'And I hope to Heaven it never will be !' exclaimed the Duke. It was as ' a drag on the wheel ' that the chief of the Cavendishes now figured in the picturesque language of the statesman who formerly called him Rip Van Winkle. Mr. Chamberlain had recently said : ' Things move quickly nowadays. Maybe the Duke is also moving with them. His last intimation was that he was not opposed to the Government, but he hoped to be a drag on the wheel. That is a curious ambition.' The Duke, at the Queen's Hall meeting, good- humouredly showed the usefulness of his new function : ' The drag is not an unimportant part of the mechanism of a motor-car or loco- motive. It is an important, and sometimes a necessary part. More than ever it is necessary now, when the engine-driver has got down and allowed another to take his place, and when the other is running the locomotive at full speed down the line and against all the signals.' A palpable hit at both Mr. Balfour and Mr. Chamberlain ! ' Are you to take foreign tariffs lying down ? ' the advocate of the new policy had asked. ' Lying down ' became one of the familiar phrases of the fiscal school ; it was tossed backward and forward. Lord Goschen played with it in the Queen's Hall : ' What do these warlike champions recommend us to do ? To stand up ? No ! but to crouch behind a wall. British trade was no longer to sally forth and meet the foe, but to build fiscal martello towers around the coast and arm them with guns which were spiked forty years ago ! ' Thus the veterans fired into one another, and although there was not yet so much bitterness as in the case of the Home Rule split, gibes were sometimes used which caused resentment. For instance, Mr. Cham- berlain ridiculed the idea of Mr. Ritchie being accepted as a great financial authority merely because he happened to be under the tuition of the permanent officials of the Treasury for a few months. Naturally the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer regarded this remark as a personal affront. It was an offence also to the officials whose new political chief was Mr. Chamberlain's son. The appointment of a Commission, at the close of 1903, under the auspices of the Tariff Reform League, provoked much sarcasm. Serious people treated it as an infringement of the royal prerogative : others made fun of ' King Joseph.' A newspaper announced that PILGRIMAGE OF PASSION 295 the Court would shortly be removed to Birmingham with Mr. Austen Chamberlain as Minister in Attendance ; another published a picture- of Josephus Rex, seated on the throne, wearing a crown and royal robes with ' our right trusty Counsellor,' Mr. Jesse CoUings, behind the new Sovereign. The Tariff Commission was appointed to consider the conditions of trade, and the remedies for the alleged depression. It entered gravely on its elaborate inquiry, but the country arrived at a decision without waiting for the result of its self-imposed labours. Still another declaration of his new faith was made by Mr. Cham- berlain at Leeds on December 16. In 1882 he had contended that what was called one-sided Free Trade was absolutely the very best that could be devised with regard to British interests. Now he described himself as a Free Trader, in the sense that all trade should be free ; and he asserted that what was commonly called Free Trade was not fair competition. ' Give us Free Trade ; we have never had it,' he cried. The cry was taken up by his followers and repeated all over the country : ' We have never had Free Trade ; we have had only free imports ; we are not against Free Trade ; it is real Free Trade that we want.' In earlier years he had been ' imable to distinguish between what the Fair Traders called " real Free Trade " and what the rest of the world called Protection.' ' Learn to think Imperially,' was the advice which the passionate - pilgrim offered at the Guildhall in January, 1904. ' A brilliant scene : a dull speech ' was the record made of the event at the time. On Mr. Chamberlain's last formal visit to the City of London the streets were thronged with cheering people, but on this occasion there was no^ crowd, except in the Guildhall and its vicinity. He was received with flag-waving, with ' Rule Britannia ' and the National Anthem : honours which brought down upon him the banter of Free Traders whose Sovereign was King Edward. The Board of Trade figures for 1903, which had just been issued, with their record of progress, were set against the lamentations of the statesman whom Lord Rosebery described as a ' modem Jeremiah ' ; but, consistent in his new argument, he retorted that the greatness of a nation was not measured by com- parison with its own past but by its relative position among the coimtries of the world. We might, he said, decline as a nation, and yet ' wallow in comparative luxury.' His speech in the City was the least successful in his winter tour. It lacked the dash of earlier efforts. A sympathetic critic, explaining the restraint of the audience, remarked that the conditions of the meeting implied an attitude of critical reserve ; the appeal was rather to the intelligence than to the emotions. Signs of physical exhaustion were apparent in the orator's manner, and it was arranged that he should leave England for a holiday soon after the beginning of the session. / / ^ XL MANCEUVRES IN PARLIAMENT AT the opening of the session of 1904 the ex-Colonial Secretary took his seat below the gangway on the right of the Speaker. It was here on the same third bench that he sat during the Liberal Ministry of 1892-95. Now he found himself in the company of Mr. Chaphn, the latest and strangest ally of one who had been the bogey of the landed aristocracy. Almost at his elbow across the gangway was Sir Michael Hicks-Beach. The two statesmen might have easily put their heads together. Narrow, however, as was the physical partition, there was between them a wide political gulf. Mr. Chamber- lain had opponents not only confronting him but also at his side. This had been his experience when he sat here formerly, but then the opponents near him were Liberal Home Rulers, whereas now he was among the Unionists who had cheered him for seventeen j^ears, and •some of whom had become his bitter fiscal foes. The severest personal mortification suffered by a debater who seldom gave quarter was inflicted on him early in February. It was part of the harvest of the war, which had contributed so greatly to his ascendency. In the course of recrimination on a subject which had begun to weary the Unionists, Mr. Chamberlain recalled that a few months before hostiUties took place Sir Henry Campbell-Banner- man said there was nothing to justify military preparations, although he knew at that time, not merely through his own information, ' but through other information that came to him ' that our force in South Africa was not complete. This mysterious reference to ' other infor- mation ' gave his adversary an opportunity for playing a strong card. The Liberal leader had been on the outlook for such an opening, and he seized it eagerly. ' Does the right honourable gentleman,' he asked, * refer to a correspondence between himself and me ? ' Mr. Chamber- lain, although obviously embarrassed by the question, did not shrink from ' Yes.' Next day, with his permission, Sir Henry CampbeU- Bannerman gave an account of the conversation recorded in chapter XXXI. of this volume. The point of it was that in June, 1899, a few months before the sending of the ultimatum, Mr. Chamberlain said : .' We know that those fellows (the Boers) won't fight. "We are playing a game of bluff.' 296 MANCEUVRES IN PARLIAMENT 297 An enormous sensation was produced by a disclosure which threw a fierce hght on events preceding the war. Radicals and Nationalists expressed pent-up hatred in mocking cheers at what they considered the recklessness and miscalculation of an ambitious imperialist. With brain and body wearied by his fiscal propaganda, he was disconcerted by the exposure which he had brought upon himself. He stated, amid jeering laughter, that he could not charge his memory with a contradiction of the use of the word ' bluff,' although it was not one he was Ukely to have used. Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman pointed out that immediately after their conversation he told one or two of his colleagues the gist of it and reported the same phrase to them ; and his recollection was confirmed with a nod or a cheer by Mr. Asquith and Mr. Bryce. On the Unionist side, however, Mr. Chamberlain was heartily applauded when he declared that he had no idea whatever of bluffing in the sense in which the leader of the Opposition considered he had used the word. The wonder was that he gave his antagonist an opportunity of disclosing the incident. Sir Henry had several times set a trap. For instance, on October 15, 1903, he said : ' I have heard of the Minister of a great State who tried to bluff a neigh- bouring state with which he was engaged in negotiation.' The word ' bluff ' was then obviously in his mind as one damaging to the chief champion of the war policy, and now he was fully justified in quoting it in reply to the taunt against himself, supported as that was by reference to a private conversation. Mr. Chamberlain's conduct . indicated less than his customary alertness of mind. Another blow fell on him the same evening. ' The truest and most unselfish of friends,' Mr. Powell Williams, suffered at the House of Commons an apoplectic seizure, which proved fatal. Mr. WiUiams was one of his confidential colleagues in Birmingham life and in poUtical work, and was Chairman of the Management Committee of the Liberal Unionist Association. The sudden stroke was felt keenly by a statesman whose mourning inspired Mr. Morley with a tribute to his friendship. The day after the funeral, which he was not able to attend, he left for Egypt. People who met him at this period realized that he was physically exhausted and that he could not add much more to the incessant work of a long and strenuous life. But to use his own phrase he was ' not dead yet.' The sessions of 1904 and 1905, so far as the fiscal question was concerned, were spent by the Government in the marking of time. A direct issue was evaded by the Prime Minister with a dexterity which foolish flatterers applauded, while Mr. Chamberlain refrained from forcing a crisis. The downfall of the Administration was predicted month after month, in spring and summer, for a couple of years, but still the Unionist ministers continued to sit on the Treasury bench. 298 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN For the prolongation of their existence they were indebted in a great measure to Sir Michael Hicks-Beach. Although some of his friends were very uneasy, the Tory Free Trader appeared to be content with the assurances he had received from Mr. Balfour. ' In any circum- stances,' he said on one occasion, ' I should not desire to replace His Majesty's present Government by right honourable gentlemen opposite, and I will never desert the Government of my dountry at such a crisis as the present may be in our foreign affairs.'^ Sir Michael Hicks-Beach had, during a long career, played a con- spicuous part in Parhament, but more than once when he reached a dominating position he showed he was not of the stuff of which great leaders are made. His deeds were seldom so firm as his words, and although he carried the character of a dour, unbending man, he flinched at a crisis. Lord Randolph Churchill forced him to the front in 1885, in order that he might supersede Sir Stafford Northcote in the leadership of the party, and in 1886 he gave way to Lord Randolph. In his last office as Chancellor of the Exchequer he was, by his own confession, overruled in financial matters by his colleagues, and in resisting the approaches to a system of preferential tariffs he was less staunch than, his successor, Mr. Ritchie, whose Parhamentary reputation did not stand nearly so high as his own. Tall, thin, reticent, and moody, with quick temper and sharp speech, fair-minded and dignified, a country gentleman born to poli- tics, a strong Tory, tossed between fiscal convictions and party inclina- tions, Sir Michael was in these latter days a curiously lonely, discon- tented figure. He had persuaded himself that the Prime Minister was unfriendly to the Birmingham pohcy ; he supported him in office, in the belief that time was against the Tariff Reformer ; and the section of Conservatives known as the Free Fooders, who were neither Cobdenites nor Chamberlainites, were pleased to suppress their scruples and to follow so easy an example. Only twenty-nine Unionists went so far at the opening of the session of 1904 as to vote with the Liberals for an amendment condemning any return to Protective duties. Of these a section drifted to the other side of the House ; the others continued to act with the Government, while opposing Preference, based on the taxation of food. A skit on the Chamberlain propaganda which greatly amused its opponents was given in a speech by Mr. Asquith in the form of a short manual of Protection for Beginners : — What is Free Trade ? — A shibboleth. By whom was it invented ? — By one Adam Smith, a professor ; but a later writer, Carlyle, is a much safer guide. How then did it come to be adopted as part of the poUcy of this country ? — ^ Our ally, Japan, was at war with Russia. MANGEUVRES IN PARLIAMENT 299 Through the machinations of a middle-class conspiracy, headed by one Cobden, whose main object was to lower the wages of labour. How has the superstition managed to survive ? — Because there are people simple and short-sighted enough to imagine that in foreign trade it is well to receive more than you give. How have we escaped ruin ? — By the mercy of Providence. How are we to set ourselves right ? — By waiting for the report of the Tariff Commission. The Prime Minister, in March, defined his position by saying that it was not proposed to deal with the fiscal question during the currency of the present Parhament and that the policy of the Government did not include the taxation of food. This formula eased the consciences of Free Fooders and at the same time Tariff Reformers winked at it because it did not bind the Government to hostility to their cause after the then existing Parliament. The one section continued jeal- ously to watch the other. When a Conservative Free Fooder proposed to meet a Liberal motion with an amendment expUcitly declaring that the Government policy did not include ' either a general system of protection or a preference based on the taxation of food ' the Tariff Reformers threatened revolt, and the amendment in which the party managers had acquiesced was abandoned. Neither section was pre- pared to take the responsibihty of turning Mr. Balfour out, unless forced by his decided action. The Liberals hoped, and expected, that the one or the other would lose patience, but the Prime Minister, now to this and now to that side leaning, was equal to every emergency. When Mr. Chamberlain returned from Egypt in the middle of April with bronzed face and improved health, politicians speculated on his attitude with respect to the time-serving Ministry. ' What will he do with it ? ' asked the Spectator. The question was answered by events. His son's first budget was produced ; he would not dismiss the Government, even if he could, so long as it was before the House ; and the bill embodying it was delayed till an unusually late period of the session. Instead of risking an open quarrel with Mr. Balfour by action in Parhament he devoted himself to organization and to the advocacy of his cause on the platform. A taunt of cowardice — not, it was explained, physical cowardice — was levelled at the Tariff Reform leader by Lord Hugh Cecil, who was sitting in front of him, on May 18, in a debate which produced angry recrimination between the different sections of Unionists. Lord Hugh, commenting on his refusal to bring his fiscal pohcy to a straight issue in the House of Commons, likened him to Bob Acres, whose courage was shown elsewhere than on the field of battle. Mr. Chamberlain in an offended tone said he regarded moral cowardice as much worse even than physical cowardice, and he boasted, with truth, that through- 300 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN out his career he had never been unwilling to express his views in the plainest terms whether they were popular or unpopular. Feeling on the Unionist side ran very high throughout the summer, and even some of the Free Fooders who voted with the Government betrayed resentment against the disturber of party peace, while the thorough- going adherents of Cobden's doctrines assailed him on every possible occasion. On the other hand he secured the sympathy of the great majority of the party. At a banquet at which he was entertained on his sixty-eighth birthday, 177 members were present, and twenty- three others had intended, if they were able, to join in the celebration. All the hosts wore Mr. Chamberlain's favourite orchid, but the flower was not a badge of rebellion. ' Above all,' he protested, ' we are the friends and admirers of the Prime Minister.' In organization Mr. Chamberlain lost no time or opportunity. His pohcy was adopted by many Conservative associations throughout the country and he captured the Liberal Unionist machinery. In such a contest the head of the Cavendishes was no match for the inventor of the EngHsh Caucus. The Duke of Devonshire's position as President ■of the Liberal Unionist Association, which had done so much to resist Home Rule, became intolerable, seeing that it gave support to branches which passed resolutions in favour of a pohcy of which he disapproved. He desired its dissolution, but in May 1904 it was reconstructed on hnes agreeable to Mr. Chamberlain who succeeded to the chief place, the new Council recommending preferential arrangements between the colonies and the mother-country. At a meeting held in the Royal Albert Hall on July 14, to celebrate this transformation, four Cabinet Ministers were on the platform. The fact that two of them. Lord Lansdowne and Lord Selborne, took office in a Council which supported a pohcy not within the official programme, led to debates in both Houses. Their defence was that they acted as individuals, and that the Government were not committed. Controversies on the introduction of yellow labour into the Rand increased the virulence of the session. Reflections were cast on Mr. Chamberlain's administration by Liberals who complained that his South African pohcy was resulting merely in the enrichment of the mine-owners. By letter and speech he concurred in the ordinance for the recruitment and importation of Chinese, which had been passed by the Transvaal Legislative Council, and sanctioned by his successor, Mr. Lyttelton. When he was in Johannesburg he expressed repug- nance at the idea of the employment of yellow labour but undertook that no opposition would be offered by the imperial authorities if it were desired by the great majority of the white inhabitants of the •colonies ; and now he assumed that the Government had satisfied themselves that this condition was fulfilled. The ministers main- MANCEUVRES IN PARLIAMENT 301 tained that on account of the shortage of natives for the mines the introduction of Chinese was necessary to avert a financial crisis. Liberals, on the other hand, denied that it was necessary or that the people of the Transvaal had been consulted in an adequate manner. Dishke of a system with the taint of slavery added to the unpopularity of the Government, and politicians continued to hint that a foreboding on this subject may have influenced Mr. Chamberlain in deciding to escape from Downing Street. One of the few speeches which he delivered in Parliament in 1904 was on the motion to closure the Licensing Bill by compartments. As in the case of the Education Act, he was silent during debate on its merits (except on a single point in Committee), and intervened only to support the ' guillotine.' Although he had brought himself into touch with Conservative sentiment on the drink question by resisting Sir WiUiam Harcourt's Local Veto scheme, the latest of the social reforms of the Unionist Ministry could not have been quite agreeable to him. Authority for reduction of licences on grounds of public policy was transferred from the local magistrates (except in great boroughs) to the Quarter Sessions. To this change the Liberals were strongly opposed ; and although the compensation for loss of licence was to be provided from a fund raised by the trade, they com- plained that the system shackled the State and that the number of reductions would be limited by the amount of the fund, instead of the fund being determined by the number of reductions required in the public interest. Another objection to the bill was that it would give a perpetuity tenure to a very large number of licences. Liberals demanded a time limit for compensation, and increased duties on licences, but Mr. Chamberlain, who in 1885 ^ was willing that the whole of this great question should be left absolutely to the local authorities, gave the Opposition no support. On the contrary, he adopted the familiar device of an attack on the extremists. He recalled that his first considerable speech in the House was devoted to temperance reform ; he declared that he had not in the shghtest degree changed his opinions; he preserved an intense sense of the importance of reform ; and the fact that practically nothing of substantial importance had been done by legislation was, he held, due mainly to the extreme views of men who absolutely refused to adopt ' that great principle in politics ' — that half a loaf is better than no bread. Meantime his fiscal propaganda underwent a change. At the outset he was moved by the belief that his policy was the only method by which we could secure a real union in the empire. If it were merely a question of trade, as he told Mr. Bonar Law on the day after his first Birmingham speech, he would have left it to younger men. Grad- * Trowbridge, October 14, 1885. 302 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN / ually, however, his propaganda showed a tendency to turn from great imperial objects to pure protection ; and in the course of his campaign he used arguments ' pick'd from the worm-holes of long-vanish'd days/ sneering at ' the idol of the free importers ' and at ' the super- stition for an antiquated policy good enough in its day.' The agricultural virtues of tariff reform were expounded by its leader in August, 1904. At a meeting at Welbeck, held in the Riding School of the Duke of Portland, and attended by about 13,000 persons, the presence of a great number of territorial magnates gave occasion for many gibes at the statesman who had derided those who ' toil not neither do they spin.'^ Here he renewed his proposal to put a two- shilling duty on every kind of corn except maize, which was an impor- tant feeding stuff ; such a duty on flour as would result in the whole of the milling of wheat being done in this country ; and a duty of five per cent, on meat, dairy produce, butter, cheese and preserv^ed milk, as well as on poultry, eggs, vegetables and fruit. These duties would, as he contended, be paid by the foreigner, and the money thus raised would go to reduce the cost of tea and sugar — and he hoped tobacco. His pohcy, he promised, would result in more profit for the farmer, more employment for the labourer and cheaper food for the family. Two months later, at Luton, he addressed another great meeting with another Duke (His Grace of Bedford) in the chair, and enthusiasm was excited among a portion of the audience by his programme. A couple of days before this engagement the Prime Minister, who went on refining while others were acting, hurriedly intervened with a speech for which occasion was found at a club dinner in Edinburgh, declaring that he was not a Protectionist, and that if the party took up a Protectionist line he could not with advantage be its leader. Mr. Chamberlain, at Luton, also light-heartedly repudiated the name of Protectionist. He was still determined to carry the Prime Minister with him, but the audience slyly laughed at his repudiation and ap- plauded the idea that foreigners should pay a ' toll ' to us for keeping open to them the greatest market in the world. A concession which he obtained with regard to the summoning of a colonial conference consoled him for any protest. Punch, in November, exhibited Mr. Balfour and Mr. Chamberlain as the fiscal freaks. Bohemian freak- twins were appearing at a music hall and it was difficult to know whether to speak of them as one or two persons. The fiscal t\vins, in the attire of music-hall performers, with bodies united but with separate heads and hmbs, sang the song of the tariffs. ' Now then, Artura,' said Josepha, ' take the time from me.' The popular idea, ^ Circumstances had changed since 1874, when he mockingly said he did not expect to find the nobiUty and gentry flocking into Sheffield to hear him address a meeting in the square. MANOEUVRES IN PARLIAMENT 303 in spite of occasional disclaimers, was that the Prime Minister was taking the time from his ex-coUeague. Happy expression was given by the same satirist to another aspect of the controversy soon after Mr. Chamberlain's return from a sojourn on the Continent, when the official statistics for November showed a fresh monthly record in our foreign commerce. The specialist in trade diseases, as he draws off his gloves turns to Dr. Chaplin and in- quires concerning the state of the poor British sufferer. ' Debihty nicely maintained ? ' he asks. ' On the contrary,' says the family 0^ t\ ^-^ ._^ O *^-t J o ^ o 00 ;-> o.y '3 ij W H -t-1 O CuO ON 3 aj [U "13 S bo 1-1 2i 4) -(-J tiO .. O 01 • o rt !:> C^T3 O w O CO. I — , C +J en PERSONAL LIFE 327 the enemy a chance ; but I don't intend to let those d d snobs have it all their own way. It is monstrous that it should actually be a disqualification for membership of a Liberal Club to have been in any way distinguished as a Liberal. I find the good people at Bir- mingham are furious. They will come up and storm the Club if something is not done.' At a meeting of that historic institution in Pall Mall at which Mr. Bright and Lord Granville denounced the blackballing, Lord Hart- ington moved a resolution in favour of transferring elections from the members at large to a special committee. This was carried in the first instance, but on a ballot being taken it was rejected, and Mr. Chamberlain shortly afterwards resigned his membership. He was- one of the promoters a few months later of the National Liberal Club, and at the laying of the foundation stone of the new building by Mr. Gladstone, in 1884, when Lord Hartington ironically referred to a report that it was to be the future home of the Caucus, the ' boss ' of that organization said he did not care to dispute the soft impeachment. After the Home Rule split, however, he withdrew from the Radical resort. On the other hand in 1885 he boasted that he had ' never worshipped with the Whigs in the temple of Brooks's.' He was a member of the Athenaeum, but even there he was rarely seen. Soon after leaving the Reform he joined the Devonshire and occasionally within its walls he met his friends. In 1903, the year of his fiscal volte-face, he accepted election as an honorary member of the Con- stitutional Club, admission to which is limited to Conservatives. Thus he was connected at the same time both with a Liberal club and with a Conservative club.