Very early in life, very soon after I had become a clerk in St.
Martin's le Grand, when I was utterly impecunious and beginning
to fall grievously into debt, I was asked by an uncle of mine, who
was himself a clerk in the War Office, what destination I should
like best for my future life. He probably meant to inquire whether
I wished to live married or single, whether to remain in the Post
Office or to leave it, whether I should prefer the town or the
country. I replied that I should like to be a Member of Parliament.
My uncle, who was given to sarcasm, rejoined that, as far a he knew,
few clerks in the Post Office did become Members of Parliament. I
think it was the remembrance of this jeer which stirred me up to
look for a seat as soon as I had made myself capable of holding one
by leaving the public service. My uncle was dead, but if I could
get a seat, the knowledge that I had done so might travel to that
bourne from whence he was not likely to return, and he might there
feel that he had done me wrong.
Independently of this, I have always thought that to sit in the
British Parliament should be the highest object of ambition to
every educated Englishman. I do not by this mean to suggest that
every educated Englishman should set before himself a seat in
Parliament as a probable or even a possible career; but that the man
in Parliament has reached a higher position than the man out,--that
to serve one's country without pay is the grandest work that a man
can do,--that of all studies the study of politics is the one in
which a man may make himself most useful to his fellow-creatures,--and
that of all lives, public political lives are capable of the highest
efforts. So thinking,--though I was aware that fifty-three was too
late an age at which to commence a new career,--I resolved with
much hesitation that I would make the attempt. Writing now at an
age beyond sixty, I can say that my political feelings and convictions
have never undergone any change. They are now what they became when
I first began to have political feelings and convictions. Nor do I
find in myself any tendency to modify them as I have found generally
in men as they grow old. I consider myself to be an advanced, but
still a Conservative-Liberal, which I regard not only as a possible,
but as a rational and consistent phase of political existence.
I can, I believe, in a very few words, make known my political
theory; and, as I am anxious that any who know aught of me should
know that, I will endeavour to do so.
It must, I think, be painful to all men to feel inferiority. It should,
I think, be a matter of some pain to all men to feel superiority,
unless when it has been won by their own efforts. We do not
understand the operations of Almighty wisdom, and are, therefore,
unable to tell the causes of the terrible inequalities that
we see--why some, why so many, should have so little to make life
enjoyable, so much to make it painful, while a few others, not
through their own merit, have had gifts poured out to them from
a full hand. We acknowledge the hand of God and His wisdom, but
still we are struck with awe and horror at the misery of many of
our brethren. We who have been born to the superior condition,--for,
in this matter, I consider myself to be standing on a platform with
dukes and princes, and all others to whom plenty and education and
liberty have been given,--cannot, I think, look upon the inane,
unintellectual, and tossed-bound life of those who cannot even
feed themselves sufficiently by their sweat, without some feeling
of injustice, some feeling of pain.
This consciousness of wrong has induced in many enthusiastic but
unbalanced minds a desire to set all things right by a proclaimed
equality. In their efforts such men have shown how powerless they
are in opposing the ordinances of the Creator. For the mind of the
thinker and the student is driven to admit, though it be awestruck
by apparent injustice, that this inequality is the work of God.
Make all men equal to-day, and God has so created them that they
shall be all unequal to-morrow. The so-called Conservative, the
conscientious, philanthropic Conservative, seeing this, and being
surely convinced that such inequalities are of divine origin, tells
himself that it is his duty to preserve them. He thinks that the
preservation of the welfare of the world depends on the maintenance
of those distances between the prince and the peasant by which he
finds himself to be surrounded; and, perhaps, I may add, that the
duty is not unpleasant, as he feels himself to be one of the princes.
But this man, though he sees something, and sees that very clearly,
sees only a little. The divine inequality is apparent to him, but
not the equally divine diminution of that inequality. That such
diminution is taking place on all sides is apparent enough; but it
is apparent to him as an evil, the consummation of which it is his
duty to retard. He cannot prevent it; and, therefore, the society
to which he belongs is, in his eyes, retrograding. He will even,
at times, assist it; and will do so conscientiously, feeling that,
under the gentle pressure supplied by him, and with the drags and
holdfasts which he may add, the movement would be slower than it
would become if subjected to his proclaimed and absolute opponents.
Such, I think, are Conservatives; and I speak of men who, with the
fear of God before their eyes and the love of their neighbours warm
in their hearts, endeavour to do their duty to the best of their
ability.
Using the term which is now common, and which will be best understood,
I will endeavour to explain how the equally conscientious Liberal
is opposed to the Conservative. He is equally aware that these
distances are of divine origin, equally averse to any sudden
disruption of society in quest of some Utopian blessedness; but he
is alive to the fact that these distances are day by day becoming
less, and he regards this continual diminution as a series of
steps towards that human millennium of which he dreams. He is even
willing to help the many to ascend the ladder a little, though he
knows, as they come up towards him, he must go down to meet them.
What is really in his mind is,--I will not say equality, for the
word is offensive, and presents to the imagination of men ideas of
communism, of ruin, and insane democracy,--but a tendency towards
equality. In following that, however, he knows that he must be
hemmed in by safeguards, lest he be tempted to travel too quickly;
and, therefore, he is glad to be accompanied on his way by the
repressive action of a Conservative opponent. Holding such views,
I think I am guilty of no absurdity in calling myself an advanced
Conservative-Liberal. A man who entertains in his mind any
political doctrine, except as a means of improving the condition
of his fellows, I regard as a political intriguer, a charlatan,
and a conjurer--as one who thinks that, by a certain amount of wary
wire-pulling, he may raise himself in the estimation of the world.
I am aware that this theory of politics will seem to many to be stilted,
overstrained, and, as the Americans would say, high-faluten. Many
will declare that the majority even of those who call themselves
politicians,--perhaps even of those who take an active
part in politics,--are stirred by no such feelings as these, and
acknowledge no such motives. Men become Tories or Whigs, Liberals
or Conservatives, partly by education,--following their fathers,--partly
by chance, partly as openings come, partly in accordance with the
bent of their minds, but still without any far-fetched reasonings
as to distances and the diminution of distances. No doubt it is
so; and in the battle of politics, as it goes, men are led further
and further away from first causes, till at last a measure is opposed
by one simply because it is advocated by another, and Members of
Parliament swarm into lobbies, following the