^ The fact that an ordinary person was a member of a Liberal club would imply that he was not a Conserva- tive and the fact of his being a member of a Conservative club would imply that he was not a Liberal. Mr. Chamberlain, however, was- above party. Unlike most of his colleagues in the House of Commons he held, aloof from social functions. He devoted himself to the severer side of public life. To the best of his knowledge and belief, the first time he was ever inside a bazaar was in opening one in Birmingham in 1894. Many a member envied his ability to make such a confession. In the life of the capital, apart from political duties, Mr. Chamberlain took a very slight share. Birmingham was his home ; London only a place of temporary residence. For a time he resided at 30, Wilton Place, ^ The Devonshire was defined as ' a poUtical club on a broad basis in strict connexion with, and designed to promote the objects of the Liberal party.' One of the objects of the Constitutional Club is ' to do all such things as, in the opinion of the Committee, shall tend to promote the interests of the Conservative party in the United Kingdom.' 328 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN but about 1880 he took 72, Prince's Gate, and subsequently he moved to 40, Prince's Gardens, a tall, narrow-fronted house in the fashionable and peaceful quarter between South Kensington Museum and Hyde Park. His neglect of exercise astonished contemporaries in an age of athleticism and sport. Macaulay, as Sir George Trevelyan writes, was utterly destitute of bodily accomplishments, and viewed his deficiencies with supreme indifference. He could neither swim, nor row, nor drive, nor skate, nor shoot. He seldom crossed a saddle, and never willingly. When in attendance at Windsor as a Cabinet Minister, the historian was informed that a horse was at his disposal. ' n Her Majesty wishes to see me ride,' he said, ' she must order out an elephant.' Such a passage might, even in the vigour of his life, have been written of Mr. Chamberlain. ' There are men of spare habit,' remarked Sir Charles Dilke in the North American Review when his friend was Colonial Secretary, ' who believe that they are better without exercise. The most distinguished debater in the Government, who has an excellent seat on a horse but who is never now seen on one, and who is no mean hand at lawn tennis, which he scarcely ever plays, is believed to hold this view.' Till the age at any rate of fifty, Mr. Chamberlain played lawn tennis but a little later he was able to give a very complete negative list. ' I do not suppose,' he said in 1892, ' that in the whole of the United Kingdom there is any man who is less of an athlete than I am. I do not cycle ; I do not ride ; I do not walk when I can help it ; I do not play cricket ; I do not play football ; I do not play tennis, and I do not even play golf, which I have been assured is an indispensable condition of statesmanship. The fact is that I do not take any exercise at all.' The allusion to golf was playful satire on the fashion set by Mr. Balfour. It was reported that on Mr. Chamberlain being taken ill during a visit to America, a doctor was summoned. ' You smoke a good deal.' ' Yes, but I make that up by never taking exercise ! ' On account of his disinclination for walking, Mr. Chamberlain's figure was unfamiliar on the streets of London. It was usually while sitting well forward in a hansom that he was seen here. One of his few recreations was theatre-going. For the drama he "•cared more than for music. The stage may have reminded him of the House of Commons, of its pathos and clowning, of its exits and en- trances, of its imposing scenes and its swift changes. Soon after his last marriage, presiding at a banquet given to Mr. and Mrs. Kendal on the eve of their first visit to America, he repudiated the arguments used by ' some of our modem Puritans who appeared to think that the stage was an ante-room to a warmer place and that it had nothing but •demoralising influences.' In rather hackneyed words he expressed his PERSONAL LIFE 329 own opinion that the stage waS an educational influence and an instru- ment of civilization. ' Each man in his time plays many parts,' said the versatile politician. No ; not each man ; Jaques' own words are better : he said ' one man ! ' Along with other sensible people Mr. Chamberlain liked good com- pany, and he had himself the reputation of being an agreeable compan- ion. A prominent political opponent, who had little sympathy with him in any sphere of life, told the present writer that in country houses, for instance, he fascinated his fellow-guests. He possessed a powerful and magnetic personality and in whatever company he might be he produced what Bagehot described, in Cobden's case, as a sense of himself. Smoking was his chief solace. He expressed agreement with the gentleman at the Magpie and Stump in the Pickwick Papers who said that tobacco was board and lodging to him. People seldom saw Mr. Chamberlain out of doors without a cigar — a big cigar — in his mouth. Mr. Chaplin jocularly remarked that he did not know a man who smoked more big, long, black, nastj^-looking cigars. At public luncheons and dinners he would sometimes smoke during his speech. He used to tell a story against himself with reference to one of these functions in an important city. The mayor presided, and when coffee was being served he whispered to Mr. Chamberlain : ' Shall we let them enjoy themselves a little longer, or had we better have your speech now ? ' Mr. Chamberlain himself did not separate enjoyment from listening to or dehvering speeches, and fellow-diners noted the skill with which while addressing them he could keep his cigar alight. His health for many years excited the envy of contemporaries. He had, as he boasted in mature age, eaten ices whenever he could get them; he smoked whenever he had nothing else to do and generally when he had something to do ; and he ' consumed in moderation such alcoholic fluids as he saw before him.' Yet his digestion then was as good as ever. In this respect, as in others, he was fortunate, for good digestion is no less necessary to the successful politician than a thick skin. ' You know,' said Mr. Rhodes at Capetown a year after the Raid, ' every man must do something. Some people grow orchids.' Mr. Chamberlain's orchid was almost as constant a companion as his eye-glass. Day after day in the House of Commons he wore one in his coat — an exquisite glint of colour in a sombre scene. At Highbury he occupied himself with the collection of the various species of orchids, - their cross-breeding and the consequent production of hybrids and the rearing of seedlings. An eminent authority in 1914 expressed the opinion that his collection was worth £2$ 000. When he championed the cause of the poor certain detractors asserted with a sneer that he 330 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN favoured the orchid because it was rare and expensive. Throughout his- life, however, he loved all flowers and cultivated many. Among his favourites were begonias and carnations : he devoted attention also to- ferns. Mr. Chamberlain said he did not know that a man could spend pleasanter hours than in keeping a garden, ' It is certainly more pleasant,' he dared to assert at Newcastle, ' than buying a deer park or keeping a betting book.' He took great interest in Kew Gardens, and when he was in the Unionist Government he obtained an extra grant, by means of which the temperate house, one-eighth of a mile long, which had long remained unfinished, was completed. As to his religious belief Mr. Chamberlain was, as a rule, reticent. In early life in Birmingham, as we have seen, he was an active worker at the Church of the Messiah. While mayor he was conspicuously loyal to it. One of his most noteworthy utterances on religious matters was a speech he delivered at the annual soiree of his Church in 1875, imme- diately after the visit of Messrs. Moody and Sankey to the town. He said the Unitarians had one fundamental doctrine — that God did not create unskilful, ignorant, frail man in order to damn him eternally for some unwitting error with regard to abstract religion. Apropos of ' what was called the revival ' he referred with all respect to work which had attracted the support and admiration of men with whom it was his delight to meet and labour, but he was bound to speak in disfavour of one dogma, the fear of hell. Those who supported the movement claimed great practical results, but he thought it was difficult to give proofs of these. It might be easy to offer statistics of men who in a state of contagious excitement asserted they had made their salvation sure ; but it was another matter to follow such men up to their homes and see how far this sudden conversion had been a pledge of Christian and altered lives. At all events, the Unitarians as a body, so long as they held their present opinions, were bound to protest against the whole system. ' So long as this course of spiritual excitement and theological dram-drinking, disas- trous in its results, was pursued by others, they were bound to lay before the people their alternative of the duties of life and religion and the practical results they achieved.' Although Mr. Chamber- lain's attendance at service became irregular, he remained a member of the Church of the Messiah. The last time he addressed the House of Commons he spoke ' as a Unitarian ' and at the autumnal meeting of the community in 1910, the Rev. Charles Hargrove, referring to his lifelong association with them said, ' Unitarians are proud of him.' To the end he was faithful to his own denomination, although, as -the Bishop of Birmingham testified, he was full of sympathy for all honest religious effort. XLIV CHARACTERISTICS La guerre est ma pa trie, Mon harnois ma maison, Et en toute saison Combattre c'est ma vie. MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S character is a tangle hard to unravel.. Charles Lamb said of Munden, the actor, that he was ' not so much a comedian as a company.' There was a company of characters — political characters — in Mr. Chamberlain. Few actors on the world's stage have played so many parts as the London merchant's son who* went to Birmingham. He completed a considerable career by the time that he entered Parliament, and while he devoted himself to politics one great role succeeded another. He was, by turn, the independent Radical, the parochial statesman, the preacher of the evangel of poli- tical humanity, the defender of the unity of the kingdom, the mission- ary of empire, the advocate of tariffs. He denounced with ferocity what he formerly advocated, and advocated passionately what he formerly denounced. In politics he proved A man so various, that he seemed to be Not one, but all mankind's epitome. His inconsistency or versatility was supposed by opponents to- spring from a selfish grasping at power, while friends saw in his mar- vellously varied career an evolution or development which was natural to a receptive mind with a widening experience. Eulogists of ambitious- men who have been successful say that all the great are ambitious. How far ambition swayed Mr. Chamberlain's career and affected his conduct, who can tell ? A large section of his fellow-countrymen believed that he was influenced by personal motives in turning against Mr. Gladstone and resisting Home Rule. So far as his public declara- tions went he was able to make out a plausible case that he had never been in favour of the sort of Parliament in Dublin that his chief pro- posed. On the other hand he had undoubtedly produced the impres- sion, both on Radicals and on Nationalists, that he was in favour of as- large an extension of Irish self-government as any other British states- man would support or tolerate. The question as to what he was likely to gain or lose individually by parting from Mr. Gladstone was difficult 331 332 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN to settle. Mr. Chamberlain himself argued that it would have been in his interest to remain with Mr. Gladstone, because thereby he would have dished the Whigs ; and his friends have agreed that in such cir- cumstances his succession to the leadership would have been assured. His adversaries reply that he was in too great a hurry, that he believed the majority of the Liberals in the country were in his favour, and that he hoped the veteran chief on being defeated would retire from political hfe. If, however, he was governed by the motives attributed to him, he made an amazing miscalculation. The question of ambition arose again in connection with his retire- ment from Mr. Balfour's Government in 1903, and his vehement advo- •cacy of a policy initiated by himself. Those who seek for a personal motive in his desertion of Cobdenism suspect that he was chagrined by the choice of a younger statesman — and a statesman who had done less service to the Unionist party — as successor to Lord Salisbury ; that he still aimed at the Prime Ministership, and saw that his oppor- tunity would never come unless he seized it without much further de- lay. On the other hand his followers find a sufficient explanation of his fiscal propaganda in the influence of his colonial experience. They also point out that by leaving the Unionist Government he saved its head from some embarrassment, that he neglected opportunities of attacking the Administration, and that he steadily endeavoured to associate Mr. Balfour as titular leader with his new policy. Mr, Froude, who claimed to know him well, testified that ' his aims are not selfish aims, nor is his ambition a personal one. It is part of the sincerity of his nature that he cares nothing for titles or ribands or •distinctions of any kind.' No doubt it was power rather than place that he sought throughout his life, but indifference to the Prime Minis- tership would be unnatural in a masterful politician, and the more one studies Mr. Chamberlain's career the more one's mind is puzzled by the problem as to how far he was swayed in his action by the desire for pre-eminence. The most biting taunt that those who suspected his motives could apply to him was to say, in words quoted by a •Conservative Free Trader : — Thou, like the hindmost chariot wheel, art curst, Still to be near, yet never to be first. Although an inclination to intrigue was often imputed to Mr. "Chamberlain by those who failed to understand him, it may be doubted if he ever endeavoured to obtain by stealthy manoeuvres what others would try to secure openly. He did not conceal, his opinions or his political objects ; ' intrigue ,' in his case, consisted in the management of men, the controlling of organizations, the working of the machine dn the interests of his avowed aims and policy. Like Quisante, a CHARACTERISTICS 333 politician described by a modem novelist, he had the knack of dis- tracting attention from others and fixing it on himself. This was accounted an offence against him by those who excused their own medi- ocrity on the plea of discipline. Consideration for colleagues is an attractive virtue, but it cannot always be practised if it mean that the man with fierce vitality and with great driving power should regulate his movements by a common standard. Perhaps Mr. Chamberlain had himself as well as the famous Irish leader in his mind when he said to Mr. Barry O'Brien : ^ 'I have often thought Pamell was like Napoleon. He allowed nothing to stand in his way. He stopped at nothing to gain his end. If a man opposed him he flung him aside and dashed on.' Politics were the sole business of the latter half of his crowded life. 'Vain hope,' wrote Carlyle, 'to make people happy by politics!* Even Mr. Morley quoted with sympathy the lines which Johnson added to The Traveller. How small, of all that human hearts endure. That part which laws or kings can cause or cure ! The member for West Birmingham knew his business better than to- decry his craft. He was devoted to it, and exalted it, believing that on the right settlement of politics depends to a large extent the com- fort, the well-being, and even the happiness of the great mass of mortals. All statesmen make flattering appeal to the most numerous section of their fellow-citizens, and Mr. Chamberlain declared that he would not care to be in Parliament if he could not serve the interests of the working classes. But did consideration for their interests determine his conduct at the crises of his career ? Or did he decide on his policy on other considerations, and then turn to the workers for the sake of the votes which they held ? To such questions irreconcilable answers are given. It is the fate of politicians to have their motives sus- pected, and least of all can the wrecker of two parties escape the com- mon lot. His qualities have exposed him to the sharpest, sternest scrutiny, and even when all the secrets of his time are revealed by the publication of the intimate letters which passed between himself and his contemporaries, critics may quarrel over a character so pungent and so provocative. ' I do not wish,' he said in 1900, ' to live a minute longer than I can have opportunity and power to serve my country.' Every states- man may, without insincerity, express the same sentiment, and there is no reason to doubt the ardour of Mr. Chamberlain's patriotism. Early in his career he was cosmopolitan in his sympathies. The interests of humanity at large inflamed his zeal and adorned his perora- 1 Life of C. S. Pamell. 334 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN "tions. In later years the world figured less in his rhetoric and the em- pire figured more. Other races were left to other refonners, and •while he renounced parochialism he shared in a new and special degree the view expressed in one of his favourite poems : That man's the best CosmopoUte Who loves his native country best. ' Our opponents, ' said the Radical Unionist, ' have forgotten noth- ing, repented of nothing, repudiated nothing.' ' He has forgotten ■everything, repented of everything, repudiated everything,' retorted Sir William Harcourt. Mr. Chamberlain agreed with Emerson that ^ a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little statesmen and philo- ■sophers and divines.' Even in early days he was, as he boasted, an inconsistent person ; and he pointed out that it was very often the •duty of a statesman to alter his opinions in altered circumstances. As to the circumstances he constituted himself the judge. Of his confessions of change the following are examples : March 24, 1890. — ' I admit I was one of those who regretted the necessity ior the occupation of Egypt ; and when the occupation was forced upon us I looked forward with anxiety to an early, it might be even an immediate evacua- iion . . . but I have changed my mind.' January 15, 1891. — ' We (Conservatives and Liberal Unionists) have both of us to put a good many of our prejudices and our opinions in our pockets.' July 10, 1891. — ' AH that has happened since 1885 has shaken my confidence in the particular solution of the Irish Question, which I was then prepared heartily to support.' November 18, 1891. — ' I am very willing to confess that the word " Ransom " was not very well chosen to express my own meaning.' 1893 (An Irish Board of Control). — Admits he had changed the opinion he held in 1885 as to the possibility of entrusting even these limited powers to the present representatives of the majority in Ireland. April 30, 1895. — ' A speech of mine has been quoted which, Uke all those speeches, was delivered a very considerable time ago, as to which I will say that since then no doubt some of my opinions have been modified and some of them Tcmain unchanged.' May I, 1896. — ' In 1870 I was in favour of the extinction of the Voluntary Schools, but I have changed my mind.' April 24, 1899 (Old Age Pensions). — ' I have made various proposals and suggested various schemes, and some of the proposals which I have made in the first instance, I have myself subsequently rejected as being inadequate and impracticable.' September 23, 1900. — ' I was in the Government which gave back the inde- pendence of the Transvaal after Majuba. It was a disastrous mistake.' October 21, 1903 (Fair Trade and Preference). — ' I admit that I have changed tny opinion.' Plutarch reports that Demades, to excuse the inconsistency of his public character, used to say, ' I may have asserted things contrary to my former sentiments, but not anything contrary to the true interest •of the commonwealth.' In like manner the whole matter of inconsist- ency was summed up by Mr. Chamberlain on May 5, 1905. ' I know,' he remarked to his followers in Birmingham, ' that there are some peo- CHARACTERISTICS 335 pie who say that in the course of our long experience you and I have been inconsistent or have changed our opinions. I do not know that it matters whether we have or have not ; the main point is we should always be right.' His view was made intelligible by the fact that he ignored the past. He was not troubled by ghosts. ' I am,' as he con- fessed, ' not generally inclined to indulge much in political retrospect. I am more ready to say : Let the dead past bury its dead. Our busi- ness is with the present and with the future.' Perhaps he would have •done himself no injustice if he had merely said ' our business is with the present.' On his changing his view of a question while he was a member of Mr. Gladstone's Government a Birmingham gentleman asked him, ' But how about your future if you change about like this ? ' ' The future ! ' he replied. ' In politics a fortnight's future is quite enough for me.' On another occasion he remarked to a friend that ' the man who thinks of the past is a fool ; the man who thinks ■of the future is a visionary ; I think only of the present twenty-four hours.' Mr. Chamberlain possessed an unusually large combination of •qualities which contribute to the. success of the statesman in a self- governing country. He had the inborn instinct for politics ; he was the man of business with the art of administration ; he was endowed with the gift of speech both for the platform and for Parliament. In the Cabinet his quickness and resource fitted him equally for criticism and for compromise. Mr. Gladstone noted that he was ' a good man to talk to, not only from his force and clearness, but because he speaks with reflection, does not misapprehend or (I think) suspect or make tmnecessary difficulties, or endeavour to maintian pedantically the uniformity and consistency of his argument throughout.' These were qualities which gave him value in Council. As an administrator he surpassed the average statesman who learns business in a country house. At the Board of Trade he was, in certain matters, and perhaps not least in fiscal affairs, under the influence of the permanent officials, but he initiated many reforms, and carried some of them. The Colonial Office found in him a strong chief. He did not interfere unnecessarily in small questions, but he mastered .great affairs, and gave firm decisions. Frequently during the Boer War he devoted fourteen hours a day to the public service, going early to his Department, thence to the House of Commons in the afternoon, and with an interval for dinner working till late at night. Civil ser- vants are pleased to have a political chief who is capable and p)owerful, not because they want to to be managed but because they want to have their business carried through the Cabinet and Parliament. Mr. Chamberlain made his Department the most prominent in the State, and got the best work possible out of its staff. The Kaffirs were right 336 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN when they described him as ' the man who puts things straight.' He showed strength even in refraining from jobs. The Secretary of State for the Colonies, not least among the Ministers, is troubled by applica- tions from persons who consider they have a claim on the party in power for appointments for themselves or their relatives. Such appli- cations were wrongly addressed to a chief who required efficiency. It was reported that he handed them over to be dealt with by the office in the ordinary routine. What has been said by Lord Rosebery of Pitt's devotion to the House of Commons may be said of Mr. Chamberlain's : ' The objects and amusements that other men seek in a thousand ways were for him all concentrated there. It was his mistress, his stud, his dice-box, his game-preserve ; it was his ambition, his library, his creed.' It was at Westminster that Mr. Chamberlain struggled hardest and gain- ed his highest reputation ; there he aroused the fiercest animosities and won the most notable victories. He understood the House of Commons. He knew its habits, its moods, its prejudices, its virtues ; he knew how to humour it, he often dared to defy it. He never des- pised it. At the end of twenty-eight years service, he declared : ' During all that time my respect for its authority, my confidence in its judgment, my desire for its good opinion, has never wavered.' Nor did any section, howeyer much it might dislike him, ever despise so skilful and zealous a member. From the month that he took his seat till the day of his last speech he was an individual force, not always calculable, never negligible. The most passionate hours of the House of Commons for a quarter of a century were, as a rule, those when he was dominating the scene. Cool as a cucumber himself, he excited turmoil in others. The upright figure, the aggressive face, the mocking lips, the keen challenging eyes, the defiant nose, the eyeglass calmly placed in position, the clear-cut phrases, the many toned voice, were conspicuous in numberless de- bates when passion ran high at St. Stephen's. A man, like Jeremiah, of strife and contention, he more frequently than most members used the words of warfare. Pleased with the danger, when the waves went high He sought the storms ; but for a calm unfit. Would steer too nigh the sands to boast his wit. Even in his most conciliatory mood — to adopt Sir WilHam Har- court's metaphor — he ' mixed with his oil a little vinegar, so as to make the salad of his speeches agreeable to the palate.' Mr. Glad- stone remarked in old age : ^ ' I always made it a rule in the House of Commons to allow nobody to suppose that I did not like him, and to say as little as I could to prevent anybody from liking me.' Consider- * Life of Gladstone, by John Morley. CHARACTERISTICS 337 ing the intense friction and contention of public life, it was, he thought, saving of wear and tear that as many as possible, even among oppon- ents, should think well of one. On the other hand, Mr. Chamberlain showed his dislikes. He loved fighting, and feared no man's hate. ' When I am struck I try to strike back again.' ' I have often been hard hit with reference to my public actions, and I have never com- plained, but I have endeavoured to give as good as I get.' His view of political ethics was expressed in a letter to Lord Randolph Churchill. Lord Randolph after resignation gave an assurance that Lord Salis- bury need not fear the slightest opposition from him, whereupon Mr. Chamberlain wrote : ' When a man says that in no case will he return a blow he is very likely to be cuffed.' ^ And when the attack of his ally fell on himself he said : ' You know that I am the mildest of men, but I have a strong inclination to hit at those who strike me, and my experience teaches me that no private friendship can long resist the effect of public contest.' Sometimes he rubbed the sore and indulged in taunts which left feelings of resentment. For years the Nationalists bore a grudge ;. gainst him for describing them as ' a kept party.' One of his most scathing gibes was flung at an Irish member who had made some com- ments on the lady whose name was associated with Mr. Pamell's in I he law courts. While these comments were fresh in the public memory he tried to deprive Mr. Chamberlain of the right to resimie a debate. ' I have noticed,' the latter calmly remarked, ' that whenever it is desirable to exhibit personal discourtesy towards any man — or any woman — the honourable and learned gentleman always presents himself to accomplish it.' The allusion to ' any woman ' was an. vmexpected and merciless thrust. Mr. Chamberlain's humour, too, left a blister. It was intended not to amuse but to ridicule ; the laughter it excited was always at the expense of somebody, and frequently the laughter was cruel. A new style of debate was popularised by the member for Birming- ham. The old school of oratory, with its learning and its pomp, was decaying when he entered the House, the fresh type of Parlia- mentarian introduced by the extension of the franchise requiring a simpler sort of speech. This was characterised by directness, and in Mr. Chamberlain's case by audacity. For the Grandisohian manner he substituted incisiveness. Bagehot has said that intelligibiUty was the first, second and third thing in Palmerston. ' No one resembled less than Lord Palmerston the fancied portrait of an ideal statesman laying down in his closet plans to be worked out twenty years hence. He was a statesman for the moment. Whatever was not wanted now, whatever was not practicable now, whatever would not take now, » Lije of Lord Randolph Churchill, by W. S. Churchill. 22 338 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN lie drove quite out of his mind.' This might have been written of Mr. Chamberlain ; and to his intelligibihty and to his concentration on what would ' take,' he partly owed his Parliamentary success. His mind did not wander in speculation ; it was intensely practical, and he expressed it with the vigour and plainness of the market place. As a platform speaker Mr. Chamberlain has had few rivals in the political domain. He knew the arguments which impress the mass of men, and he knew how to present them in a popular form. At the height of his power at least, he was never duU. His personaUty was in itself an attraction. His alert, sharp face combined with a vi- brating voice and an incisive style to arrest attention and to impress a public meeting. Few politicians are good speakers. They rush to the platform and tumble out a medley of matter. There is no polish in their phrases, and very little arrangement in their arguments. The reputation of many of our front bench Parliamentarians might be ruined if a newspaper were to pubUsh a full report of their speeches, giving each clumsy sentence as it is formed by pretentious lips. Mr. Chamberlain had the gift of expression. He knew what he meant to say, and he said what he meant. Moreover, he spoke always with the air of conviction. What he stated on any occasion might be incon- sistent with what he had said formerly, but when he uttered it the listener felt that it was his firm and unquaHfied belief. A French writer has remarked that true eloquence consists in saying all that is proper, and nothing more. The latter part of this rule was not observed in some of Mr. Chamberlain's fiscal speeches. During the greater part of his career, however, he was distinguished, as com- pared with other pohticians, by his brevity. Neither Lord Salisbury nor Mr. Asquith was ever diffuse, and the brilliant speaker who was trained in Birmingham was also among the least of offenders. As Mr. Asquith observed, he rarely digressed and he never lost his way. ' I am grateful to providence,' he said with sly allusion to a friend and leader, ' that I am not myself a metaphysician.' He meant he was not as other men, whose views were vague and confused, and ill to understand. The power of clearly defining what we know and think might, in his opinion, be learned like any other branch of know- ledge. Mr. Chamberlain acquired the power by perseverance and practice. Frequently in debate he had only brief notes, but with his clear, cool, narrow mind, with his direct intellect and his Hterary instinct, he framed his sentences in so orderly a manner that they might have been reproduced without sub-editing. His addresses in the early 'eighties were specially fine in form. They had a style, due probably to an inspiring teacher, such as Burke, which his later utterances lacked. Probably no man's words, not even Mr. Gladstone's, have occupied CHARACTERISTICS 339 so many columns in the newspapers as Mr. Chamberlain's. For thirty years he had the ear of the country, and for a quarter of a century many newspapers published his speeches verbatim. Mr. Frederic Harrison has pointed out that hardly a single adequate specimen of Chatham's oratory has been fully reported. Specimens of Mr. Cham- berlain's oratory would fill many volumes, but effective as any man's speeches may be at the time of dehvery their fame will perish, like the fame of a second-rate actor, unless they are supported by character and deeds. And who will say that the modern imperialist, with vol- umes of spoken words for his pedestal, will stand as high as Chatham with ' hardly a single adequate specimen ' of his oratory reported ? The speeches by Mr. Chamberlain which may live longest are those that he dehvered in advocacy of the unauthorised programme. They are the speeches which his later admirers would most wiUingly forget, but the printed word remains as a guide to a new generation of Radicals, and as an illustration of the vanity of human forecasts. Their sin-' cerity is as real as their passion ; and the least favourable critic of their policy feels that the orator was then, if ever, inspired by conviction. His power over an audience was unimpaired by years of change, and after Mr. Gladstone's death he was unequalled on the platform except by Lord Rosebery. As Achille Viallate, in his biography (1899) states, Mr. Chamberlain then stood in the front rank as a political orator, and knew, as nobody else knew, how to excite enthusiasm, how to dominate and carry away an audience. In his last active years his mastery was not so steadily maintained, but he continued to attract the attention and excite the wonder of the country by flashes of his old force. Matthew Arnold has said of Macaulay that he had his own heightened and telling way of putting things, ' and we must make allowance for it.' Mr. Chamberlain's heightened and telling way of putting things assisted him to capture popular audiences. Literary quotations abounded in his speeches, although they may not have indicated a deep knowledge of hterature. The practice of quotation varies from generation to generation. Charles Fox used to say, ' No Greek ; as much Latin as you like ; and never French under any circiunstances.' Later, the Duke of WeUington's advice to a member was, ' Say what you have to say, don't quote Latin ; and sit down.' Disraeli remarked that they often had Latin quota- tions in his day, but ' never from a member with a new constituency,' and when Greek was quoted ' the House was quite alarmed.' Greek went first. Since Mr. Gladstone's death it has scarcely ever been quoted in Parliament. Latin, too, has almost gone. Mr. Chamberlain, in his first important speech in the House, ventured on facilis descensus Averno, but even tags and phrases found in popular dictionaries have been discouraged by the protests of Labour members. French has 340 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN come in although everybody laughs at everybody else's pronuncia- tion. ' No English poet,' said Fox, ' unless he has completed his cen- tury ! ' Sir Wilham Harcourt tried to observe this rule because his inclination ran that way. Most members, however, are more modern. Recent prose, even, has been quoted, Lord Hugh Cecil for instance introducing Mr. H. G. Wells into debate and Mr. T. P. O'Connor giving an extract from the book of the week. In Byways in the Classics Mr. Hugh E. P. Piatt predicts that quotations in the House of Conmions wiU be confined in the future to the Bible and Shakespeare ; and the AthencBum, in a review, adds Dickens as a third source. Some of the most telhng quotations given in Parliament are from Scripture, and not the least effective have come from men who make no claim to be religious. Hansard, however, is the book to which reference is made most frequently. It is safe for either party to quote Peel, and it is useful for a Tory to quote Gladstone. Among modern writers Mr. Chamberlain's range was wide. His favourite sources of quotation included Pickwick and the Biglow Papers ; he acquired a habit of citing vaguely ' the American poet ' (usually Longfellow), and in his later years he adorned his perorations with ' what the colonial poet says.' He made frequent use of Alice in Wonderland which is the non-political book most often mentioned in the House of Commons. Sometimes the form of his literary allus- ions was amateurish. In 1885 he referred to ' the late Mr. Carlyle ' ; in 1893 he quoted ' a work called Romola — I think by George Eliot '. On another occasion he attributed to Mrs. Malaprop, Dogberry's ' comparisons are odorous ' ; perhaps he was thinking of her remark ; ' No caparisons. Miss, if you please ; caparisons don't suit a young lady.' ' Only Pretty Fanny's way ' is a gibe much employed in Parlia- ment, and nobody repeated Thomas Parnell's words with more ex- pressiveness than Mr. Chamberlain. He went also to Adam Bede for Mrs. Poyser's sharp sayings. Like many other members he cited Oliver Twist ' asking for more,' and he taunted opponents, from Mr. Gladstone downwards, on having ' as little to tell as Canning's needy knifegrinder. ' His favourite Shakespearian quotation was : ' Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale her infinite variety.' He had a partiality also for — Vex not his ghost : Oh, let him pass : he hates him That would upon the rack of this tough world Stretch him out longer. A familiar verse from Bayly, with the pronouns altered, he put into the mouth of Liberals, in reference to Home Rule : — CHARACTERISTICS 341 Oh no ! we never mention it ; Its name is never heard. Our lips are now forbid to speak That once famihar word. It is a mistake to suppose, as unkind critics have suggested, that Mr. Chamberlain relied for his hterary ornaments on books of familiar quotations. An intimate Radical friend from whom he parted in 1886 asserted that he was in no sense a well-read or well-informed man outside such affairs as circumstances compelled him to master. He read, however, a great deal in a desultory manner. There is evidence in some of his early articles and speeches of the influence of Mr. Morley's favourite authors ; so that he had good direction. At the outset of his career he quoted Bacon, referring to him as the great- est member who ever sat in the House of Lords. To the Town Council of Birmingham, in 1874, he introduced Gulliver. In the Fortnightly at the same period he applied two hues from Milton to Mr. Goschen, thus : — In arms not worn, in foresight much advanced. To wage, by force or guile, eternal war. Not foreseeing that he would live to be a pessimist, he was accustomed to repeat in his most sarcastic tone : — Now the world is a dreffle mean place, for our sins. Where ther' ollus is critters about with long pins, A-prickin' the globes we've blowed up with sech care. An' provin' there's nothin' inside but bad air. One of his happiest efforts was, in 1881, his apphcation to gentle Sir Stafford Northcote of the description given of Madame Blaize : — She strove the neighbourhood to please. With manners wondrous winning ; And never followed wicked ways — Unless when she was sinning. He was also happy in 1882, when apropos of Lord Randolph Church- ill's style of criticism, he recalled the directions given in The Compieai Angler for baiting a hook with a Uve frog. He summarised Izaak Walton's directions by saying ' put your hook in his mouth, and out of his gills, and tie his leg to the wire with a fine thread ; and in so doing use him as though you loved him.' This, by the way, was a good description of his own tender method of dealing with opponents. An opponent of whom he often made fun sent him to the pages of Dickens. Sir Richard Cross's declaration, in 1883, that at last the time had come for vigorous action by the Conservatives, reminded him of ' the amusing incident in the Pickwick Papers, when Mr. Weller attempted to rescue his master from the constables, and when Mr. Snodgrass, in a truly Christian spirit, and in order that he might take 342 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN no one unawares, announced in a very loud tone that he was going to begin, whereupon he was immediately secured without making the slightest resistance.' He also declared that Sir Richard asked questions after the fashion of Sergeant Buzfuz, as though he expected to get his witness committed for contempt. During the Scottish tour in 1885, Mr. Chamberlain looked up Burns, and from a less known poet he quoted with electrical effect the pathetic lines of which there are various renderings, beginning : — From the dim shieling on the misty island Mountains divide us and a world of seas. Preaching the gospel of humanity, he replied to those who rebuked him for impetuosity in the fine words of Leonato : — It is all men's office to speak patience To those that wring under the load of sorrow ; But no man's virtue, nor sufficiency, To be so moral, when he shall endure The Uke himself. Mr. Chamberlain's allusions ranged from the optimism of Candide (which he attributed to Mr. Goschen) to the remedies of Dr. Sangrado ; he likened Sir William Harcourt to Falstaff, Dugald Dalgetty and Mr. Turveydrop ; as we have seen, he linked Mr. Morley with Mr. Pecksniff and Sir George Trevelyan with Joseph Surface ; he compared more than one statesman to Mark Tapley, and jeered at Mr. Gibson (after- wards Lord Ashbourne) for playing the part of Sancho Panza to Lord Salisbury. His quotations roamed from Faust to comic opera. He quoted Coleridge and Moore and Prior ; he was fond of Cowper and Pope ; he gave a pungent extract from Walter Savage Landor's Imag- inary Conversations ; and several times he made effective use of Charles Churchill, the hterary bravo noted for scurrilous satire. He mocked his opponents, from peers to Radicals, with the couplet : — We kicked them downstairs with such a sweet grace That they thought we were handing them up. For the most characteristic quotation of his late Imperial days he went to Byron : — A thousand years scarce serve to form a State, An hour may lay it in the dust. Few of Mr. Chamberlain's speeches on tariff reform were complete without poetry. Frequently he quoted from authors whom he did not name. ' And such poetry ! ' exclaimed Mr. Churchill, as if the exclamation were sufficient in its scorn. Very rarely did he cite any lines quite exactly. In some cases the variation might have been a fault of memory, but occasionally as has been said of Scott with respect CHARACTERISTICS 345- to his Journal, ' it would seem that he deliberately made free with the words of his author, to adapt them more pertinently to his own mood or the impulse of the moment.' Scarcely any enduring phrases sprang from Mr. Chamberlain. Seldom, indeed, does a politician produce a literary pearl, and modem catch- words, as a rule, lack originality. ' Peace with honour,' a phrase used by a statesman who was a master of language, was traced to Pitt, Burke, Cromwell, to George Wither's Vox Pacifica, to Shakespeare and to Sir Robert Cecil in 1598 ; Disraeli's ' plundering and blunder- ing ' was copied from Bolingbroke ; ' bag and baggage,' familiarised by Mr. Gladstone, had been put into Touchstone's mouth by Shake- speare, and used in The Holy War by Bunyan ; ' by Jingo,' the refrain of a militant music-hall ditty, which led Sir Wilfrid Lawson in January, 1878 to call the noisy patriots ' Jingoes,' was an expression employed by certain fine ladies in the time of The Vicar of Wakefield ; ' to kill Home Rule with kindness ' was an adaptation by an Irish Chief Secretary from Petruchio's ' way to kill a wife with kindness ' ; and Mr. Morley's ' end it or mend it ' was found in The Monastery, Don Juan and the letters of Erasmus. Among the picturesque metaphors of recent years were Mr. Asquith's ' ploughing the sand ' and Lord Rosebery's ' clean slate ' and ' lonely furrow,' while Sir Henry Campbell-Banner- man gave a word to controversy by satirising a phase of Irish agitation as ' Ulsteria.' Mr. Chamberlain's ' filling the cup ' described the accumulation of Radical grievances against the House of Lords long after he ceased to have any ; he took ' they toil not, neither do they spin ' from the sublimest sermon ; his ' what I have said, I have said, '' the motto of a baronet, was used by Thomas Paine ; and although he gave currency to ' little Englander ' it was first suggested in 1884 by the Pall Mall Gazette. A resemblance to Pitt was detected in Mr. Chamberlain. Punch depicted him gazing at a portrait of that strong statesman and saying, ' Yes ; no doubt we are very much alike. He wanted only the eye- glass.' Mr. Thomas Hardy, alluding to ' the cleanly-cut, exquisitely pursed-up mouth of William Pitt ' as represented in the bust by Nolle- kens, says it is a mouth which is in itself a yoimg man's fortune, if properly exercised. It brought fortvme to the member for West Birmingham with its keenness, force and decision, with its tight snap, and its curl of irony and scorn. Mr. Chamberlain's eyes were difficult to fathom ; they were cold and yet challenging, as if always ready for combat. The general expression of his features in conversation indicated a vigilant composure, with a slight disdain. Caricaturists in his late years gave him a fox-like aspect with what Mr. George Meredith called an adventurous nose. His face, Hke Mac- beth's, was ever as a book where men might read strange matters, au 344 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN iace of restless thoughts and deep designs. His head was commonly represented as small, but seen sideways it surprised one by its length. The secret of youth was possessed by this wonderful man for an amaz- ing period. When nearly sixty he seemed at a distance to be only about thirty. The youthful illusion was aided by the clean-shaven face, the slight whisker of early manhood having disappeared in middle age, and by the smoothly-brushed, dark hair, as well as by the alacrity of the figure. In his last Parliamentary decade the stoop of the shoulders, the lines on the forehead, the streaks of grey in the hair, betrayed the approach of the winter of life, but the features main- tained the expression of sharp intelligence and indomitable will. So long as his form was erect Mr. Chamberlain looked above the middle height. He always dressed with obvious care, and the orchid in the button-hole added to the conspicuous smartness of his appearance. One who was well acquainted with most of his contemporaries has said that he knew no man with so strong a will as Mr. Chamberlain, except Mr. Gladstone. Another observer with good opportunities of judging him described him as a creature of impulse, and although the description sounded sarcastic in many ears, Mr.Labouchere testified that * he adopted a course without much consideration.' However this might be, when he took a decision he carried it out with a concentration and energy that moved mountains. He was the most strenuous politician of his time ; engrossed in the business of the kingdom and the •empire, he was determined to have it transacted as much as possible in his own way. Egotism was naturally as conspicuous in Mr. Cham- berlain as in other able and ambitious men. ' I ' figured in his official utterances, where the average minister would have spoken of ' the ■Government.' When he complained that he was introduced into all the orations of his opponents, like King Charles's head into Mr. Dick's petition, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman truly retorted that he was the occupier of that place in his own speeches. XLV THE FINAL YEARS ' The history of a life is the history of a body no less than that of a soul.' — John Morley [Rousseau). WITH dramatic exactness Mr. Chamberlain's active career ter- minated with his three score years and ten. His birthday was celebrated with high honours, and then came sudden silence, followed by long seclusion. ' Upon the rack of this tough world ' his life was stretched out a good deal longer, but in such a manner that the hearts of opponents were softened. It was, for him, a sort of death in life. The terrific overthrow of the Unionists at the general election in January, 1906, failed to subdue Mr. Chamberlain's spirit. He had foreseen defeat, and although now confronted by an immense force of exulting enemies, he looked forward bravely and briskly to the time when, free from the clogging unpopularity of the Balfour Administra- tion, his own policy would be presented at the polls. Now that the Unionists were out of office he hoped to draw them as an organized army into the fiscal campaign. Taking his place on the front Opposi- tion bench among the members of the late Cabinet and leading the party with conspicuous skill while Mr. Balfour was in search of a seat, he rallied the dejected men and with high words * raised their fainting courage and dispell'd their fears.' His firm intention to sweep aside restraints and pursue his policy at all risks was made manifest in a remarkable letter which he addressed to Lord Ridley, an enthu- siastic officer of the Tariff Reform League, on February 6. ' From the beginning,' he wrote, ' I have made it absolutely clear that in no circvunstances would I be a candidate for the leadership of the Unionst party — first, because after having worked in the closest friendship with Mr. Balfour for twenty years I will not place myself in competition with him now ; and secondly, because I entirely agree with those who say that the leader of a party, seven-tenths of which are Conserva- tives, should be himself a Conservative.' These words would have been meaningless if the idea of leadership which he disavowed had 345 A 346 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN not been put forward in some Unionist quarters. It was notoriously favoured by the Tariff Reform ' whole-hoggers.' Mr. Chamberlain declared, however, that there was no question of repudiating the leadership of Mr. Balfour or of putting undue pressure upon him to abandon his opinions or his friends. ' On the other hand,' he added in a tone of menace, ' Tariff Reformers sincerely believe in their prin- ciples, and cannot be expected to put them aside to suit the exigencies of party wire-pullers.' The ominous character of this warning was recognized by all poli- ticians, and in spite of Mr. Chamberlain's protest, Liberals at least believed that he would soon be compelled to take the post for which he was not a candidate. Those who were in his confidence say that he contemplated the issue of a manifesto with a view to the formation of a separate party upon a tariff reform and social reform basis. An exchange of notes, however, passed between himself and Mr. Balfour, with the result that a formula, devised by Mr. Austen Chamberlain, was agreed upon and placed in writing. ' I hold,' Mr. Balfour certified, ' that fiscal reform is, and must remain, the first constructive work of the Unionist party.' Accepting this declaration, Mr. Chamberlain placed his services at the defeated leader's disposal, and the allied statesmen sat again side by side when Mr. Balfour was elected by the City of London. A slight attack of influenza troubled Mr. Chamberlain at the begin- ning of 1906, and in spring he suffered from his old enemy, gout. His manner became strangely restless. Both in and out of Parliament, however, he took a bold part in controversy. When Mr. Asquith, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, began to prepare the way for old age pensions, their early advocate assumed a critical attitude. Mr. Cham- berlain repeated emphatically that never in the whole course of his political life had he promised pensions ; and he asserted that all he had done was to express his sense of the necessity of enabling the industrious working people to make a better provision for old age and to put before them two practical schemes. ' A universal old age pen- sion,' he held, ' is impracticable from the point of view of its expense, and is immoral and undesirable from the point of view of its influence upon thrift and industry.' This was almost his final contribution to the discussion of a subject which he more than any other statesman had forced on the attention of the country. A still more pathetic interest clings to the speeches which he de- livered on the education question when it was dealt with by the bill of the Liberal Government. It was on this theme that he addressed the House of Commons for the first time in 1876, and on this theme, in 1906, he addressed it for the last time. Although regarded by Liberals as a renegade on account of his hostility to the plan which THE FINAL YEARS 347 the Lords rejected, he claimed a certain consistency in principle. ' I hold as I have always done,' he wrote on April 25, ' that there are only two just ways of settling this question. One is that the State should confine itself to secular instruction, giving equal facilities to all denomi- nations to provide the religious education which may be desired by the parents for their children. The other is that the State should provide religious education for all, according to the wishes that may be expressed by the parents of the children. Of these two alternatives I myself greatly prefer the first, and believe that ultimately it is in this direction that a final settlement must be looked for.' In the spirit of this letter Mr. Chamberlain took part, on May 9, in the second reading debate on Mr. Birrell's bill embodying the principles of public control of public money and abolition of tests for teachers. Recalling his maiden speech, delivered thirty years previously, he said it was very curious to look back and see that the position remained exactly the same, and that we had not proceeded one step towards a final settle- ment. Once more he expressed the opinion that an entire separation between the work of the State and the work of the individual or denomination offered the only foundation on which to establish a fair and impartial system. When he spoke of ' what we desire,' Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman archly inquired who were ' we,' and ever ready with a reply he said ' we ' meant those who agreed with ' me.' In this case ' we ' included few of the Conservatives. Mr. Chamberlain spoke for the last time in the House of Commons on June 27. His first speech (in 1876) was in committee on Lord Sandon's Education Bill ; his final words were in committee on Mr. Birrell's. It is encouraging, incidentally, to note that at the close of his career in Parliament he testified that there was one thing on which they might always appeal to the democracy of this country, and that was on the eternal principle of common justice. To the last, as he thus showed, his faith in his fellow-countrymen was maintained. His own self-confidence also was fully preserved. As noted in the chapter on his Personal Life, Dr. Chfford had remarked that they all knew what ' Joey wanted.' Mr. Chamberlain retorted disdainfully that he was not certain his critic did know all he wanted. Unfortunately the sands of his opportunities of teUing what he wanted were almost run out. Speaking a second time the same day he advocated universal facilities for parents, who dissented from the teaching in any given school, to secure for their children the kind of religious education which they desired. These were his closing words in ParUamentary debate. A week later, July 4, on an amendment to the Education Bill, he gave his last vote. The celebrations of his seventieth birthday, which took place at Birmingham on Saturday and Monday, July 7 and 9, were characterized 348 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN by a personal devotion and an enthusiasm which deeply moved him. At a civic luncheon on the 7th he displayed remarkable sensibility ; ' tears stood in his eyes, and his voice quavered ' while he told his fellow-townsmen that he had found in their affection an overwhelming reward for a strenuous life of work and contest. Along with the members of his family and attended by a procession of eighty motor- cars, he visited six public parks where the people were entertained, making a three hours' journey over a route of seventeen miles through decorated streets, lined by cheering citizens. On the second day of the celebrations delegates from all parts of the country presented addresses of congratulation, and numerous telegrams were received from across the seas. There was a political demonstration in Bingley Hall, the scene of many of his triumphs, at which the hero was greeted with extraordinary fervour, and it was followed by a torchlight pro- cession, which attended Mr. and Mrs. Chamberlain to their gates. All this, while very gratifying, was excessively fatiguing. Suddenly a veil dropped over the life of the man who had been so conspicuous for over thirty years. In the middle of July the country learned that on the 13th, at his London residence, he had been seized by illness. His absence from the wedding of his son, Austen, eight days later, was the first indication of its gravity. Much reserve was maintained as to the character of the ailment. It was described by friends as an attack of gout, and they ridiculed rumours about a paralytic stroke. When the invalid returned to Birmingham in the middle of September the world was informed that he had to be con- veyed from the train to his carriage in a chair, and it was ominously explained about the same time that his fingers were so cramped that he could not write with comfort. For six months after going home to Highbury Mr. Chamberlain was seen by scarcely any one except his family and attendants. He spent several hours daily in his garden and greenhouses, and by the end of the year he was ' permitted to read.' In March, 1907, he travelled to London with as little publicity as possible, a compart- ment in the train being reserved for him imder an assumed name, and after a rest he proceeded to St. Raphael, near Cannes. A fellow- passenger on the Channel boat said he was so changed that he was not generally recognized. In June he came back to England, and several times during summer he passed between London and Birmingham. On railway platforms he walked slowly, leaning upon a stick and supported by a companion at his side. He was unable to use his right hand ; his right leg also was affected ; and his appearance was greatly altered by the spectacles which he now wore instead of the familar monocle. For a long time yet Mr. Chamberlain could not receive his friends, but by the close of 1907 he was able to attend to THE FINAL YEARS' 349 letters and the world gladly heard then that there was a possibility of his health being restored. ' I hope,' he wrote, ' it may not be long before I take my place again in the front rank of the fight for Unionism and the policy for which it now stands,' and in the following February (1908) he caused another letter to be written in a similar strain. ' I am getting better but am still far from having recovered my ancient strength. I hope, however, that this is only a question of time and patience.' Subsequent years passed like 1907. For several months in the spring and summer of 1908 the intrepid invalid, whose helpless condition excited universal sympathy, was abroad, trying a cure at Aix- les-Bains after his visit to Cannes, and going also to Ouchy. He acknowledged the salutations of people who met him, while travelling, by raising his left hand. The autumn was spent at Highbury, where he took drives and continued to enjoy the hours in his garden, and he was in London for several weeks in December. His new life fell into a routine. He spent the early months of successive years at Cannes and the remainder of the time at his home at Birmingham with the exception of occasional visits to Prince's Gardens. At Cannes he occupied the Ville Victoria, its sunny garden, stocked with sub-tropical trees and plants, sloping down to La Napoule Bay, and commanding a magnificent view. In his feebleness and seclusion, as his family reported, Mr. Cham- berlain watched political events with undiminished interest. To the growth of the new fiscal doctrines his encouragement was essential ; without it they might have quickly drooped and faded. Seldom has the life of a statesman been so indispensable to followers. Many letters and telegrams expressing his wishes and views were drawn from Mr. Chamberlain by Tariff Reform candidates and societies, and his hold on the popular imagination was maintained by the idea of the strong man stricken in body but valorous in mind. In May, 1908, by a letter written in his name he expressed the conviction that Tariff Reform was now being adopted by the people. ' They see,' he said, ' that it is only in this way that one can keep our position against our foreign competitors and they will not allow what our forefathers won for us to be filched from us by modem indifference.' A touch of the old adroit hand was given in a message read at a luncheon at which Mr. Balfour was entertained, in March, 1909, by the Executive of the Tariff Reform League. The foimder of the League regretted that he could not attend to ' welcome our leader on the occasion of his doing honour to an Association that was brought into being to advance the first constructive policy of the party which he leads.' No doubt the ' leader ' remembered that the Association was formed to promote a policy initiated not by himself but by his colleague ! 350 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Great transactions were carried out after Mr. Chamberlain's voice and presence were withdrawn from Pariiament by the Minis- try of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman and his successor, Mr. Asquith. Responsible government was conceded to the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony, which subsequently formed part of the South African Union, old age pensions were provided for the poor at home, and Mr. Lloyd George's 1909 budget with its land and liquor taxes and its increased burdens on the very rich led to the opening of a new chapter of the constitutional struggle. The House of Lords, which had already defied the huge majority in the representative chamber by rejecting several of the ministerial measures, was encouraged by Mr. Chamberlain to throw out the Finance Bill embodying the budget. At a meeting at Birmingham in September, 1909, when Mr. Balfour, who was a guest at Highbury, bore witness to the continued high courage, clear intellect and assured judgment of his host, a letter was ' amid tense silence ' produced from the invalid expressing the hope that the Peers would see their way to force a general election. By this stroke the fate of the notorious budget in its first Parliament was sealed, for to many Unionists — as one of the ablest of them said — Mr. Chamberlain's voice still represented the guiding note. ' The master hand,' Mr. F. E. Smith testified, 'was still there, the old skill, the old courage were still undimmed ; the voice, though hushed for the moment in our public controversies, was ever ready in brave, and wise counsel.' Mr. Chamberlain proceeded to London at the end of October and remained there till the Peers, who were advised by Lord Milner to damn the consequences, referred the Finance Bill to the country. Their action was defended in a fearless, unflinching manner by their old assailant, who now wrote that their only offence was that of giving the nation a chance to speak for itself. A few friends saw Mr. Cham- berlain during the crisis, and one of them, the son of his early political comrade. Admiral Maxse, said that those who had been privileged to discuss public affairs with him were more than ever impressed by his keenness, foresight, wisdom, valour and confidence. Recalling a fine tribute paid to another famous British statesman, Mr. Maxse reported that every combatant left his presence a better and a braver man. His absence from the field, however, was a misfortune for the Unionists during the general election of January, 1910. They could truly say, as the Carthaginians wrote over the grave of Hannibal : ' We vehem- ently desired him in the day of battle.' The bold challenge of the Peers did not result in triumph. Although a large number of the Liberals fell, the Unionists were left in a minority. A most moving spectacle was witnessed by the House of Commons on February 16, 1910, when the statesman who had personified vigour THE FINAL YEARS 351 and force came, after an absence of three-and-a-half years, to take the oath in the new Parliament. ' Doth any here know me ? This is not Lear : Doth Lear walk thus ? speak thus ? Where are his eyes ? ' At the close of an afternoon devoted to the swearing in of members, when the House was almost empty, an old stricken man came slowly from behind the Speaker's chair, leaning on a stick in his left hand and putting his right foot stiffly down on the heel, Mr. Austen Chamberlain supporting him on the right side and the Liberal Unionist Whip ready to aid him at his other elbow. His right arm was held closely to his breast ; his face was fireless, and spectacles gave to a famihar figure a strange, almost disguising aspect. Onlookers felt a shock of sorrow when in the broken, helpless man they recognized one by whom Parliament had been inspired and mastered. On his being assisted to a convenient place on the Treasury Bench, not then occu- pied by any of the ministers, a copy of the oath was held before him and he recited its terms as they were read out, phrase by phrase, by his son, his voice being quite audible but his articulation indistinct. Mr. Austen signed the roll on his behalf, the invalid confirming the signature by formally touching the pen. ' Mr. Chamberlain, West Birmingham, sir,' announced the Clerk of the House, with a tone of emotion in his voice as he presented, according to custom, the newly sworn in member to the Speaker ; and Mr. Lowther, leaning from his chair, grasped the left hand which was offered, while he whispered, ' How do you do ? Glad to see you again.' Having taken the oath, Mr. Chamberlain could be ' paired ' in divisions with an absentee on the other side. His ' pair ' was his only part in the proceedings of the short Parhament elected in January, 1910. Visits from the Palace were paid to him. King Edward called at Prince's Gardens in the summer of 1909 and spent a considerable time with Mr. Chamberlain. This was the end of the association which began at Birmingham in 1874 when the Radical mayor's recep- tion of the Prince of Wales excited so much curiosity. On his return from his annual visit to Cannes in 1910 he received from King George the same honour as had been paid to him by King Edward. The new Sovereign, a few weeks after succeeding to the throne, took tea with Mr. and Mrs. Chamberlain and remained in conversation with them for an hour. For the first time since his illness the invahd spent his birthday this year in London. Personal friends called at his residence and ninety Tariff Reformers belonging to the two Houses of Parliament celebrated the occasion by dining together at Prince's Restaurant. 352 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN The year 1910 was notable for the development of the constitu- tional struggle. Resolutions to curtail the veto of the Lords were passed by the House of Commons, and a conference between leading members of the two great parties having failed to secure agreement, the Government appealed to the country on the subject in December, and although Mr. Balfour endeavoured to conciliate the Unionist Free Fooders by agreeing to a special Referendum on Tariff Reform, Mr. Asquith was maintained in office and enabled to carry out his plans by a combination of liberal. Nationalist, and Labour members. Once more, on February 2, 1911, Mr. Chamberlain visited the House of Commons, and took the oath. This he did in the same manner and with the same assistance as in the previous Parliament. In some respects he seemed a little more like his former self. His face as he surveyed the scene had the old keen glance, and there was a note of the old vibrating tone in his voice, although the words came forth in jerks. An orchid in his coat also reminded observers of the days that were no more — the great days of combat and of passion. When the Clerk held out to him the pen with which his son had entered his name on the roll he smiled and said, ' Thank you,' as he touched it and he rephed to the Speaker's welcome with a jocular remark. This was the last time he was seen, the last time his voice was heard, in the House. At the opening of the new Parliament the cause with which his old age was associated was still championed in its entirety by those who believed in it. The reciprocity agreement entered into by the Govern- ments of the United States and of Canada led to the renunciation of the idea of imperial preference by one or two journals which had espoused Tariff Reform, but Mr. Lyttelton, speaking from the Unionist front bench* on February 9, 1911, conveyed to Mr. Chamberlain the affec- tionate assurance that his friends ' had not abandoned the cause of which he was for so long the central and inspiring figure, to which he had devoted so much labour and for which he had done and suffered so much.' While treating the American reciprocity arrangement as a new proof of the necessity of their own proposals, the Tariff Reformers were greatly encouraged when it was rejected at a general election in Canada. On his 75th birthday (191 1) their honoured leader, whose health was better than it had been since it broke down, received again a very large number of congratulatory messages from all parts of the empire. There was on this as on similar occasions a dinner party of his prominent followers at Prince's Restaurant, the number of the company representing the combined years of his life and of his Parha- mentary membership, his favourite orchid being worn by all present. His reply to their telegram had a touch of pathos. ' I have no doubt,' he said, ' about the ultimate success of our pohcy, although it is late in coming.' THE FINAL YEARS 355 At the constitutional crisis in the summer of 191 1, however, Mr. Chamberlain's influence failed. Unionists were divided in opinion on the tactics to be pursued with reference to the Parliament Bill for the limitation of the power of the Peers. After Mr. Asquith had, on July 20, informed the leaders of the Opposition that the King would con- sider it his duty to exercise his prerogative to secure the passing into law of the bill in substantially its House of Commons form, the Marquis of Lansdowne, with the approval of Mr. Balfour, advised his friends not to insist on vital amendments. Mr. Chamberlain, on the other hand, gave encouragement to those who under the leadership of aged Lord Halsbury, the ex-Lord Chancellor, persisted in a resistance which if successful would have compelled the Government to resort to a large creation of peers in order to carry their measure. ' The country,' he wrote, ' owes a great deal to Lord Halsbury, since in the crisis of her fate he has refused to surrender his principles.' His intervention on this occasion gave offence in some Unionist quarters. The Times dis- paraged advice given from ' a retirement which ill-health had for years forced upon Mr. Chamberlain,' and the Spectator, which held him responsible for the disastrous rejection of Mr. Lloyd George's budget by the House of Lords as well as for the present resistance of the extremists, described with candour and pungency what the Unionist party owed to the politician who eight years previously started the Tariff Reform propaganda : ' He split the party in 1903 ; he committed it to a fatal step in 1909 ; he has split it once more in 191 1.' At this stage he was beaten by Mr. Balfour ; the resisters who had received the blessing of Birmingham were defeated ; and the Parliament Act was passed. To his disappointment at the course of political events — the con- tinued success of Liberalism and the long exclusion of his friends from office — a personal pang may have been added by his son's failure to obtain the Unionist leadership when it was resigned by Mr. Balfour in November, 1911. Although considerations of health influenced the ex- Prime Minister in withdrawing from the leadership, all the world believed that he had been discouraged by the dissensions among his colleagues. Mr. Austen Chamberlain had, like his father, taken the side of the con- stitutional ' die-hards ' against the advice of the official chiefs, and on the day of Mr. Balfour's resignation he threw over the Referendimi on Tariff Reform to which they had been committed and announced that a Unionist Government would carry out their fiscal principles ' without need for further mandate, sanction, or approbation.' By such dissent he lost the sympathy of some of Mr. Balfour's personal friends. The party in choosing a new leader was almost equally divided between Mr. Austen Chamberlain and Mr. Walter Long, a genial, fluent country gentleman, experienced in affairs and popular in the House. In these 23 354 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN ■circumstances the two favourites waived their own claims, and the leadership fell to Mr. Bonar Law, who had been only eleven years in Parliament and had never sat in a Cabinet, having held only a minor ofhce. Although Mr. Bonar Law was one of the most thoroughgoing advocates of Tariff Reform his appointment could not have given unalloyed pleasure at Highbury. Mr. Austen Chamberlain, by his -solid talents, his industry, and his good Parliamentary style, had estab- lished a fair claim to the first place, but in the son's case (for a time at least), as in the father's, the leadership was lost by the too eager holding out of a hand which had seemed within reach of the prize. Liberal Unionism as a separate force ceased to exist, so far as the •central organization was concerned, in 191 2. It had played a powerful part in politics, but ever since the Coalition in 1895 the distinction between the allied sections gradually became slighter, and while old Liberal Unionists died, nobody was bom a Liberal Unionist. The National Conservative Union and the Liberal Unionist Council were accordingly amalgamated in 1912. Mr. Joseph Chamberlain wrote expressing his approval of the amalgamation, and Mr. Austen Cham- berlain announced that in future he meant to call himself a Unionist. Thus ' Liberal ' dropped practically out of his life, although Liberal Unionism still survived in Birmingham. The subsequent history of the Unionists was not quite agreeable to the Chamberlain circle. Although they won by-elections, their 'quarrels over food taxes were renewed. The Referendum, which the •extreme Tariff Reformers had steadily opposed, was abandoned by the official leaders two years after its adoption. Lord Lansdowne, as their mouthpiece, announcing in November 14, 1912, that if they won at the general election they would be free to undertake Tariff Reform and to enter into reciprocal arrangements without further reference to the constituencies ; but so great was the disquiet caused by this step among Unionist Free Fooders that Mr. Bonar Law resorted to another device, and informed the country that food duties would only be imposed if the Colonies, at a conference, considered them essential to Imperial Preference. The new device, in turn, led to a very sharp •conflict, one section of Unionists still holding with Mr. Chamberlain that * if you are to give a preference to the Colonies you must put a tax upon food,' and another crying out that the electors would never agree to a food tax. The Unionist Party in the House of Commons took the matter into their own hands, and presented to their leader in January, 191 3, a memorial requesting that ' if, when a Unionist Govern- ment has been returned to power, it proves desirable, after consulta- tion with the Dominions, to impose new duties on any articles of food in order to secure the most effective system of preference, such duties -should not be imposed until they have been submitted to the people THE FINAL YEARS 355 of this country at a general election.' To this ' change of method ' Mr. Bonar Law, although with reluctance, agreed. Mr. Austen Cham- berlain, on the other hand, frankly refused to share the responsibility for such a decision. It really meant a return to the double election devised by Mr. Balfour in 1904. On that occasion the plan was modi- fied in deference to the views of Mr. Chamberlain. Now, the memorial in favour of it was signed by nearly all the Unionist members. Mr. Joseph Chamberlain gave no public sign of resentment. On the con- trary, in a letter to the Duke of Westminsterfromthe Villa Victoria, Cannes, dated February 21, 1913, with reference to a fund for the Imperial Reform Campaign, he wrote : ' There is nothing in what has recently occurred to make it impossible for us to continue our pro- paganda on the same lines.' Still he maintained his own views. ' I have not,' he wrote to a friend on May 30, ' changed my own opinions in any way, and though a portion of our policy has been postponed, I am confident that it will ultimately be found essential to that complete imperial union for which we have so long laboured.' While the fluctuating cause of Tariff Reform thus gave trouble to Unionists, the Liberals proceeded with their own bold reforms. In the session of 1911, in which the veto of the Lords was limited, pay- ment of members, advocated by Mr. Chamberlain in his Radical days, but opposed by his Conservative friends, was provided for by the Government with the sanction of the House of Commons, and a social policy such as the author of the unauthorized Liberal programme of 1885 might have been proud to promote was developed in Mr. Lloyd George's scheme of national insurance, which the Conservatives praised in principle and denounced in detail. Then came in 1912-14 the renewal of old controversies in which he had been conspicuous. In the new struggle on a Home Rule Bill the famous fighter was sorely missed. And how he himself must have envied the active combatants as he sat in his invalid chair, with his head resting on his hand, brooding over the past with its thrill and glory ! All that domestic affection could do was done for the invalid, and in his old age, as Lady Dorothy Nevill ^ noted in a visit, he found a source of pleasure and amusement in his grandson, ' dear little Joe.' His family shared his interests and aims, and aided him with devotion. Mr. Neville Chamberlain in a speech in West Birmingham made a touching reference to him. ' My father,' he said, ' has had many trials in the course of what is now a long life. He has had domestic sorrows, he has had political disappointments, he has had to suffer the frustration of his ambitions and the loss of friends ; and now in his closing years he is suffering imder a disability which is, perhaps, more painful to him than to most men, because all his life he has been * Under Five Reigns, Lady Dorothy Nevill. 356 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN a man of the greatest mental activity ; but his immense courage and his extraordinary patience have enabled him to go through all his trials — not excepting the last one — with an equal mind and in good spirits.' A waiter at the refreshment room at Calais said to Mr. Neville Chamberlain, after seeing his father on his way to Cannes in 1913 : ' Sir, he doesn't change, and although he comes back every year a year older, still he seems to be the same man.' Writing from Cannes to the British Weekly in the spring of that year. Sir William Robertson Nicoll noted that there was little change in his appearance, though perhaps he looked a trifle older. He spent most of his time in the large and beautiful grounds attached to the Villa Victoria. Sometimes he took walks in the sun on the Boulevard du Midi, and was seen at other times in a bath chair or driving in his carriage. His return in the summer of 1913 was delayed by the serious illness of Mrs. Cham- berlain. When he arrived at Charing Cross he appeared to be able to move his limbs with less labour than in some former years. A small group of spectators standing near his carriage, as he entered it, a passenger inquired, ' Who is that ? ' * That's Joey,' replied a porter. The old familiar name adhered. At last, on January 7, 1914, the newspapers contained the announce- ment, made by Mr. Chamberlain in letters to the Presidents of the Liberal Unionist and Conservative Associations for West Birmingham, that he did not intend to offer himself for re-election. ' I have not,' he said, ' come to this decision without many regrets at the severance of a connexion which has already lasted for over thirty-seven years, and has been marked on the part of my constituents by an ever- growing confidence and support ; but I cannot hope again to do my work in Parliament, and I feel that our city and the constituency need the services of a younger man who will take an active part in the Par- liamentary struggle and help you to maintain the supremacy of the Unionist cause in Birmingham.' Although the intimation caused little surprise and the blow was softened by the assurance that Mr. Chamberlain's health was not worse, and that his interest in politics was undiminished, a note of pathos was struck by the event. Eulogis- tic articles appeared in the Unionist press, and sympathetic, truly appreciative references were made also by Liberal and Labour news- papers. While the former dwelt largely on his Imperialism, the latter acknowledged his services to social reform. There was a touching sound of sorrow in the resolution of the Executive of the West Birming- ham Liberal Unionist Association, recording the ' coming severance of public and personal ties which for so many years have bound us together in affectionate relationship.' Death came, mercifully perhaps, before the retirement could take THE FINAL YEARS 357 effect, and when it came it was unexpected. Mr. Chamberlain spent the early months of 1914 as usual at Cannes, and on his return in May, although he looked thinner and more bent than in former years, it was stated that his health had improved. Fellow passengers at Charing Cross watched sympathetically while he was assisted to his horse-drawn brougham. He made his first public appearance since his illness — and, as it proved, the last — at a garden party given to the Unionists of his own constituency and of his son's in the grounds of Highbury on June 6. Seated in a bath chair, and seeming to be in good spirits, he put out his hand to old political friends and raised his hat in acknowledgment of bursts of cheers from delighted people. ' I wish we had you with us now,' said men who had followed him in fight, whereupon he smiled and shook his head. The next news was of his death, which occurred in London on July 2. People were startled by the intimation of the event. There had been no report of a relapse, and it was not generally known that Mr. Chamberlain had come back from Birmingham to London. The final illness was short. On Monday, June 29, he ' kept me for an hour,' liis son, Mr. Austen, stated, ' while he told me his whole mind on the situa- tion in Ireland.' On Tuesday he was taken ill. Next day he stayed in bed, and at 10.15 on the evening of Thursday, in the presence of his family, he passed peacefully away. The news, published on the following forenoon, excited profoimd emotion, not only in Great Britain, but throughout the empire. Messages of regret from all over the world were received, foreign coimtries as well as British showing their consciousness that a great man had gone. Telegrams to Mr, Austen Chamberlain included several from the royal family. The King wired an expression of heartfelt sorrow, adding, ' I deeply regret the loss of one for whom I had the greatest admiration and respect,' and subsequently His Majesty sent a letter of condolence in his own handwriting. Queen Alexandra telegraphed direct to Mrs. Chamber- lain, and her secretary conveyed her very sincere sympathy to Mr. Austen on the death of ' such a distinguished father, one of the greatest men this Empire has ever known.' An Abbey funeral for the statesman was offered to his family, but in compliance with his wishes he was buried among his own people in the simplest manner. At an hour of Sunday when comparatively few people were astir his body was conveyed from Prince's Gardens to Paddington on the way to Birmingham. There, as he passed from the railway station to Highbury, his fellow-citizens lining the route stood with uncovered heads and sorrowing faces. Next day, Monday, July 6, he was buried in Key Hill Cemetery. A service of the utmost simplicity was conducted at the Church of the Messiah, while simul- taneously a memorial service was held at St. Margaret's, Westminster, 358 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN which was attended by poUtical friends and opponents, by men con- spicuous in various walks of Hfe, by foreign diplomatists and by re- presentatives of the colonies. Mr. Chamberlain's last journey from his home to the Church of the Messiah and thence to the cemetery was watched by crowds of people, but only the family circle stood at the graveside, when he was laid to rest beside his first and second wives and not far from his father. In that circle besides the widow were three daughters and two sons of the statesman, and his only surviving brother, Mr. Walter Chamberlain. For no man was there deeper mourning by a family. Tributes to Mr. Chamberlain's memory were paid in both Houses of Parliament by the leaders of the Liberal and the Unionist parties. Specially fine was that from Mr. Asquith, who testified that ' in that striking personality, vivid, masterful, resolute, tenacious, there were no blurred or nebulous outlines, there were no relaxed fibres, there were no moods of doubt and hesitation, there were no pauses of lethargy or fear.' Mr. Balfour, who supplemented Mr. Bonar Law's tribute from his own wider experience, described Mr. Chamberlain as ' a great statesman, a great friend, a great orator, a great man.' Although he had never been leader of the House of Commons, nor head of a Government, the House in which he had played a foremost part, doing him an exceptional honour, adjourned its sitting in his memory. That same evening the House of Lords gave the second reading to a bill based on the assumption that Home Rule was to become law. XLVI A SUGGESTED EPITAPH THE epitaph prepared for Mr. Chamberlain by Lord Roseberjr was that ' in a political career of thirty years he split up both the great political parties of the State.' It was a career unequalled in destructiveness, although surpassed in constructiveness by men of immeasurably smaller talents. Mr. Chamberlain's most notable achievement in the arena of home politics was his surprising and successful fight against Home Rule. To his energy, his ingenuity, his oratory, and his influence the defeat of Mr. Gladstone's Irish schemes was in a large measure due. The greatest affair with which he was directly associated as a minister of the Crown was the Boer War. His share in that chapter of history on which the mark of blood is left has been accounted to him for fame by one set of critics and by another set for dishonour. ' He has left a united South Africa under the Union Jack,' said Sir Conan Doyle, the novehst, who classed him with Chatham and Pitt among the great empire builders, while Radicals on the other hand found the results of his policy in taxes and graves and broken hearts. As Secretary of State he assisted the movement of the time for the drawing of the colonies closer to the mother country in sympathy. There may have been exaggeration in Mr. Balfour's statement, in 1900, that ' it was during his term of office that the British Empire as a whole first showed its full and corporate conscious- ness of what it was and what its destinies were,' but even the Radicals admitted the happy effects of his administration in promoting an imperial sense of unity and a common glow of patriotism, and the people of the dominions themselves were grateful to him for his interest and zeal. His memory may be preserved across the seas longer even than at home, for several towns in the dominions have been named after him. Unfortunately it was as a wrecker that Mr. Chamberlain closed his official career. In renouncing his earlier fiscal beliefs he unsettled the minds of a great mass of his fellow-countrymen and drew down the Unionist party. He hoped to reconstruct it, but dis- abling illness came up)on him without his having convinced the 359 36o JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN United Kingdom that a safe system could be raised on the new founda- tions which he devised. No bill of the first magnitude was ever carried by Mr. Chamberlain. The historian may find that he was an inspirer rather than a performer. He sowed the seed, and others reaped the harvest. One who knew him intimately described him as a great artificer of programmes and Mr. Gladstone jeered at him as a prolific parent of schemes. He was one of the most ardent advocates of free education, which the Conservatives provided while he was their ally but not their colleague. With his encouragement, too, they set up county councils and gave facilities, inadequate although these were, for allotments and small holdings. There is no doubt also that he prepared the country for •old age pensions. He brought the question of pensions into current politics and yet he left to his opponents the honour of providing them. While he looked into the promised land, Mr. Asquith and Mr. Lloyd George led the old folk into it. The most important bills which he personally piloted were those for bankruptcy reform while he was a Liberal, and for compensation for accidents when he became a Unionist. Many of his aspirations were unrealized. Neither the Church, nor the land, nor the school system in respect of sectsirianism was freed by Mr. Chamberlain, and the power of the House of Lords was, in the •end, checked against his will. ' I have an ambition, ' he said in early life ; ' my ambition is to leave the world a little better than I found it.' In some respects this high aim was fulfilled. No doubt, like Adam Smith on his death bed, Mr. Chamberlain could have said, 'I meant to have done more.' But he did much. He assisted to improve the lot of the poor and he stimulated political parties to promote social reform. What ill he may have done by reopening the fiscal question, and letting Protection loose, remains to be seen by those who come after him. Which — it may be asked — was the real Mr. Chamberlain, the Mr. Chamberlain who preached Ransom, or the Mr. Chamberlain who said, ' You must put a tax on food ' ? Were they both real men ? Was the old completely changed into the new, with a fresh set of convictions ? The complexity of the strangest career of our time cannot be made plain and simple by contemporaries. They are puzzled by the earnest- ness with which he spoke on both sides of many great questions. Other statesmen have changed their opinions and their parties, but none so surprisingly and daringly as Mr. Chamberlain. The secret of his career lies, perhaps, in George Meredith's words, ' He has been thought- lessly called a renegade,' wrote the novelist in 1906. ' He is merely the man of a tremendous energy acting upon one idea. Formerly it was the Radical and free trade, now it is the Tory and protectionist idea ; and he is quite in earnest, altogether at the mercy of the idea animat- A SUGGESTED EPITAPH 361 ing him.* It may be said of him, as Professor Dowden has said of King Richard III, that his central characteristic was ' the necessity of releasing and letting loose upon the world the force within him, the necessity of deploying before himself and others the terrible resources of his will.' ' Now in his ashes honour.' CHAMBERLAINIANA A COLLECTION OF SUPPLEMENTARY DETAILS BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS ON MR. CHAMBERLAIN 1882 ' Remarks on Mr. Chamberlain's Bankruptcy Bill, etc' H. Gotobed. 1883 ' Defeat and Retreat. Three Years' Blunders.' Letters from Joseph to William. (An imaginary attack by Mr. Chamberlain on Mr. Gladstone for his ' grand old ma'nnishness.') Pp. 48. 1884 ' Mr. Daniel Creedy, M.P.' An Extravaganza (intended to satirize Mr. Chamberlain). Pp. 40. * The Liberal Party and Mr. Chamberlain.' By Sir W. T. Marriott, Q.C., M.P. A tract. Pp. 30, attacking Mr. Chamberlain per- sonally : many editions issued. ' A Letter to Joseph Chamberlain on the " Unearned Increment," by A Tory Radical.' A short satire. 1885 'The Radical Programme.' With a preface by Mr. Chamberlain. ' The Right Honourable Joseph Chamberlain, M.P.' By H. J. Leech. A pamphlet, friendly in tone, on Mr. Chamberlain as local legisla- tor, member for Birmingham and Cabinet Minister. 'The Life of Joseph Chamberlain.' By B. C. Skottowe. A brief, S5mtipathetic biography, published in Birmingham. ' Speeches of the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, M.P.' With a Sketch of his Life. Edited by H. W. Lucy. The volume in- cludes Mr. Chamberlain's most famous Radical speeches. ' Free Schools : a Reply to . . . Joseph Chamberlain and others.' By Rev. T. D. C. Morse. A pamphlet. 1886 ' Mr. Chamberlain.' By G. A. Denison, Archdeacon of Taunton. A tract expressing dread of Mr. Chamberlain as the pronounced and principal adversary of the Church of England. * Now or Never ! ' A letter (on the political crisis) to the Right Honourable * * * (i.e., J. Chamberlain). Talus. ' A United Kingdom versus A Home Rule Policy. A Letter to the Right Honourable Joseph Chamberlain, M.P.' Pp. 13. Ignotus. ' La Ligue pour la defense de la liberte et de la propriete en Angleterre et le socialisme agraire de M. Chamberlain.' By A. Raffalovich. 365 366 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN * Not for Joe ! ' A political medley. Pp. 30. 1893 ^ Profils anglais.' By A. Filon. A series of essays on English political leaders, including Mr. Chamberlain. 1896 ■* Joseph Chamberlain.' By S. H. Jeyes. A biographical sketch in series of ' Public Men of To-day.' Pp. 258. ■* The Neo-Protection Scheme of the Right Hon. J. Chamberlain.' By Lord Farrer. A Cobden Club leaflet. 1898. ^ Before Joseph came into Egypt.' A selection from Mr. Chamber- lain's speeches. By WiUiam Sykes. Pp. 160. The Chamberlain Birthday Book. Extracts from Mr. Chamberlain's speeches. 1899 ■* J. Chamberlain.' By Achille Viallate. A record "of the career of ' cet intelligent et audacieux politicien.' 1900 ' ■* Sir Henry Parkes and Mr. Chamberlain.' By J. R. Endean. Letters to Mr. Chamberlain, complaining of his eulogium of Sir H. Parkes. ' The Right Honourable Joseph Chamberlain : the Man and the States- man.' By N. Murrell Marris. Pp. 480. A very friendly bio- graphy with considerable personal detail. * Joseph Chamberlain : Conspirator or Statesman ? ' By W. T. Stead. Pp. III. An examination of the evidence as to the Jameson Raid. ■* Was Mr. Chamberlain privy to the Jameson Raid ? ' A pamphlet denying his complicity, published by the Women's Liberal Unionist Association. 1901 * Der Morder der Kinder und Frauen. (Es ist Chamberlain — ^Aus dem Franzosischen iibersetzt.) ' ' Protest gegen Chamberlain.' By Eugene von Enzberg. ■* The Right Honoiurable Joseph Chamberlain, M.P.' By Arthur Wallace. A sympathetic biography. Pp. 94, 32mo. ' Joseph Chamberlain. A Romance of Modern PoHtics.' By Arthur Mee. A short biography in New Century Leader series, claiming to be written from a national rather than a party point of view. ■* Der Liigner Chamberlain. Deutsche Volks proteste gegen die Ver- leumdungen des enghschen Colonial-Ministers Chamberlain.' Leipzig. Pp. 32. BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS 367 1902 ■• Englands Verbrechen an Transvaal und Mr. Chamberlains Verleum- dung der deutschen Kriegfiihrung.' By W. Prosch. Pp. 22. "Joe Chamberlain. Vroolijke vordracht.' By D. Junior. A song. • Interviste. Gladstone — Chamberlain — Cecil Rhodes — Salisbury, etc' By Carlo Paladini. Pp. 428. ' The Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain.' By E. Rodgers and E. J. Moyle. Volimie in Men of the Moment penny series. Illus- trated by authors. " Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain : a Study of his Character as a Statesman.' By H. C. Pedder. Pp. 102. A defence of Mr. Chamberlain's imperiahsm as a development of his democratic principles. 1903. ' Mr. Chamberlain : his Life and Pubhc Career.' By S. H. Jeyes. Pp. 803. Dealing mainly with career as Unionist. "* Chamberlain and Chamberlainism : his Fiscal Proposals and Colonial Pohcy.' By Bartholomew Smith. Pp. 132. ^ The Chamberlain Bubble. Facts about the Zollverein, with an Alternative Pohcy.' By PhiUp Snowden. Tracts for The Times. " Mr. Chamberlain's Proposals : Wliat they Mean and what we shall Gain by tjiem.' By C. A. Vince. A defence of fiscal reform. Pp. 87. ' Mr. Chamberlain's New Pohcy. Fifty Years of Free Trade and the Result.' By H. W. Wilson. A defence of new pohcy. Pp. 32. ' Facts and Explanations in a Nutshell : the Chamberlain Policy, or Fiscal Reform at a Glance.' By E. P. Woolf. Pp. 16, 32mo. ■• Trade and the Empire.' Mr. Chamberlain's proposals examined in four speeches and a prefatory note. By H. H. Asquith. " Through Preference to Protection.' An examination of Mr. Cham- berlain's Fiscal Proposals. By Chiozza Money. 'Thoughts on Mr. Chamberlain's Proposed Fiscal Pohcy.' By W. J. Hammond. A pamphlet contending that Mr. Chamberlain has followed the exigencies of the time. ' The Protectionist Peril.' By G. H. Penis. Pp. 143. An examina- tion of Mr. Chamberlain's fiscal proposals. ' Talking it Over. Mr. Chamberlain's Visit to John Workman.' By J. Middleton (of Oldham). National Reform Union Pamphlet. ' Joseph the Dehverer of the Land of Egypt.' By Anglo-Saxon. A pohtical allegory on Mr. Chamberlain and the fiscal question. * Owd Poskitt : his Opinions on Mr. Chamberlain in Particular and on EngUsh Trade in General.' By Joseph Smith Fletcher. A retired Yorkshire farmer defends ' Joaziph ' for saying now what he himself has been saying for years. ' Joe : or a Crisis in Dr. Mundum's School.' By Mark Gordon, pseud. An allegory in defence of Mr. Chamberlain's fiscal pohcy. ■* Our Joe : his Great Fight.' By Harry Furniss. Cartoons. 368 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN 'Joe, the Brummagem Mephistopheles. ' By the author of Mair Macjigger. Glasgow. Pp. 68. ' The " Pump Away, Joseph " Songster. All the Songs about Joe.' A souvenir of Mr. Chamberlain's visit to the City of London on. March 20, 1903. ' GuUiver Joe.' By Jonathan Quick, pseud. A parody of ' Gulliver's Travels ' satirizing Mr. Chamberlain. ' Playing Mr. Chamberlain's Game : an Appeal to the Spectator and all Free Traders.' By A Man fra' Sheffield. A defence of Mr. Bal- four's policy. Pp. 22. ' England's Mission by England's Statesmen, Chatham-Chamber- lain.' Edited by A. Mee. Pp. 362. ' La Crise anglaise et les idees de M. Chamberlain.' By L. Duplan. Conference a I'Universite Populaire, Lyonnaise. ' L'Imperialisme anglais. Sou evolution. Carlyle-Seeley-Chamber- lain.' By Jacques Gazeau. * With Mr. Chamberlain through South Africa.' A narrative of the Great Trek. By George Griffith (newspaper correspondent). ' Souvenir of Mr. Chamberlain's South African Tour, 1902-3.' An illustrated record of the tour. By J. H. lies and L. Scheff. 1904 ' The Life of the Right Honourable Joseph Chamberlain.' By Louis Creswicke. Four volumes, with portraits, cartoons and other illustrations. ' Mr. Chamberlain : his Life and Public Career.' By S. H. Jeyes. Two volumes, with illustrations. ' Chamberlain : etude.' By J. O. Bijoux. Brief biographical study published at Port -Louis, He Maurice. ' A Looking-Glass for Mr. Chamberlain.' By T. W. H. Crossland. Pp. 32. ' The Wrong Mr. Chamberlain : a Fiscal Farce.' By Paul Herring, ' Socialism versus the Chamberlain Red Herring.' By Joe Walker. Advocacy of Socialism in preference to the ' fiscal jugglery ' of Mr. Chamberlain. Pp. 31. ' Fact versus Fiction : the Cobden Club's reply to Mr. Chamberlain.' ' The Statesman and the Bishop.' By John Draper, _^sgw^. 'A letter to a gentleman in the diocese of Hereford.' Pp. 93. Defending Mr. Chamberlain's fiscaJ views against Bishop Percival's criticism. ' Mr. Chamberlain's Zollreform und Deutschland.' By Carl Peters. Pp. 20. ' A Revenue Tariff within the Empire.' Canadian chapters on Mr. Chamberlain's Pohcy. By A. MacGoun. Pubhshed in Montreal. ' Mr. Chamberlain's Defence of Colonial Protection.' A pamphlet by James Rigby Smith. BOOKS AND PAMPHLETS 369 ' The Chamberlain Proposals from the Canadian Point of View.' By J. C. Sutherland, Montreal. Pp. 8. 1905 * Joseph Chamberlain, Imperiahst, 1836-1906.' By N. Murrell Marris. An outline of his life and work, with extracts from famous speeches. Pp- 275. 'Chamberlain: a Study.' By John M. Robertson. A denunciation of Mr. Chamberlain from the time of his secession from the Liberal Party. Pp. 64. ' Joseph Chamberlain on Both Sides.' By Alexander Mackintosh. A Book of Contrasts. ' England's Ruin discussed in Sixteen Letters to the Right Honourable Joseph Chamberlain, M.P.' By Stedman (afterwards A. M. S. Methuen). Fiscal poUcy traversed. Pp. 127. ' Chamberlain's Handelspolitik.' By Marie Schwab. Jena. Pp. 123. ' Die Grundlagen imd die Grenzen des Chamberlainismus : studien zur Tarif-reformbewegung im gegenwartigen England.' By Bemhard Braude, Zurich. Pp. 144. 1906 ' Joseph Chamberlain : an Honest Biography.' By Alexander Mackintosh. An impartial record of Mr. Chamberlain's career. Pp. 462. 1909 ' Two Jack Cades and the Peers : Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Lloyd George.' By A. Mackintosh. A booklet showing similarity in the attacks of the two statesmen on the Peers, and in the attacks on themselves. 1910 ' Seven Years of the Sugar Convention, 1903-10.' A vindication of Mr. Chamberlain's imperial and commercial policy. By R. T. Hinckes. Pp. 53. 1914 ' With Mr, Chamberlain in the United States and Canada, 1887- 1888.' By Sir Willoughby Maycock, K.C.M.G. A record of Mr. Chamberlain's travels as a member of the Canadian Fisheries Commission. Also many volumes of speeches and reprinted articles. 24 A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS MR. CHAMBERLAIN S OPINIONS AT DIFFERENT STAGES Parochial — Imperial October 26, 1880. ' I wiU confess to you that I am so parochially minded that I look with greater satisfaction to our annexation of the gas and water, to our scientific frontier in the improvement area, than I do to the result of that imperial policy which has given us Cyprus and the Transvaal ; and I am prouder of having been engaged with you in warring against ignorance and disease and crime in Birmingham than if I had been the author of the Zulu War, and had instigated the invasion of Afghanistan.' January 14, 1885. ' Local government touches the domestic hfe of the people, their health, comfort, and happiness more closely and to a greater extent than many of the most ambitious efforts of imperial legislation.' April 19, 1887. ' I am proud of being a parochial statesman, and I wiU say this — ^that our parochial statesmen have done even more for the welfare and happiness of the people than our imperial legislature.' January 30, 1897. ' The leaders of the Radical party for- get, in the attention which they give to these domestic controversies, which, after all, are of minor importance — they forget the real part which this country has played and is called upon to play in the history of the world.' October 24, 1900. ' What should we be without our em- pire ? Two small islands with an overcrowded population in the northern sea ! ' January 6, 1902. ' We have to carry civilization, British justice, British law : we have to carry rehgion and Christianity to millions and miUions of peoples who, until our advent, have lived in ignorance and in bitter con- flict, and whose territories have fallen to us to develop. That is our duty. It is a Christian duty. It removes altogether from us the reproach of selfishness, of parochial politics.' January 19, 1904. think imperially.' ' Learn to 370 A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 371 Imperial Expansion August i, 1878. ' Already the weary Titan staggers under the too vast orb of her fate.' November 3, 1897. ' Is it contended that the weary Titan staggers under the too vast orb of her fate, and that we have not the strength to sustain the burden of empire ? ' March 27, 1879 (South African wars and ' this new Imperiahsm '). ' Where was this pohcy to stop ? . . , Unless this spirit were either by Parliament or by the people at large, severely and sternly repressed, there could hardly be a limit to the responsibilities which might be fastened upon us, and none to the difficulties and even the disasters yet in store for this country.' August 3, 1890. ' I think I may congratulate you that within the present year, without striking a blow, we have added a vast empire to the dominions of the Queen in Africa.' February 2, 1893. ' We can- not imperil our position as a great nation by refusing to face any responsibilities which come to us in our character as a great nation.' December 19, 1882. 'The time has gone by when Lord Beaconsfield could truly declare that the pohcy of the Enghsh Government embraced the exten- sion of the empire. We think our possessions are sufficiently ample, our duties and responsi- bilities too onerous and compli- cated.' May 22, 1895. ' We beheve in the expansion of the empire, in its legitimate development. We are not afraid to take upon our- selves the burden and the re- sponsibihty which attach to a great governing race.' January 15, 1884. 'There is a great party in this country which seems to have learnt no- thing by experience, but which is always eager for the expansion of an empire already, I should think, vast enough to satisfy the most inordinate ambition, and which taxes our resources to the utmost in the attempt to govern it well and wisely.' January 23, 1889. ' There is a school of modern philosophy, of which the literary representative is Mr. John Morley, which shrinks from national obhgations, and which, like Pilate, would wash its hands of national responsibilities.' 372 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN August i, 1878. patriotism of the music-halls.' Jingoism ' The vulgar October 24, 1900. ' We have at last abandoned the craven fears of being great, which were the disgrace of a previous age.' June 17, 1885. By the reform of Irish administration, ' we will do more to secure the strength, the character, and the influence of the nation than by the addition of any amount, however large, to the expenditure of the nation for naval or military purposes — it will go further to maintain our weight in the councils of Europe than any amount of bluster in our relations with foreign countries.' Liberals and Tories March 20, 1893. ' I and those who agree with me believe in the expansion of the empire, and we are not at all troubled by accusations of Jingoism.' April 17, 1901. ' The only thing that makes possible this wonderful empire of ours is British prestige.' January 9, 1877. All the great benefits conferred by past legislation upon the wage classes had emanated from the Liberals. February 3, 1880. ' I have the most sincere distrust of all Conservative reforms. It brings to my mind the mediaeval legend When the devil was sick the devil a monk would be ; When the devil got well the devil a monk was he.' January 5, 1882. ' The Tory notion of really successful domes- tic statesmanship has been de- scribed in two or three hnes — To promise, pause, prepare, postpone. And end by letting things alone ; In short, by taking people's pay For doing nothing every day.' June 7, 1881. ' Do you want the Tories back again ? Are you willing once more to relegate to a distant future all prospects of domestic reform in order to enter again upon a policy of meddlesome interference and wanton aggression ? ' July 10, 1895. ' Give to the Conservatives, in common fair- ness, what is undoubtedly their due — the right to claim that they were the first to take an interest in questions affecting the material happiness and do- mestic lives of the people of this country.* May 18, 1897. ' When I stood for Sheffield in 1874 ^ pointed out to my Liberal friends that they were the most backward in social legislation, and that all this legislation had been initiated and to a large extent carried out by the Tory party. I said that in 1874, and I say it in 1897.' July 10, 1895. ' Let me nail to the counter another misrepre- sentation. The Gladstonians tell you that they are the true friends of social legislation, and that the Conservatives are opposed to it. Nothing can be more untrue.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 373 December 19, 1882. ' When you come to think about it a Tory is really an object of most sincere compassion, with his his- tory of constant defeat, of pre- dictions falsified, of hopes dis- appointed.' November 17, 1898. ' The Conservative party have been in a special sense the great apos- tles of social reform.' November 26, 1883. ' The Tories when they were in ofhce did nothing ; and when they are out of office do everything to prevent us from doing anything.' January 29, 1885. ' What is it that the Tories have to offer us besides a vigorous foreign policy, which might, perchance, find places for some of their younger sons, or a tax on the food of the people which would undoubtedly raise their rents ? ' June 26, 1903. ' Surely it is common knowledge that all that system of legislation which has promoted the health and the comfort of the working classes, which has caused, to some extent at any rate, a rise in their wages, was due to Conservative states- men like Lord Shaftesbury.' June 3, 1885. A contrast be- tween the Tory Parhament of 1874 and the Liberal Parliament of 1880. ' During the whole existence of the former, with the exception perhaps of the Artisans DweUings Act, which was unfortunately an unsuccess- ful but a well-meant attempt to grapple with a great social evil, there is not, as I believe, one single act of legislation to which the future historians will deem it necessary to make even a passing reference.' In the case of the Liberal Parliament of 1880, ' there has not been a single session that has passed without measures of important reform finding their place in the statute book, without grievances being redressed and wrongs being remedied.* November 21, 1905. ' When I belonged to the Radical party, so-called, I said to them what I say to you now — that social re- form owes every step from the commencement and initiation of our factory legislation down to the Compensation for Accidents Bill to the constructive capacity of a Tory or Unionist Govern- ment.' July 4, 1904. ' It has hap- pened that most of our social legislation has been brought for- ward and carried by the Conserva- tive and Unionist party.' 374 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN August 5, 1885. ' The Liberal party has always seemed to me the great agency of progress and reform.' January 8, 1880. ' Here lies a Tory Ministry Whose word no man relies on ; Who never said the things they meant. And never did a wise one.' October i, 1889. ' I have found out that they (Conserva- tives and Whigs) are very good fellows.' Toryism November 26, 1883. ' The Tories are always deaf and blind on this question of Reform until they get thoroughly frightened.' October i, 1889. ' We are continually taunted with HAVING BECOME TORIES. WeLL, IT ALL DEPENDS UPON WHAT YOU MEAN BY Toryism.' January 16, 1884. The Tories ' have apparently a rooted dis- trust of their fellow-countrymen, which no experience can possibly remove.' August 4, 1884. ' The party of obstruction and of prejudice.' October 7, 1884. ' The Tories always have hated every exten- sion of popular hberties.' October 19, 1885. ' Aye, this July 6, 1892. 'I am not is Toryism all over. It is cynical, ashamed of the aUiance with the it is selfish, it is incapable.' Conservative party ; I glory in it.' Promise and Performance July 23, 1884. The new voters ' will not be slow to see the difference between Tory professions and Liberal per- formances.' March 27, 1884. "I should like to know when the time would be opportune in the minds of the Tory party for a measure of re- form." July 2, 1892. ' Promise with the Unionist Government means performance.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 375 Ireland February i, 1883. ' Centur- ies of wrong and of oppression have made Ireland what she IS. February 23, 1883. ' How long is England's danger to be Ireland's opportunity ? How long do you suppose the people of this country would tolerate a policy which involves the ex- istence of a Poland within four hours of our shore ? ' July 6, 1886. ' I think that on the whole Ireland has had more justice than England and Wales and Scotland.' February 17, 1893. ' The reason why we are opposed to separation is because of the geo- graphical situation of Ireland, and because Ireland within a few hours of our shores cannot become independent without be- ing a source of danger to the very existence of the empire.' Home Rule June 4, 1885. 'Mr. Glad- stone has removed two of the greatest grievances of Ireland. He has disestablished an alien Church and he has reformed the land laws. But there remains a question as important, possibly more important, than both these two, and that is to give, in Mr. Gladstone's own words, the widest possible self-government to Ire- land, which is consistent with the maintenance of the integrity of the empire.' June 13, 1885. 'We have to recognize and to satisfy the national sentiment which both in Scotland and in Ireland has led to a demand for the control of purely domestic affairs. And these objects can only be secured, I believe, by some great measure of devolution, by which the imperial Pariiament shall main- tain its supremacy, but shall nevertheless relegate to subor- dinate authorities the control and administration of their local business.' July 2, 1886. ' You are asked to pay a hundred and fifty millions (under the Land Bill) to set up a rival Parliament in Dublin ; aye, a rival and a competitor to the great Parlia- ment at Westminster, the mother of Parliaments, the type and the model of free institutions throughout the globe, and the one only security and guarantee for the rights and the liberties and the property of zJl Her Majesty's subjects. . . . You are asked to stake upon the hazard of a die the authority and the influence, perhaps even the exist- ence of the empire. All I can say is I will never be a party to such a dangerous jind a ruinous speculation.' July 6, 1886. 'That is the price you are asked to pay for enabling the Irish to manage their own affairs — ^in other words, for allowing the enemies of England to set up a rival Parhament in Dublin.' 376 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN June 17, 1885. ' The pacifica- tion of Ireland at this moment depends on the concession to Ire- land of the right to govern itself in the matter of its purely do- mestic business.' September 15, 1885. ' I have proposed that there should be established in Ireland and in Scot- land, perhaps also in Wales and in England, national councils for deahng with affairs which although they are national, are yet not of imperial concern.' April 9, 1886. ' I have never been opposed to Home Rule as I have explained and as I have always understood the words, and as the Prime Minister has on many public occasions de- fined it.' June 19, 1886. ' I have al- ways been a Home Ruler.' March 12, 1887. If certain objections could be met he was ' ready to accept any scheme for conferring on Ireland legisla- tive authority to deal with its exclusively domestic concerns.' April 15, 1887. ' We are both Liberals and Home Rulers.' April 18, 1887. ' I was a Home Ruler long before Mr. Glad- stone.' Retention of May 7, 1886. ' The key of the position is the maintenance of the full representation of Ireland in the Imperial Parliament.' February 4, 1893. ' We ob- ject to Home Rule because we believe that it would be dangerous to the security of this country ; and it would be a base desertion of our loyal fellow-subjects in that country if we were to hand them over to the Roman Catholic priests and to the delegates of the National League.' February 4, 1893. ' Home Rule as a practical policy is as dead as Queen Anne.' April 10, 1893 (Second Home Rule Bill). ' We are asked to stake the dignity, the influence, the honour, and the wealth of the nation upon this cast. . . . Sir, I say the possible danger is too great and the possible gain is too small.' February 13, 1896. The basis of our objection to Home Rule for Ireland is that it would en- danger the security of this coun- try.' Irish Members July 13, 1893. ' The issue is whether the interests of Great Britain are to be controlled by delegates from Ireland, nominated by priests, elected by illiterates, and subsidized by the enemies of this country.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 377 Coercion June 7, 1881. ' For my part I hate coercion : I hate the name and I hate the thing.' October 25, 1881. ' With the Tories coercion is a policy ; with us it is only a hateful incident.' June 3, 1885. ' Coercion may be necessary at times. . . . But coercion is for an emergency.' September 26, 1888. ' Coer- cion — that is to say, the force which is necessary in order to maintain the law of the land.' House of Lords October 25, 1881. ' That bourne from which no Liberal bill returns.' August 4, 1884. ' During the last hundred years the House of Lords has never contributed one iota to popular liberties or popular freedom, or done an3rthing to ad- vance the common weal ; and during that time it has protected every abuse and sheltered every privilege.' March 19, 1892. ' Although the House of Peers is a good deal threatened nowadays, in all pro- bability it will outlive most of us and will remain for several gen- erations to come — a picturesque and a stately, if not a supremely important part of the British Constitution.' October 20, 1884. ' That club of Tory landlords which in its Gilded Chamber has disposed of the welfare of the people with almost exclusive regard to the interests of a class.' October 20, 1884. The peers and their robes and coronets ' are ancient monuments, and I, for one, should be very sorry to deface them ; but, gentlemen, I do not admit that we can build upon these interesting ruins the founda- tions of our government.' September 20, 1893. ' The House of Lords deserves the gratitude of the people of Great Britain for standing up for their rights and preventing them from being over-ridden by a disloyal Irish faction.' 378 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN October 20, 1884. ' The chronicles of the House of Lords axe one long record of concessions delayed until they have lost their grace, of rights denied until extorted from their fears.' June 2, 1894. ' I say the Lords have but done their duty. They have appealed to the nation to decide between them and the Government on this great issue.' October 20, 1884. ' We have been too long a peer-ridden nation.' November 4, 1884. ' For more than half a century we have meekly submitted to be baffled and trampled on by a handful of hereditary legislators who do not legislate but who only impede legislation.' February 8, 1894. ' What are you going to attack the House of Lords for ? This cry about the House of Lords is a purely artificial one ; it is got up for party purposes.' October 20, 1884. ' I have no spite against the House of Lords, but as a Dissenter I have an account to settle with them, and I promise you I will not for- get the reckoning. . . . The cup is nearly full.' December 8, 1898. ' The House of Lords destroyed the Home Rule Bill, and for that alone it has earned the undying gratitude of this generation.' October i, 1885. 'The House of Lords has always been the obsequious handmaid of the Tory party.' October 14, 1885. 'There is the question of mending or ending the Second Chamber, which, with- out any pretence to popular au- thority, nevertheless arrogates to itself the right of delaying, dis- figuring, and sometimes destroy- ing all the work which is carried out by the other branch of the Legislature.' February 8, 1894. ' The Lords have exercised their con- stitutional right ; they have the right to examine bills and, if they see fit, to amend and im- prove them.' October 16, 1894. ' I am no apologist for the constitution of the House of Lords ; I am no defender of hereditary legisla- tion ; but I am a strong up- holder of a Second Chamber, and until you can find me a better I am going to stick to the House of Lords.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 379 Disestablishment October, 1874. ' The separa- tion of Church and State . . . has been felt by every member of the Liberal party to be at some time or other inevitable, although many have been glad enough to postpone its imme- diate consideration. There are plain indications that the time is approaching when men must definitely take sides on the ques- tion which may well be the new point of departure for the Liberal party.' March 30, 1892. ' It is neither defensible in principle nor in policy to put this question (dis- establishment) forward to the exclusion of every other.' September 29, 1887. ' The question of rehgious equality . . . is ripe for discussion and for public consideration, and it ought not to be put aside.' September 4, 1889. ' I have always held that the Church of England would gain if she rested upon voluntary support and if she did without the assistance and the control of the State.' October 13, 1891. ' I have voted for disestablishment be- cause I thought that in the interests of religion, in the in- terests of the Chiu-ch itself, and in the interests of the harmony of all classes of the nation it would be better that the Church should depend upon the devo- tion and the loyalty and the self-sacrifice of its own supporters rather than that it should accept the invidious assistance and con- trol of the State.' November 22, 1894. ' You may, if you like, try to disestab- lish and disendow the Church in Wales, and if you succeed, in my opinion — although I sym- pathize with the object as a matter of abstract principle — nobody will be one penny the better for it.' 38o JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Denominational Schools January 24, 1872. ' The re- presentatives of the ratepayer must have absolute control of all national funds applied to secular education ; all grants for this purpose made to denominational bodies must be withdrawn.' April 3, 1872. ' Let the State keep to its proper work and fit its children to take their places as citizens of a great empire, and let it leave their rehgious training, and all that concerns their education for the kingdom which is not of this world, to the care of the Churches and the responsibility of the parents.' October i, 1885. ' To my mind the spectacle of so-called national schools turned into a pdvate preserve by clerical man- agers, and used for exclusive purposes of politics or religion, is one which the law ought not to tolerate.' January, 1877. ' The efforts of all lovers of justice, and of all friends of education, must now be directed to the establishment of the principle that representa- tion shall go hand in hand with taxation, and that no grant of national or local funds shall be made to any school a majority of whose managing body does not consist of representatives elected by the district for the purpose.' May 25, 1888. ' The friends of the denominational system would have to submit to local control if they accepted aid from the rates.' May 25, 1888. 'No practical statesman would dare to propose a measure which would be fol- lowed by the immediate with- drawal or extinction of the volun- tary system.' February 21, 1890. ' It is proposed that when additional grants are given to all schools there should be popular control of voluntary schools. ... It would be ridiculous to suppose that the supporters of voluntary schools would accept any such plan. The proposal, in short, is a proposal for the extinction of the voluntary system. Very well, that is a practically intoler- able proposition.' June 29, 1891. ' You have to tell the ratepayers that if they want Board schools instead of voluntary schools they have to find something like forty millions in cash and an extra rate of two millions a year. I do not believe that the people of this country are prepared to pay that price for what is only a counsel of perfection.' June 29, 1891. ' However desirable this pubhc control of voluntary schools may be, it is impossible, as a matter of policy, to secure it by forcing it on the voluntary schools.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 381 Liquor Traffic r February 10, 1880. ' The Conservative party had played into the hands of the pubUcans and contracted with them a degrading alliance.* October 14, 1885 (Liquor Traffic). ' We trust the people, and we trust them wholly ; and we are wiUing that the whole of this great question should be left absolutely to the representa- tive authorities which will be elected throughout the country.' May, 1876 {The Right Method with the Publicans). ' No doubt there are causes at work which tend to the ultimate eradication of everything, but why must the present generation go on wearing the devil's chain ? It is no comfort to families whose happiness has been wrecked and their homes made desolate by the drunkenness of some relative to hear that in a century or two a millennium may be expected in which the evils of drinking will disappear ? ' Vested October, 1874. {Fortnightly Review). ' The Conservative party is principally composed of the privileged classes and their respective parasites ; and a species of half-conscious log- rolhng goes on, in which the holders of special immunities and advantages — the landowners and the game preservers, the licensed victualler and the Estabhshed parson — all take part, and com- bine to resist the aggression which threatens any of their separate interests.' July 6, 1895 (Local Veto Bill). ' It proposes to deal with the private property of men who are, for the main part, just as res- pectable as any other tradesmen.' July 6, 1895 (Local Veto BiU). ' I protest against this bill. . . . It proposes to interfere with public-houses, which are the con- venience and the meeting-place of the working classes, and to leave untouched the private cel- lars and clubs and even the railway stations, which are fre- quented by the well-to-do.' July 6, 1895 (Opposing Local Veto Bill). ' If you want to stop drinking — if you think it impossible, which I do not, to stop drunkenness without stop- ping drinking — then be consistent : take the rich as well as the poor. If you want to stop drinking, have the courage of your opinions and make drinking a penal offence ; or if you won't do that, at all events make laws against the sale and against the manufacture of liquor under all circumstances.' Interests May 29, 1888. 'When any legitimate interest, which had been brought into existence with the sanction of the Legislature, was interfered with on public grounds it was the duty of the community to compensate those whose interest was disturbed.' 382 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Republic July 29, 1889. ' Honourable members tell us it is a shameful thing to fawn upon a monarch. So it is ; but it is a still more shameful thing to truckle to a multitude. . . . We enjoy the fullest measure of political liberty under a constitution which is more democratic than exists in any Republic of Europe or of the world.' September 12, 1870. Sup- ports a resolution rejoicing that the irrepressible instinct of the French people for the divine right of self-government has led to the re-establishment of their Republic. December 5, 1872. ' Very few intelligent people do not now hold that the best form of govern- ment for a free and enhghtened people is that of a Republic. That was the form of Govern- ment to which the nations of Europe were surely and not very slowly tending.' Aristocracy September 24, 1885. ' I have been made the mark for the malignant hatred of the aristo- cratic and landowning classes.' July 24, 1885. ' The demo- June 3, 1905. ' I have the cratic revolution is not to be highest respect for dukes and for accomplished by aristocratic per- all the aristocracy.' verts.' October 14, 1885. ' I cannot call to mind one single great or beneficent reform which has been promoted at the instigation of the landed gentry, or which has not received their persistent hostihty.' Plural Representation January 29, 1885. 'I am in favour of the principle of one man one vote, and I object alto- gether to the plural representa- tion of property. ... If we are to make a distinction, I am not quite certain whether it is not the poor man who ought to have more votes than the rich one. April 30, 1895. ' There is the case of persons who hold two estates or two properties in different constituencies, but who only reside upon one. These per- sons are absentee voters, although they have substantial local in- terests and qualifications ; and as to them I will say that, as A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 383 the original basis of the franchise undoubtedly was local interest and qualification, you are going to make a very serious constitu- tional change if you deprive them of their votes.' April 30, 1895. ' But a still stronger case is the case of persons with double residences. That is a case of the greatest importance ; and if honourable gentlemen think they have got a good electoral cry in aboUshing the plural votes of these people they will find they are greatly mistaken.' Equal Electoral Districts March 27, 1884. 'I don't March 3, 1891. 'I have care a straw for equal electoral spoken in favour of equal elec- districts.' toral districts. ... I am still in favour of all those reforms.' Labour Representatives January 29, 1885, ' I rejoice to think that under the altered conditions opportunity will be found to give to Mr. Burt and Mr. Broadhurst, who have re- presented the cause of labour with so much ability and so much independence in the present Par- liament, colleagues who will follow their example and who will strengthen their hands.' June 9, 1893. ' I think I can speak for the working classes in Birmingham and the district. Their feeling is, that all the restrictions which they beheve to be greatly to the advantage of the working classes which have been secured by legislation, have been secured, in the first instance, against the wishes of the employers of labour, by the efforts of the Trades Unions and the special representatives of the working classes.' September 29, 1900. ' I have been for nearly five-and-twenty years in Parliament ; during that time I have known every self- called champion of labour who has ever sat in that great assembly, and to the best of my recollec- tion not a single one of these gentlemen has ever initiated or carried legislation for the benefit of the working classes, but they have hindered it occasionally. When they come into Parliament their only use is as items in a voting machine.' 384 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN January, 1884. ' It is ridicu- lous for Trades Unionists to pre- tend that they can keep them- selves outside politics. The exclusion of politics from the sphere of Trades Union work would be a practical abnegation of the most vital interests of the working classes.' June 2, 1894. ' I say that the present so-called labour members in the House of Commons are notoriously, and in the sight of every man, mere fetchers and carriers for the Gladstonian party.' Innuendo against Russia February 4, 1878. ' Through- out the speeches of members of the Government there ran one continual innuendo against the good faith of Russia. They had put on the conduct of the Russian Government and on the words of her diplomatists and the action of her emperor the most offensive possible construction, and the result was great indignation on the part of the Russian people against this country.' May 13, 1898. (Referring to the methods by which Russia secured the occupation of Port Arthur) : ' Who sups with the devil must have a long spoon.' Mr. Gladstone December 19, 1882. ' The noblest figure in English political history.' December 19, 1882. ' So far from Mr. Gladstone being a tyrant, I say there is no man in the House of Commons — I do not believe there is any man in the country — who is so ready to re- ceive suggestions, so anxious to appreciate the case of an oppo- nent, so willing to give considera- tion to any new light that can be thrown upon a subject.' December 19, 1882. ' Fifty years of honoured and honourable public life.' January 16, 1883. ' Mr. Gladstone's retirement from the July 8, 1892. ' The furious mob orator ! He appears to be losing his head and losing his temper.' April 10, 1890. leader.' ' An imperious July 27, 1893. ' It is always the voice of a god ! Never since the time of Herod has there been such slavish adulation.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 385 scene upon which he had played so illustrious a part would be an incalculable misfortune for his country.' November 4, 1884. ' Our noble cause has a noble leader, in the man whose deep sympathy with the people, whose pervading trust in his fellow-countrymen has raised him to the height of this great empire and has secured for him in the hearts and affection of his fellow countrymen a perma- nent and an abiding resting place.' June 3, 1885. ' Mr. Gladstone will stcmd before posterity as the greatest man of his time.' July 2, 1886. ' You have a Prime Minister in the very height of his popularity, turning round upon himself and making an abject surrender to a vile con- spiracy.' June 3, 1885. ' Remarkable for his personal character and for the high tone that he has intro- duced into our political and pubhc life.' Lord Salisbury October 25, 1881. ' Lord Salisbury's memory is notorious.' April 10, 1890. ' Mr. Glad- stone's Home Rule poUcy was- conceived in secrecy, was born in deceit, and it has been nurtured on evasion.' March 30, 1883. ' Lord Salis- bury surveys the Liberal policy with jaundiced eyes, through glasses which are coloured by temper and by prejudice.' March 30, 1883. ' Lord Salis- bury constitutes himself the spokesman of the class " who toil not, neither do they spin." ' July 23, 1884. ' An air of patrician arrogance.' April 28, 1885. ' The speeches are distinguished by the charac- teristic invective of the noble lord, also by his characteristic inaccuracy.' November 30, 1899. ' No- thing that Lord Salisbury said of me, and nothing that I ever said of him, ever prevented our co- operating cordially upon what, fortunately, we were both able to beUeve was for the interests of the nation. When we came together to look at the merits of some of those propositions which other- wise might have been the subject of party criticism we found that we were entirely agreed.' *5 386 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN War with Boers May 8, 1896. ' War with the Boers would leave behind it embers of a strife which genera- tions would hardly be long enough to extinguish.' March 20, 1902. ' We are estabhshing British supremacy, and when we have estabhshed British supremacy I for one do not anticipate those terrible conse- quences from the racial feeling which now prevails at the present time.' Old Age Pensions March 17, 1891. ' My own ideas, my own plans,' for making provision for old age. July 8, 1892. ' You know perfectly well that for some years I have been advocating a system of old age pensions.' July 2, 1892. ' I ask you to pledge yourselves to the great principle that it is the duty of the State to provide for the veterans of industry just as it provides for the veterans of the army and navy.' July 16, 1892. ' My old age pension scheme holds the field.' July 12, 1895. ' My proposal, troadly, is so simple that any one can understand it.' April 4, 1894. ' I look for- ward to the time when some Min- ister will be found bold enough to propose to lay aside experiment- ally what may be considered a reasonable sum towards the com- mencement of a system of old age pensions, and if that is satisfac- tory, I am not disposed to place any limit on its ultimate develop- ment.' May 29, 1901. ' This question of old age pensions, as it is some- times called, although that is a description which I personally dishke.' April 24, 1899. ' It was a proposal, not a promise.' October 25, 1901. 'I never promised old age pensions.' 1905 (Letter to Sir F. Milner). ' I have never in my life made a definite promise of old age pensions.' 1899. ' Any universal scheme for giving pensions to everybody is beyond the resources of the State.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 387 May 3, 1894. ' I want to give facilities to working men — to all men, aye ! and to all women, to make provision against their old age.' May 3, 1894. ' The Govern- ment (Liberal) have appointed a Commission to inquire into the subject. That has meant a delay of two years. I think myself the time might have been employed in inquiring into the details of a practicable measure.' September 29, 1900. ' What I promised was not universal old age pensions, which I do not believe in.' November 15, 1898. ' I do not think it is possible immedi- ately to deal with this question. There are financial considerations to be taken into account, and there are other matters, perhaps, which may have a still more pressing claim upon the Govern- ment.' FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION Cobden's Predictions July i, 1883 (a Sunday paper had said Cobden would be chiefly known as the author of a number of predictions which had been falsified by events). ' Nearly nineteen centuries have passed, and still the doctrines of the Chris- tian rehgion have not received universal acceptance, and I sup- pose we should think it a little presumptuous, even in a Sunday paper with a limited circulation, to describe the apostles as very worthy fishermen who were chiefly to be remembered as the authors of a variety of predictions which have been falsified by events." July i, 1883. ' In judging Mr. Cobden we have to consider not whether the world has been wise enough to adopt his views, but whether anything has oc- curred since his death that has weakened the force of the argu- ment which he used or that has thrown the slightest doubt on the conclusions at which he arrived. Tried by this test I think that Free Trade will successfully stand the experiment.' October 7, 1903. ' There was nothing upon which Mr. Cobden was more assured, than that Free Trade was such a good thing that if we gave the example every other nation would follow us. . . . Well, I do not beheve that all those people (Americans, Ger- mans, French) are fools, and when I find that they absolutely refuse to adopt the Cobdenite principle, and to accept Free Trade, I say to myself, it is worth thinking over.' 388 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN One-sided Free Trade March 24, 1882. ' The con- clusion to be drawn from the facts before us is that our present sys- tem of one-sided Free Trade, as honourable gentlemen opposite call it, is absolutely the very best that can be devised with regard to British interests and the interests of British trade.' February 16, 1905. ' Free imports are not Free Trade. They stand in the way of freer trade. We have never had Free Trade.'.ll I , \ ' Even if other countries have progressed more than we have, I should have said that that proved nothing either for or against Pro- tection, because in dealing with this matter it must be borne in mind what a multiplicity of fac- tors we have to take into consider- ation in estimating the relative progress of foreign nations com- pared with our own.' June 13, 1885. ' Although we cannot show any great change of opinion in foreign countries, yet at least we can find in their experi- ence conclusive proof of the soundness of Mr. Cobden's doc- trines and a great cause of con- gratulation for this country.' October 6, 1903. ' The pro- tected countries have progressed in an infinitely better proportion than ourselves.' November 4, 1903. ' HowJ^do our opponents account for the fact that every foreign country without exception, which has adopted Protection, has, in recent years at any rate, progressed much more rapidly, in much greater proportion than we, the Free Trade country of the world ? Excess of Imports June 13, 1881. ' The imports from France to this country have not shown any steady or consis- tent increase. Even if they had I should differ from the honourable member in considering that state of things injurious to this coun- try.' October 26, 1881. ' Mr. Mi- cawber said that if your incom- ings were £20 and your out- OcTOBER 7, 1903. ' As soon'as tariffs were raised against us, our exports to the countries which raised them have been continually decreasing. Yes, but that is not all. If their prosperity had been going down in equal proportion, it would have been no argument at all. But while our exports to them have been continually de- creasing, their exlports to us have been continually increasing.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 389 goings 3^19 19s. 6d. the result was happiness, and that if your in- comings were £20 and your out- goings £20 OS. 6d. the result was misery. This is precisely the result which the Fair Traders desire to produce in our national relations.' August 12, 1681. ' An excess of imports over exports causes much anxiety to a certain class of persons in this country, and is regarded by them as a sign of weakness and a proof of our com- mercial decUne. I consider it, on the contrary, as a fact which ought to give us the greatest satis- faction.' March 30, 1895. ' The real fact is that every pennjrworth of foreign goods that comes into this country is paid for by a similar amount of either Enghsh goods directly, or Enghsh work in the shape of, for instance, the freight of shipping transport.' October 7, 1903, ' In the course of the twenty years since 1882, the total imports of foreign manufactures have increased £64,000,000. Meanwhile, our ex- ports of manufactures to these countries have increased 3(^12,000,000. So that, on the balance, we have lost £52,000,000. . . . What would this £52,000,000 of money have given to you if you had been able to keep it ? It would have pro- vided subsistence for one and a half millions of people.' State of Trade March 31, 1897. ' Let us have confidence in the future. I do not ask you to anticipate with Lord Macaulay the time when the New Zealander will come here to gaze upon the ruins of a great dead city. No ; I see no signs of decrepitude or decay.' Janu.\ry 6, 1902. ' I see no signs of any imminent or pressing danger to the prosperity of the country. During the last five years we have enjoyed an un- paralleled condition of trade, and although we cannot expect that October 6, 1903. * If our Imperial trade dechnes or if it does not increase in proportion to our population and to the loss of trade with foreign countries, then we sink at once into a fifth-rate nation. Our fate will be the fate of the empires and kingdoms of the past.' October 6, 1903, ' I tell you that it is not well to-day with British industry.' ' I see signs of decay in British trade, I see cracks and crevices in the walls of the great structure.* 390 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN to last for ever, and although there are some signs that trade is not as brisk as it was, the prospects are extremely good, and I am not at all disposed to take a pessimis- tic view of the future.' October 7, 1903. ' Agriculture has been practically destroyed ; sugar has gone ; silk has gone ; iron is threatened ; cotton will go.' Tax on Food August 12, 1881. ' Is any one October 6, 1903. ' I propose bold enough to propose that we to put a low duty on foreign corn, should put duties upon food ? ' not exceeding 2s. a quarter.' August 12, 1881. ' A tax on food would mean a decline in wages ; it would certainly in- volve a reduction in their pro- ductive value ; it would raise the price of every article produced in the United Kingdom ; and it would indubitably bring about the loss of our gigantic export trade.' November 7, 1885. ' If you are going to tax the bread of the people you will affect every house- hold in the land and you will throw back the working classes of this country to the starvation wages and to the destitution from which Mr. Gladstone and Sir Robert Peel reheved them.' June 26, 1903. ' Even sup- pose the tax upon corn increases the price of bread, does that neces- sarily increase the cost of living ? Man does not live by bread alone.' October 27, 1903. ' I pledge myself that my proposals will not add one farthing to the cost of living of any family in the country.' November 4, 1903. 'Let us get rid of all this idea that Pro- tection is immediately followed by starvation and destitution. This is absolutely untrue. Let us get rid of the idea that Free Trade necessarily brings prosperity. That is altogether untrue.' Colonial Preference and Food Tax 1882. ' The transfer of the importation of corn from foreign countries to our colonies will be the worse for us ; it will deviate capital from growing com to manufactures.' March 24, 1882. ' I do not know whether the honourable member thinks you can tax food without raising its price. I would at any rate lay down the axiom 1903. ' Without preferential treatment of the colonies we shall lose the colonies.' October 6, 1903. ' If you wish to have colonial preference, you must put a tax on food. . . . Nothing that I propose would add one farthing to the cost of living.' A STUDY IN CONTRADICTIONS 39^ that that is impossible ; and it is only by increasing the price that the object of Mr. Ecroyd (in pro- moting a colonial union) can be achieved,' Shipping and Free Trade October 27, 1881. ' Great has been the advance which has taken place in every branch of commercial enterprise ; that ad- vance has been more extra- ordinary, and, above all, more continuous, in shipping than in anything else, and I shall not forget — neither will you — that it has taken place under, and is, I believe, distinctly in conse- quence of, that entire freedom of trade which has marked the policy of this country for the last generation.' October 27, 1903. ' I say to- those who are concerned in the shipping industry — you will benefit by this pohcy (Tariff Reform) ; you can't lose by it. . . . My case is that British shipping, ad- mirable as its condition is in many respects, is not progressing so fast as foreign shipping.' Effect of Protection April 28, 1885. 'We have only to recall the history of those times when Protection starved the poor, and when the country was brought by it to the brink of revolution.' November 7, 1885 ' Those bad times of Protection and of the Corn Laws which were responsible for the destitution and the starvation wages, from which your forefathers suffered so greatly.' January 14, 1885, ' The con- dition of the farmer was never so hopeless, and the state of the labourer was never so abject as when com was kept up at a high value by a prohibitive or protec- tive duty. The food of the people was taxed to raise the rents of the landlord.' November 4, 1903. ' Is it true that, at the time when Free Trade was introduced and the Corn Laws were repealed, we were in a state of destitution and misery and starvation ? Is it true that imder the Protection which pre- vailed before that, this country was going down in the scale of nations or losing its prosperity and losing its trade ? No ; abso- lutely not ! The exact reverse was the case. There was a time of great prosperity in this country under Protection.' 392 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN Effect of Free Trade March 24, 1882. ' I ask the House to reject the motion (for inquiry into foreign tariffs), be- cause it appears to me to involve a reversal of the policy (of Free Trade) under which the pros- perity of the country has in- creased and its resources have •developed, under which wages have risen, the necessaries of life become cheaper, and, above all, the causes of just discontent been removed, and much has been done to settle on a secure basis the foundations of settled govern- ment and social order.' October 20, 1903. ' While there has been a great increase of prosperity in this country, it has not been due, and it can be shown not to be due, to Free Trade, but it has been due to other things, of which Free Trade, however, may be one.' November 4, 1903. ' It is true that after the repeal of the Com Laws this country entered on a period, which lasted for twenty- five years, of what I may call un- paralleled prosperity. I do not deny it, but I say it had nothing whatever to do with the repeal of the Corn Laws, and very little to do with the introduction of Free Trade.' • WHAT I HAVE SAID, I HAVE SAID ' THE OLD RADICALISM OF MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S SPEECHES.* House of Lords Are the Lords to dictate to us, the people of England ? Are the Lords to dictate to us the laws which we should make and the way in which we should bring them in ? Are you going to be governed by yourselves — or will you submit to an oligarchy which is the mere accident of birth ? Your ancestors resisted kings and abated the pride of monarchs, and it is inconceivable that you should be so careless of your great heritage as now to submit your liberties to this miserable minority of individuals who rest their claims upon privilege and upon accident. ... I have always thought the House of Lords was a very picturesque institution, attractive from its connex:ion with the history of our coun- try. I have no desire to see a dull uniformity of social life ; and I am rather thankful than otherwise to gentlemen who will take the trouble to wear robes and coronets and who will keep up a certain state of splendour which is very pleasant to look upon. They are ancient monuments, and I should be very sorry to deface them. But I don't admit that we can build upon these interesting ruins the foundation of our government. . . . The chronicles of the House of Lords are one long record of concessions delayed until they have lost their grace, of rights denied until extorted from their fears. It has been the history of one long contest between the representatives of privilege and the representatives of popular rights, and during that time the Lords have perverted, delayed, and denied justice untU at last they have grudg- ingly and churlishly conceded to force alone what they could no longer withhold. In the meantime what mischief has been wrought, what evils have been developed that might have been stayed in their incep- tion, what wrongs have been inflicted and endured that ought long ago to have been redressed ! We are told that the object of a Second Chamber is to stay the gusts of popular agitation and to give the nation time for reflection. I defy any student of history to point to one single case in which the House of Lords has ever stayed the gust of public passion or checked a foolish popular impulse. (Denbigh, October 20, 1884). It is said that the House of Lords will not give way. Then I say, ^ The extracts are, with few exceptions, taken from the reports in the Bir- tningham Daily Post. 893 394 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN neither will the people submit. We are in favour of Government by the people and for the people, and we repudiate the presumptuous claim to usurp the prerogative of the Crown, to degrade the House of Commons, and humihate all who bear the name or claim the rights of free men. We grudge the Lords nothing that rightly belongs to them, nothing they can enjoy without injury to others — their rank and title, their stars and garters, any influence which their personal qualities can gain for them, any power that they may secure by long prescription and high station ; but their claim to dictate the laws which we shall make, the way in which we shall govern ourselves — to spoil, delay, and even reject measures demanded by the popular voice, passed after due duscussion by a majority of the people's House, and receiving the sanction and confirmation of popular assemblies such as this — is a claim contrary to reason, opposed to justice, and which we will resist to the death. (Hanley, October 7, 1884). Lords and Dissenters I have no spite against the House of Lords, but as a Dissenter I have an account to settle with them, and I promise you I will not forget the reckoning. I boast a descent of which I am as proud as any baron may be of the title which he owes to the smiles of a king or to the favour of a king's mistress, for I can claim descent from one of the two thousand ejected ministers who, in the time of the Stuarts, left home and work and profit rather than accept the State-made creed which it was sought to force upon them ; and for that reason, if for no other, I share your hopes and your aspirations, and I resent the insults, the injuries, and the injustice from which you have suffered so long at the hands of a privileged assembly. But the cup is nearly full. The career of high-handed wrong is coming to an end. The House of Lords have ahenated Ireland, they have oppressed the Dissenters, and they now oppose the enfranchisement of the people. We have been too long a peer-ridden nation and I hope you will say to them, that if they will not bow to the mandate of the people they shall lose for ever the authority which they have so long abused. (Denbigh, October 20, 1884.). The Irish Problem I believe that one of the greatest of Irish problems is still before us and must wait for its solution to the new Parliament whose advent we anticipate with so much interest and with such expectation. Mr, Gladstone has removed two of the greatest grievances of Ireland. He has disestablished an alien Church and he has reformed the land laws. But there remains a question as important — ^possibly even more im- portant than both these two, and that is to give, in Mr. Gladstone's own words, the widest possible self-government to Ireland which is consistent with the maintenance of the integrity of the empire. What we have to do is to conciliate the national sentiment of Ireland. We ' WHAT I HAVE SAID. I HAVE SAID ' 395 have to find a safe mean between separation on the one hand, whick would be disastrous to Ireland and dangerous to England, and, on the other hand, that excessive centrahzation which throws upon the Eng- hsh Parhament and upon English officials the duty and burden of supervising every petty detail of Irish local affairs, which stifles the national life, which destroys the sense of responsibiUty, which keeps the people in ignorance of the duties and functions of Government, and which produces a perpetual feeling of irritation while it obstructs- all necessary legislation. (Birmingham, June 3, 1885). Home Rule What are the great problems of the future ? We have to deal with obstruction in the House of Commons. We have to deal with the system under which the greatest legislative assemblage in the world has begun to lose its usefulness, and in consequence lose its influence. And that result can never be accomplished so long as the Imperial Parhament is burdened with an ever-increasing amount of petty detail, with which it is incompetent to deal, and which ought to be referred to other bodies. We have also to recognize and to satisfy the national sentiment, which is in itself a praiseworthy and a patriotic and an inspiring feehng, and which both in Scotland and Ireland has led to a demand for the control of purely domestic affairs. And these objects- can only be secured, I beheve, by some great measure of devolution, by which the Imperial Parhament shall maintain its supremacy, but shall nevertheless relegate to subordinate authorities the control and administration of their local business. I believe that in this way only is there any chance of our being able to remove the deeply-rooted discontent which follows as a natural consequence from the attempt of one nation to control and interfere with the domestic and the social economy of another, whose genius it does not understand, whose pressing necessities it is not in a position to appreciate, whose business it has not time to attend to, and whose prejudices and whose prefer- ences it is impossible, even with the very best intentions, to avoid sometimes ignoring or offending. I look forward with confidence to the opportunity which will be afforded in the new Parliament for the con- sideration of this most momentous question, and I beheve that in the successful accomplishment of its solution lies the only hope of the paci- fication of Ireland, and of the maintenance of the strength and integ- rity of the empire which are in danger, which are gravely compromised so long as an integral portion of Her Majesty's dominions can only be governed by exceptional legislation, and so long as it, in consequence,, continues to be discontented and estranged. (Cobden Club, June 13, 1885). Ireland, ' a Poland ! ' When the conspirators have been crushed out, what are we to do for the Irish people ? How are we to meet the discontent which it is- 396 JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN admitted still prevails in that country ? Does the right hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Gibson) really think it is possible we can go on governing Ireland permanently by a system of absolute repression and nothing else ? How long will such a policy bear the test of exper- ience ? How long is England's danger to be Ireland's opportunity ? How long do you suppose the people of this country would tolerate a policy which involved the existence of a Poland within four hours of •our shores ? I say that a policy of that kind will break down in prac- tice, as it deserves to break down, and thus you will be once more face to face with what has been truly called the greatest problem of our lime. (House of Commons, February 23, 1883). Ireland's ' Foreign Government ' The pacification of Ireland at this moment, as I believe, depends on the concession to Ireland of the right to govern itself in the matter of its purely domestic business. What is the alternative ? Are you •content, after eighty years of failure, to renew once more dreary experi- ences of repressive legislation ? Is it not discreditable to us, that even now it is only by unconstitutional means that we are able to secure peace and order in one portion of Her Majesty's dominions ? I don't beheve that the great majority of Englishmen can have the slightest ■conception of the system under which this free nation attempts to rule a sister country. It is a system founded on the bayonets of 30,000 soldiers, encamped permanently as in a hostile country. It is a system as completely centralised and bureaucratic as that by which Russia governs Poland, or that which was known in Venice under the Austrian rule. An Irishman at this moment cannot move a step, he cannot lift a finger, in any parochial, municipal, or educational work without being •confronted, interfered with and controlled by an English official appointed by a foreign Government — and without a shade or shadow of representative authority. I say the time has come to reform alto- gether the absurd and irritating anachronism which is known as Dublin Castle, to sweep away altogether these alien boards and foreign officials, and to substitute for them a genuine Irish administration for purely Irish business. (Islington, June 17, 1885). Burden of Empire It is not necessary that I should waste time in repudiating the idea of annexation, of a Protectorate, or even of an indefinite supervision of the Egyptian Government. Such a policy as this would be contrary to the truest interests of this country. The time has gone by when Lord Beaconsfield could truly declare that the policy of the English relations with Chamberlain, 292-294 ; evades fiscal issue, 297, 303-4 ; half-sheet of note- paper, 304 : resignation of Prime Ministership, 311 ; defeat, 312 ; Chamberlain's regard, 316 ; arrange- ment with Chamberlain, 346 ; re- signation of leadership, 353 ; eulogy of Chamberlain, 358. Balfour of Burleigh, Lord, 281. Bankruptcy Act, 71, 360. Baptist, letter to, 137-139. Beach, Sir M. Hicks- (Lord St. Aldwyn), 40, 84 ; scolds Chamberlain, 114; imposes corn duty, 264; attacks Tariff Reform, 277 ; fiscal controversy, 293-294 ; character and position, 298 ; on Johannes- burg negotiations, 305. Birmingham, Chamberlain's business life in, lo-ii ; municipal service in, 12-15 ; mayor of, 14-15 ; ' pivot ' of reform, 22 ; visit of Prince and Princess of Wales to, 34-37 ; Cham- berlain's election for, 38-40 ; Glad- stone's visit to, 44-45 ; Chamber- lain's political position in, 123-124, 130 ; Mrs. Chamberlain's reception at, 145 ; Lord R. Churchill's claims to seat for, 152 ; party coalition at, 161 ; revolt on education policy, 251-253 ; new fiscal declaration at, 264-266 ; ' two loaves ' at, 291-292 ; relations of Chamberlain with, 321- 324 ; birthday celebrations at, 347- 348 ; last appearance at, 357. Birmingham and Edgbaston Debating Society, 8. Birmingham Daily Gazette, 40, 41. Birmingham Daily Mail, 180 n. Birmingham Daily Post, 28, 29, 38, 39, 92, 143, 145. Birmingham Education Society, 16. Birmingham Liberal Association, 22, 38, 47-48, 123. Birmingham Republican Club, 33. Birmingham Town Crier, 30. Birrell, A., 173, 219, 347. Birthday celebrations, 347-348. Bloemfontein, Chamberlain at, 260. ' Bluff, a game of,' 231, 296-297. Board of Trade, President of, 54 ; administration of, 69-73, 335- Boers, see Transvaal. Botha, General, 243, 254. Bright, Jacob, 77. Bright, John, 9, 17, 22, 25, 29, 40, 41, 44» 45. 53. 55 ; calls Chamberlain a Jingo, 66 ; his resignation, 66-67 ; celebration at Bingley Hall, 75 ; letter on Home Rule Bill, 126-127 > votes against it, 129 ; death, 152. British Weekly, 193, 323 «, 356. Brooks's Club, 327. Billow, Count von, visit from, 220; quarrel with, 244-246. 408 INDEX 409 ' Cade, Jack,' Chamberlain compared with, 100, 102, 225, 291. Caine, W. S., 127. 156. Campbell- Bannerman, Sir Henry, 12, 125, 214 ; Chamberlain's interview with, 231 ; character, 231 ; depre- cates armed intervention in Trans- vaal, 232 ; likens Chamberlain to Paul Pry, 239 ; quarrels with Chamberlain, 241, 242; describes him as a little We montSe, 254-255 ; Chamberlain's ' bluff,' 296-297 ; question of deportment, 303 ; Prime Minister, 312 ; relations with Cham- berlain, 316-317 ; administration, 350. Cape Colony, Chamberlain in, 261- 262. ' Caretakers ' (Ministerial), 94. Carlton Club, 136. Carnarvon, Lord, no, in. Carr's Lane Church, 12. Carter Lane Chapel, 3. Caucus, 48 ; defended by Chamberlain, 49, 51 ; success of, 53, 81, 85 ; turns against Chamberlain, 126. Cavendish, Lord Frederick, 64-65. Cecil, Lord Hugh, 277, 292 ; taunts Chamberlain, 299, 306-7, 340. Chamberlain, Arthur, 280. Chamberlain, Austen, maiden speech, 173-174 ; first office, 201 ; Chancel- lor of the Exchequer, 282, 299 ; personal, 321 ; candidate for leader- ship. 353-354- Chamberlain, brothers, blackballed, 325-327. Chamberlain, Joseph, ancestry, 2-3 ; birth, 5 ; enters father's business, 5 ; moves to Birmingham, 7 ; his marriages, 9-10 ; business career, 10- II ; municipal life, 12-15 '• assists to found National Education League, 16 ; opposition to Education Bill, 18 ; spokesman of Dissenters, 19-21 ; opening of poUtical career, 22 ; first programme in Fortnightly Review, 23-25 : candidate for Sheffield, 26- 29 ; Republican speeches, 33-34 ; reception of Prince and Princess of Wales, 34-37. Member for Birmingham, 38 ; attack on Disraeli, 39-40 ; maiden speech, 41 ; visited by Gladstone, 44 ; Eastern Question, 45 ; haran- gues denounced by Balfour, 46 ; pro- moter of Caucus, 47-49 ; opposition to flogging in army, 49-51 ; ' a row ' with Ix)rd Hartington, 50 ; attacks Beaconsfield Administration, 52. Liberal minister, 53 ; the Treasury Bench, 55 ; defends annexation, and subsequently retrocession of the Transvaal, 56-58 ; sympathy with Parnellite party, 59 ; struggle with Forster, 61-64 ; conducts ' Kilmainham Treaty,' 63 ; charged with intrigue, 63-64 ; ready to accept Irish Chief Secretaryship, 64; 'Jingo' in Egyptian affairs, 66-67 > administration at Board of Trade, 69 ; Free Trader, 69-71 ; Legislation, 71 ; promotes Merchant Shipping Bill, 71-73 ; gibe at Lord Salisbury, 74-75 ; ' Daring Duck- ling, ' 75-76 ; personal attacks on Chamberlain, 78 ; assails House of Lords, 79-83 ; ' the cup nearly full,' 83 ; Aston Park riots, 83-85. Unauthorized Programme, 87-93 ; Radical leader, 87 ; doctrine of ran- som, 89 ; warning to landlords, 91 ; qualities of leadership, 94 ; ' de- nunciation of stop-gap ' Govern- ment, 94 ; The Radical Programme, 95 ; tour in Highlands, 96-97 ; relations with Gladstone, 98-100 ; rebuked by Tories and Whigs, 100— 102 ; rivalry of Radical and Whig, 103-104 ; disruptive effect of speeches, 104-105 ; expected suc- cession to leadership, 106. Views on Home Rule, 106 et seq. ; scheme of National Councils, 107- 108 ; Ireland and Poland, 109 ; pro- jected visit to Ireland, 109-110; Gladstone's adoption of Home Rule, 111-112 ; Liberals back in office, 114-115 ; Chamberlain's office, 115- 116 ; his colleagues, 117-118 ; his re- signation, 119; meets Lord Salis- bury, 121 ; obtains confidence of Birmingham Association, 123 ; organ- izes opposition to Home Rule Bill, 125 ; his supporters influenced by Bright's letter, 126-127 ; ' Judas,' 129 ; energy and passion at general election, 1 30-1 31 ; supports Con- servative Government, 133 ; dis- turbed by Lord Randolph Churchill's resignation, 134-135 ; Round Table Conference, 136-139 ; Baptist letter, 137-139 ; motives, 139 ; alienation from Liberals, 140 ; North America Fisheries Commissioner, 142-143 ; third marriage, 143-145. His relations with old colleagues, 146 ; quarrels with Parnell, 147- 148 ; new friends, 149-150 ; loss of his Radical leadership, 151 ; recants 410 INDEX old Radicalism, 154 et seq. ; friend- ship with ' Bung and the Bishop,' 156-159 ; Unionist alUance, 161 ; appointed a leader, 163 ; offer of old age pensions, 166 ; a French view, 167 ; last duel with Gladstone, 169 ; resistance to second Home Rule Bill, 170 ; his inconsistency, 173 ; characteristics in debate, 174-177 ; provokes uproar, 178 ; final rela- tions with Gladstone, 1 80-1 81 ; strikes imperial note, 182 ; opposes Liberal measures, 183-185 ; his attitude to Local Veto, 187-189 ; to disestablishment, 190-194 ; to House of Lords, 194-196 ; new social programme, 197-198 ; difficulties with Tories, 199 ; their leaders satis- fied, 199-200. Appointed Colonial Secretary, 201 ; colleague of Lord Salisbury, 202 ; conduct at Transvaal raid, 206-207 ; reply to Kaiser's telegram, 207 ; new diplomacy, 209 ; raid inquiry, 211-214 ; personal vindication of Rhodes, 214 ; new imperialism, 216— 218 ; foreign excursions, 218-219 ', ' a long spoon,' 218 ; ' touting for an ally,' 218-221 ; colonial services, 221 ; doles to squire and parson, 222-223 ; Compensation for Acci- dents Bill, 223-224 ; his price, 224 ; foreign impressions, 226-227 ; strug- gle with Kruger, 228 et seq. ; ' bluff ' interview with Sir Henry Campbell- Bannerman, 231 ; warnings at High- bury, 233 ; accepts appeal to god of battles, 234 ; responsibility for Boer war, 235 ; defiance of opponents, 236 ; in khaki election, 239-241 ; publication of letters, 239, 241 ; 'a seat sold to the Boers,' 240 ; ' pro- Boer ' imputation, 241-242 ; quarrel with German Chancellor, 244-246 ; sneer at Dillon, 247-248 ; cab accident, 249 ; promises support to Balfour as Prime Minister, 249-250 ; discontent with Education Bill, 251- 252 ; silence in House, 252 ; ' a little tSte montee,' 254 ; visit to South Africa, 254 et seq. ; financial negotia- tions at Johannesburg, 257-258 ; results of tour, 262 ; popularity at home, 262-263. Fiscal volte-face, 264 ; record on Free Trade, 266-268 ; motives of change, 268-269 ; record on old age pensions, 270-274 ; changed attitude to duties on food, 275-276 ; ' a gamble ' with the food of the people. 278 ; Cabinet inquiry, 280 ; Cham- berlain's second resignation,28i-283; opposed by Duke of Devonshire, 284-285 ; propaganda, 286-295 ; no- toriety, 288-289 ; comedy of two loaves, 291-292 ; resistance by Union- ist colleagues, 293-294 ; ' Learn to think imperially,' 295 ; personal mor- tification, 296-297 ; issue on his policy evaded by Balfour in Parlia- ment, 297, 304; taunted with coward- ice, 299-300 ; captures Liberal Unionist organization, 300 ; charges Liberal leaders with methods of vul- garity, 303 ; excites personal antipa- thy, 307 ; obtains dissolution, 311 ; ' drives Balfour on to rocks,' 312. His colleagues, friends and oppon- ents, 313 et seq. ; relations with Gladstone, 313-314 ; with Duke of Devonshire, 314-315 ; Lord Salis- bury, 315 ; Sir William Harcourt, 315-316 ; Mr. Balfour, 316 ; Sir Henry Campbell -Banner man, 316- 317 ; Sir George Trevelyan, 317 ; enemies, 317-318 ; friendship, 318- 319 ; Lord Morley, 319 ; Sir Charles Dilke, 319 ; Mr. Jesse Collings, 320 ; a soft side, 321 ; relations with Birmingham, 321-324 ; domestic life, 324 ; Mrs. Chamberlain, 324— 325 ; clubs, 325-327 ; neglect of exercise, 328 ; orchids, 329-330 ; religion, 330 ; inconsistency, 331- 332 ; ambition, 332-333 ; confes- sions of change, 334-335 ; adminis- tration, 335-336 ; debater and orator, 337-339 ; quotations and allusions, 339-343 ; appearance, 343-344- Final years, 345 et seq. ; under- standing with I3alfour, 345-346 ; last speeches in Parliament, 346- 347 ; birthday celebrations, 347- 34S : ries^, 348 ; takes the oath, 350-351 ; royal visits, 351 ; action at constitutional crisis, 353 ; for- tunes of his cause, 352-355 ; de- cision to retire, 356 ; last appearance, 357 ; death, 357 ; suggested epitaph, 359-361. Chamberlain, Joseph (father), 2, 3, 4, 7. 27- Chamberlain, Mrs., 143-145, 263, 324-325, 357. Chamberlain, Neville, 324, 355, 356. Chamberlain, Richard, 3, 173. ChapUn, H., 47, 51 ; stricture on Chamberlain, 64, 85, 107, 114; ally of, 289, 296, 310. INDEX 4ir Chester, Bishop of, i8o. Childers, H. C. E., 53. 56, iii. Chinese labour, 258-259, 268, 300-301, 312. Church of England, attacked by Cham- berlain, 24-25 ; disestablishment of, 190-194 ; extracts, 379, 400-401. Churchill, Lord Randolph, i, 59 ; described, 76-77 ; friendship with Chamberlain, 78 ; controversy with Chamberlain on Aston Park riots, 83-86 ; democrat, 95, 98 ; overtures to Lord Hartington, 103-104 ; ally of Chamberlain, 120-121, 125, 126; resignation, 134, 135, 136 ; relations with Chamberlain, 137, 140-141, 152, 155. 337 ; pathetic reappear- ance, 171 ; education of Conserva- tives, 225 ; style of criticism, 341. Churchill, Winston, 277, 306, 312. Coalition Government, 200, 202. Cobden Club, 76, 94. Cobden, Richard, 70, 87 n, 102 ; his doctrines, 266, 276, 286 ; extracts, 387, 404-405. Coercion, Irish, 60, 61, 92, 139 ; extracts, 377. Collings, Jesse, 16, no, 114, 123, 201, 295 ; his friendship with Chamber- lain, 320. Colonial conference, 267, 302, 307-308, 354- Conservative and Constitutional Asso- ciations, National Union of, 48, 200, 310, 354. Conservatives, extracts, 372-374, 398- 399. Constitutional Club, 279, 327, Cowper-Temple clause, 18. ' Creedy, Daniel, M.P.,' 78. Crimes Bills (Ireland), 60. 65, 92, 108, 139, 147- Crooks, W., 262. Cross, Assheton (afterwards Sir Richard and Lord Cross), 40, 61, 71, 74, 341-342. Crosskey, Dr., 12, 13, 22 «, 167. Daily Nsiys, 10, 55. Daily Telegraph, Chamberlain criticised by, 30, 39, 310. Dale, Dr., 12, 13, 19, 20, 28, 39, 97, 123-124, 129, 159, 165, 168, 321. ' Daring Duckling,' cartoon, 75-76. Denbigh, attack on peers at, 82 ; extract, 394. ' Devil's Advocate,' 177. Devonshire, Duke of (Lord Harting- ton), 29, 35, 40, 44, 46, 49 ; ' lately the leader,' 50-51 ; Liberal minister. 55. 56, 61, 64, 79, 80, 82 ; Cham- berlain's conflict with, 88, 91, 95, 97 ; ' Rip van Winkle,' loi, 103-105, 106, 108, 112, 115, 116; alUance with Conservatives, 122, 125, 129 ; his leadership accepted by Chamberlain, 133. 134. 136. 137. 139. 140. M6. 147 ; succeeds to peerage, 163 ; Unionist minister, 200 ; leader of Lords, 250 ; on Tariff Reform, 280- 281; resignation, 281-285; 'a drag on the wheel,' 293-294, 300, 311 ; relations with Chamberlain, 313-315- Devonshire Club, 142, 327. Dilke, Sir Charles, 16, 24, 53-55, 65, 92, 95. 109, 319. Dillon, John, 41, 175, 209, 247-248. Diplomacy, new, 209, 218-221. Disestablishment, 24, 31, 88, 95, 104, 190-194; extracts, 379,400-401. Disraeli (Earl of Beaconsfield), 19, 23 ; Chamberlain's attack on, 39-40, 41- 42, 45, 48, 52 ; Sybil, 225 ; phrases, 343- Dissenters, see Nonconformists. Doyle, Sir Conan, tribute to Cham- berlain, 359. ' Drag on the wheel,' 294. Drink traffic, 27, 32, 42-43, 156, 168, 187-189, 301 ; extracts, 381. ' Dumpophobia ', 288. Eastern Question, 43-46, 48. Education Act (of 1870), i6-2l, 25, 29. 30. 158. Education Acts and Bills (of 1896, 1897, 1902, and 1906), 222-223, 251-253. 263, 268, 312, 346-347- Education, denominational, 16-21, 26, 27, 42, 157-160, 222-223, 251-253, 312, 334 ; extracts, 380, 401-402. Education, free, 16, 24, 27, 89, 90, 95. 99. 161, 360. Education, National League, 16 etseq., 29. 158. Edward, King, 243, 249, 263, 351 ; see also Prince of Wales. Egerton, Alan de Tatton, 242-243. Egypt, 66-68, 167, 219-220, 334. Electoral Reform Congress, 33. Elliot, Arthur, 277, 282 n. Employers' Liability Bills, 72, 92, 183, 223-224. Equal Electoral Districts, extracts, 383- ' Escape, means of,' 198. Fashoda, 219-220. Fawcett, H., 21, 50. 412 INDEX Filon, A., Chamberlain described by, in Profils anglais, 167, 322. Fiscal Controversy : — Cobdenism, extracts, 387, 404-405. Dumping, 288. Fair Trade, 69, 91, 291, 334. Food Tax, 70, 275-276, 279, 287, 291-292, 299, 302 ; extracts, 390, 405- Free Food League, 278, 293-294. Free Fooders, 278, 284, 292, 298, 308. Free Trade, 69-70, 264-268, 275 etseq. ; extracts, 387-392, 406-407. Free Trade ministers resign, 281-282 et seq. ' Gamble, a,* with food, 278. ' Half sheet of notepaper,' Mr. Balfour's, 304. Imports, excess of, extracts, 388- 389, 404- ' Lying down,' 294. One-sided Free Trade, extracts, 388. Preference, Colonial, 265-268, 276 et seq., 352, 354-355 '> extracts, 390-391. Propaganda, raging, tearing, 280, 286 et seq. Protection, 70-71, 266-267, 276, 292, 302 ; extracts, 391, 406. Retaliation, 287, 288, 293, 304, 309, 310. TarifiE Commission, 294-295, 299, 303- Tariff Reform, initiated, 264 ; Cabinet inquiry, 277 ; Unionist dissension, 278 ; Cabinet rupture, 281 ; propaganda, 286 et seq. ; opposition by Chamberlain's col- leagues, 293 ; Parliamentary manoeuvres, 297 et seq. ; result of election, 312 ; referendum offered, 352 ; ' change of method,' 354-355- TarifiE Reform League, 278, 294, 345. 349- ' Whole hog,' 292. Flogging, 49-51. 92- Forster, W. E., education policy, 16-20, 26, 29 ; praises Chamber- lain's maiden speech, 42 ; Irish Secretary, 56; policy and resigna- tion, 61-66 ; death, 121. Fortnightly Review, 23, 24, 30, 31, 36, 49. 95, 108, 115, 286. Fourth Party, 59 ; described, 76-77 ; Chamberlain dines with, 78 Fowler, Sir Henry, 159. Franchise Bill, 79-83. Gamble, a, with food, 278, George, King, 351, 353. George, Lloyd, 273, 350. German Emperor, telegram to Kruger, 207 ; Chamberlain's interview with, 220. Gladstone, W. E., first Government, 16-17 ; disappointment of dis- senters with, 17-21 ; early criticism by Chamberlain, 24, 26, 30, 31 ; on Eastern Question, 43-44 ; Cham- berlain's guest, 44 ; second Govern- ment, 53 ; places Chamberlain in Cabinet, 54 ; Chamberlain's panegy- ric on, 74 ; disturbed by Chamber- lain's radical speeches, 74-76, 80, 82 ; defeat of his Government, 92 ; relations with Radical leader, 98- 100, 106 ; adoption of Irish Home Rule, 1 1 1 ; indifiference to Chamber- lain, 112 ; third Government, 114- 117 ; his Home Rule Bill opposed by Chamberlain, 120 etseq. ; its defeat, 129 ; rebukes Liberal supporters of coercion, 139 ; praises Chamber- lain's American mission, 142 ; at- tacked by former colleagues, 146- 147 ; prevents continuance of Parnell leadership, 149; appeals to Chamber- lain's ancient faith, 161-162 ; at- tacked by Chamberlain, 165 ; last Government, 169 ; displays splendid powers, 170 ; introduces second Home Rule Bill, 172 ; denounces Chamberlain, 177 ; Bill rejected by Lords, 179 ; retires, 180 ; relations with Chamberlain, 313-314 ; Cham- berlain's opinion on, see extracts, 384-385, 397-398. Gladstonians, 146, 151, 160, 166, 169, 172, 202. Glasgow, Tariff Reform propaganda opened at, 286 Globe, 39. Gordon, General, 67, 92. Gorst, John (afterwards Sir John), 48, 64, 76. Goschen G. J. (Lord Goschen), 40, 80-81, 87, 88; disagreement with Chamberlain, 89, 91, 100 ; ' the skeleton at the feast,' loi, 104, 114, 116, 129; joins Conservative Government, 136, 147, 171, 205 ; opposes Tariff Reform, 277-278, 280, 292, 294, 312, 341. Gothenburg, licensing system, 42, 180, 187. Granville, Earl, 44, 53, 66, 75 ; com- plains of Chamberlain, 79, 88, 9t, 112, 116, 134, 139. Gully, Speaker, 247. INDEX 413 H.ii.F'Shi:i:t of notepaper, Mr. Bal- four's, 303-304- Halsbury, Lord (Hardinge Giffard), 71. 84, 246. 353. Hamilton, Lord George, 64, 80; opposes Tariff Reform, 281, 290, 306. Hanley, notorious speech at, 82, 85. Harcourt, Sir William, 12, 49, 52, 55-56, 57. 58. 65, 77. 112, 117; accusation against Chamberlain, 1 20, 134 ; ' round a table,' 136, 137, 138 ; gibes and taunts at Chamber- lain, 152, 155, 159, 160 ; Gladstone's deputy, 170, 173, 176-177, 182, 183 ; his death duties, 184-185 ; disputes with Chamberlain, 188-189, 194, 200, 203 ; ornament of House of Commons, 204 ; on Transvaal raid and war policy, 207, 210, 211, 214, 231, 234, 236, 241, 235, 262 ; as Free Trade champion, 291 ; relations with Chamberlain, 315-316. Hardy, Gathorne (Earl of Cranbrook), 17, 40. Harris, Dr. Rutherford. 212-213. Harrison, Frederic, 34, 339. Hartington, Marquis of, see Duke of Devonshire. Hawarden, visit to, 100. Healy, T., 41, 71, 115, 123, 182, 185, 238. Herschell, Lord, at ' round table,' 136. Hicks-Beach, Sir M., see Beach. Highbury (Birmingham), 10, 167 ; uses metaphor of sand-glass at, 233 ; home at, 324, 329, 348, 349 ; last appearance at, 357. Highlands, speeches in the, 96-97. ' Hog, the whole,' 292. Holloway, sensational speech at, 94 ; extract, 396. Home Rule, Irish, Pamell's efforts for, 59 ; Chamberlain's advocacy of, 106-109 ; change of attitude on, no; his schemes, 113; assents to inquiry, 117 ; Gladstone's first Bill, 121 ; Chamberlain's opposition, 121 et seq. ; Bill defeated, 129 ; round table conference on, 136-139 ; alliance against, 146-147, 161 ; second Home Rule Bill introduced, 172 ; Chamberlain's attitude, 172 et seq ; Lords' rejection of Bill, 179 ; alternative to, 197 ; Chamberlain's recantation on, 156 ; third Bill, 355, 358 ; Chamberlain's most notable achievement, 359 ; extracts, 375- 376, 394-396. Hutton, R. H., 6. Hyndman, H. M., 155. Iddesleigh, Lord, see Northcote. Illness, Chamberlain's, 348. Imperial Federation, 217, 265-266. ImperiaUsm, 51, 54, 131-132, 167, 182-183, 216-218, 255-256, 259, 260, 278, 295; extracts, 370-371. ' Impericilly, learn to think,' 295. Inverness, speech at, 98. Ipswich, unauthorized programme at, 90. Ireland, Parnell and Forster's adminis- tration, 59-66 : Kilmainham Treaty, 62-64 ' Chamberlain and Chief Secretaryship, 64-65 ; Phoenix Park murders, 64 ; record of Liberal Government, 65; Chamberlain's re- cord on, 106-109 etseq. ; bureaucratic government, 109 ; proposed visit to, 109-110 ; Gladstone's concession of Home Rule, in ; Unionist coercion of, 139 ; Chamberlain's recantation with regard to, 156; final struggle with Gladstone con- cerning government of, 169 et seq. ; extracts, 375, 394-396 ; see also Home Rule and Parnell. Irish Church Bill, 23. James, Sir Henry (Lord James of Hereford), 56. 116, 129, 146, 163, 200, 250 ; appeals to Duke of Devon- shire against Tariff Reform, 280,311. Jameson, Dr., 206 et seq., 228. Jennings, L., 152. Jingo, applied to Chamberlain, 66. Jingoes and Jingoism, the ; Jingo feeUng on Eastern Question, 45 ; Chamberlain's Jingoism, 67 ; new Jingoes. 207, 208 ; rampant, 237 ; the City a Jingo centre, 246, 254 ; first use of term, 343 ; extracts, 372. ' Joe ' or ' Joey,' 322-323. 347. 356- Johannesburg, Chamberlain at. 257- 259- Jowett, Rev. J. H., 323. ' Judas,' 129, 148. 175, 178. Kendals, Chamberlain presides at banquet to, 328. Khaki, 238, 23^241. Kilmainham, Parnell imprisoned at, 61. Kilmainham ' Treaty,' 62-64. ^48. Kimberley, Lord. 53, 218. Kitchener. Lord, 219 ; in South Africa, 235, 243, 247, 256. Kruger, President. 207. 208, 209, 210, 211, 215, 222; struggle with, 228 et seq., 246. Labouchere, H., 106, 120, 125, 128, 134. 142. 154. 239. 268, 344. 414 INDEX labour representation, extracts, 383- 384- Land Bills (Irish) : Bill of 1881, 60, 61, 93; Bill of 1886, 119, 122, 130; Bills of 1890 and 1891, 160. Land League (Ireland), 61, 64, 140. Lansdowne, Marquis of, 200, 280, 300. Lawson, Sir Wilfrid, 45, 67, 134, 155, 188, 239, 343- League, National Education, see Education. League, National (Irish), 137, 140. ' Learn to think imperially,' 295. Lecky, W. E. H., 215. Liberal, National Federation, 44, 47- 49, 126; see also Caucus. Liberal Union Club, 140, 249, 270. Liberal Unionist organiz^ion, 140, 150 ; captured by Tariff Reformers, 300 ; united with Conservative organization, 354. Liberal Unionists, initiated, 125; Parlia- mentary party, 133 ; joint organiza- tion, 140 ; compact with Conserva- tives, 150 ; ' abortion of a party,' 160 ; name conceded, 172 ; coalition with Conservatives in office, 200, 202 ; disappearance, 354. Liberation Society, 31, 190. Licensing Bill, 301. Limehouse, political leaders at, 303. ' Little Englanders,' 216, 241, 293, 343. Loaves, The Two, 291-292. Local Government Board, Chamber- lain President of, 115-116. Local Veto Bills, 187-189, 204, 301. Logan, J. W., 178, 179. Londonderry, Marquis of, 224. Lords, House of, 23, 27 ; attacked by Chamberlain, 79-83 ; defended by Chamberlain, 194-196 ; fiscal de- bates in, 278, 280 ; Chamberlain's appeal to, 350 ; extracts, 377-378, 393-394- Loreburn, Lord, see Reid. Lowther, James, 64. Lyttelton, A., 283, 300, 308, 352. Mafeking, 237 ; mayor's message, 240 ; Chamberlain at, 260. ' Mafficking,' new term, 238. Majuba, 57, 236, 240-241. Marriages, Chamberlain's 9-1 o, 1 43-1 44 Marriott, W. T., 78, 90. Maxse, Admiral, 23, 30. Maxse, L. J., 350. Maxwell, Sir Herbert, 64. McCarthy, Justin, 50, 63, 65, 149. MSlee in House of Commons, 178-179. ' Mend their manners,' 220. Merchant Shipping Bill, 71-73. Meredith, George, 23, 31, 343, 360, Miall, E., 18, 19. Milner, Sir A. (Lord Milner), 228-230, 244, 262, 283. Mitchelstown, ' massacre of,' 175. Morley, John (Viscount Morley), 12, 17, 18 ; strictures on Gladstone, 19- 20, 20 n. ; editor of Fortnightly, 23, 25. 29, 31 ; editor Pall Mall Gazette, 61, 63, 85, 98, 99, 102, 103 ; Irish Chief Secretary, 115, 116, y 7-1 18, 121, 129, 135, 136, 138 ; separated from Chamberlain, 150, 151, 152, 155 ; censures Chamberlain, 160, 164, 170, 173, 182, 193 ; laments loss of ' old Radical,' 203, 204, 223, 230, 254, 286, 288, 293, 297, 303; Chamberlan's friendship, 318-319. Mundella, A. J., 26, 28, 30, 117, 159. Muntz, Sir P., 84-85. National Councils Scheme, 107-108, 138 n., 156. National Liberal Club, 327. Nationalists, Chamberlain associated with, 49, 59, 61, 63 ; combination of Conservatives with, 92, 109 ; holders of balance, iii, 114; charges against Chamberlain by, 123, 129, 142, 148, 149 ; united under ^edmond, 164 ; hate of Chamberlain by, 169, 171, 172, 173, 178, 185, 202, 318 ; ' a kept party,' 337. Newdegate, Mr., 37. Newman, Cardinal, 44. Nolan, Colonel, 42. Nonconformist, 18. Nonconformists (and dissenters), 3, 16-21, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 190- 194, 223, 253 ; extracts, 394, 401. Nonconformist Unionist Association, 192. North American Review, 328. Northcote, Sir Stafford (Lord Iddes- leigh), 40, jy, 83, 99 ; compares Chamberlain to Jack Cade, 100, 102. O'Brien, William, 185. O'Connor, T. P., 41, 142, 14S, 178, 179, 340- Old age pensions, proposed by Cham- berlain, 166, 197, 203-204, 226, 241 ; the story of, 270-274, 275, 276, 279, 311, 334, 360; provided by Liberal Government, 350 ; extracts, 386-387. ' One man one vote,' extracts, 382- 383. INDEX 415 Opera House, Unionist alliance at, 122. O'Shea, Captain, 62, 63 ; divorce suit, 149. Pall Mall Gazette, 61,65, 117, 343. Parish Councils Bill, 183, 195. Pamell, Charles Stewart, i, 41, 49, 59 ; arrest and release, 60-63, 65, 76, 109 ; interview with Lord Carnarvon, 110, III ; alliance with Liberals, 114, 115, 137, 138 M. ; charge against Chamberlain, 147 ; Times charges against Pamell, 147-148 ; in divorce case, 149 ; death, 164, 333. Parnell Commission, 147-149, 173. ' Parochially minded,' 54 ; extract, 370. Patents Bill, 71. Payment of members, extract, 403. Peel, Speaker, 179. Percival, Dr. (Bishop of Hereford), 321. Phoenix Park murders, 64-65, 147, 148. Pigott, Richard, 148. Plimsoll, S., 71. Poland, rule in Ireland compared with, 109 ; extracts, 396. Preference, Colonial, see Fiscal Con- troversy. Pretoria, Chamberlain at, 257. Primrose League, Chamberlain's gibe at, 49. Prisons Bill, 42. Pro-Boers, 237, 239, 241-242. Protection, see Fiscal Controversy. Publicans, The Right Method with, 32. 189- Public Houses, 32, 43, 187-189. Punch, on ' A Brummagem lion,' 36; ' Daring DuckUng,' 75 ; appearances, 97-98 ; ' Irish Stew,' 122 ; ' Fishery- Commissionery Young Man,' 143 ; ' Joey Chamberlain and Bung,' 156; duel with G. O. M., 177; the ' Fiscal Freaks,' 302 ; portrait of Pitt, 343. Radical Programme, The, 95, 191, 203. Radical Union, 130. Raid, Transvaal, 206-209 ; costs of, 211; inquiry into, 211-214 ; Mr. Rhodes's conduct in connection with, 214-215, 236 ; a discredited tale concerning, 242-243. Ransom, doctrine of, 88, 89-90, 96-97, 150 ; abandonment of, 156-157 ; extract, 402-403. Redmond, John, 164. Reform Club, 325. Reid, Sir Robert (Lord Loreburn), and term ' pro-Boer,' 241-242. Republicanism, 33 et seq. ; 90 ; recantation of, 154 ; extracts, 382, Rhodes, Cecil, 206, 212, 213 ; a ' man of honour,' 214, 215, 236, 242, 329. Rip Van Winkle, loi, 104. Ritchie, C. T., defends Free Trade, 264, 265, 268, 277, 280 ; resigns office, 281, 293, 294, 306, 312. Roberts, Lord, 235, 237, 240, 243. Roebuck, J. A., 28, 29, 182. Rogers, Dr. Guinness, 21. Rosebery, Lord, 75 n., 112, 117, 172 ; Prime Minister, 184, 199, 200, 203, 228, 231, 244, 246, 247, 248 ; com- ments on resignation of Unionist ministers, 282 ; ' Well, what do you think of it all ? ' 288, 293, 295, 311 ; friendship with Chamberlain, 317 ; suggests epitaph for Chamberlain, 359- Round Table conference, 135-139. Rural World, 270, 271. Russell. Charles (Lord Russell of Killowen), 51. Russell, Lord John, on Chamberlain, 25- Rutland, Duke of (Lord John Manners), 40. Rylands, Peter, 17, 325. St. Aldwyn, Lord, see Beach. St. James's Gazette, 224. Salisbury, Marquis of, gibes at, and by, 46, 56, 72 ; ' who toil not, neither do they spin,' 75, 76 ; encounters with Chamberlain, 81--82, 88, 89 ; his ' stop-gap ' Administration, 94, 100, 102, 104, 109, 115 ; meets Chamberlain at Turf Club, 121. 122 ; his second Ministry, 133, 136, 161, 182, 199 ; Chamberlain, a colleague of, 200, 202, 203, 218, 219, 224, 225, 232, 246 ; retirement, 249 ; Cham- berlain's relations with, 315 ; eX' tracts, 385. Sandon, Lord, 39, 41, 347. Saturday Review, 23, 40. Saunderson, Colonel, 178. Schnadhorst, H., 22, 126. Second Chamber (see also House of Lords), 27, 195. Seely, Major, 306. Selbome, first Earl of. Lord Chancellor, 53 ; describes Chamberlain, 56 ; describes Mrs. Chamberlain, 144 ; gives a glimpse of Chamberlain's home hfe, 324. Selborne, second Earl of, in Raid inquiry, 212-213 ; in fiscal contro- versy, 280, 300. 4i6 INDEX Serjeant, Richard, descent from 3, 4. Sexton, Thomas, 116; on Chamber- lain's ' honour,' 134. Shaw, Miss Flora (Lady Lugard), her telegrams to and from Rhodes, 213. Sheffield, Chamberlain candidate for, 26-30, 34, 39, 107, 158, 224; Mr. Balfour's fiscal declaration at, 284 ; Lord Rosebery at, 288. ' Skeleton at the feast,' loi, 104 150 Skottowe, B. C, 106. Small .Holdings Bill, 161. Small Houses Bill, 226, 252. Smith, Goldwin, ix, 282, 312. Smith, Samuel, 72, 187. Smith, W. H., 136, 164 and n. Socialism, 91, 97. Spectator, 89, 199, 277, 289, 299, 353. Spencer, Earl, 64, 65, 66, 95, 112, 172. Sportsman, 39. Standard, on Chamberlain's appoint- ment to the Cabinet, 54-55. Stanhope, Edward, 72. Stanley, Colonel (sixteenth Earl of Derby), 49. Stanmore, Lord (Arthur Gordon), 324. Stop-gap Government, 94. Stuart James, 155. Tariff Reform, see Fiscal Controversy. TSte montSe, 254. ' Three-acres-and-a-cow,' no, 114 uc 320. ^' ^' Times, The, 19, 26, 28, 35, 36 ; de- nounces Chamberlain, 52 ; 54, 89, 96 ; praises Chamberlain, 131 • charges against Parnelhtes, 147' 148 ; complaint of, by Chamberlain] 157 ; eulogy of Chamberlain, 216 ; ' a pair of accomplished whist- players,' 284 ; protest, 353. 'Titan, the weary,' 46, 217. Toil, ' Who toil not, neither do they spm,' 75, 155 ; extract, 398. Toryism, extracts, 374. ' Touting for an ally,' 219. Trade, Free, see Fiscal Controversy. Transvaal, the. Chamberlain's early policy on, 56-58 ; raid and inquiry, 206-215 ; negotiations concerning. 228-234 .* war with, 235-238, 239, 240. 243, 247, 248 ; Chamberlain's visit to, 253, 254-263 ; its contri- bution, 258, 263, 304-305 ; Chinese labour m, 258-259, 268, 300, 312 Trevelyan, Sir George, 65, 129 i:j6 137, 140, 185. ' •" ' Tuckwell, Rev. W., 106, 112. Turf Club, I2T. Uganda, 182, 256. Uitlanders, 207-208, 209, 228, 229, 230, 232. Unauthorized programme, the, 87-93, 95-102 ; disruptive effect of, 105 ; carried out ' in principle,' i6i ; eloquent advocacy of, 339. Unitarian, 330. United Kingdom Alliance, 187. United States, proposed alliance with 218, 220. ' Vanity Fair, 76. Venice, under the Austrian rule, com- parison of Ireland with, 109 ; ex- tracts, 396. Vested interests, extracts, 381. Viallate, Achille, describes Chamber- lain, 227, 339. Victoria, Queen, reference to, in con- nexion with Chamberlain's RepubU- canism, 34, 90 ; sends portrait to Chamberlain, 142-143 ; foreign attacks on, 220 ; receives Chamber- lain at Osborne,^242 ; death of, 243 . Wales, disestablishment in, 190-194. Wales, Prince of (King Edward), at Birmingham, 34-37 ; grants to children of, 154 ; in House of Commons, 171, 172; at a banquet presided over by Chamberlain, 242 ; succeeds to throne, 243. ' War, a sort of,' 246. Washington, Chamberlain's official visit to, 142 ; marriage at, 144. Western Mail, 194. Westminster Gazette, 196. ' Who toil not, neiter do they spin,' see Toil. Williams, Powell, 201, 297. Wolff, Sir Henry Drummond, 64, 76 ; ' jackal,' 84, 320. Workmen (Compensation for Acci- dents) Bill, see Employers' LiabiUty. York, Duke of (King George), '^172. Butler & Tanner Frome and London O ^iJl^O. Sh BOKKO.BO RETURN TO DESK Fl^ Renewed books .«sub,cct 1)476 ^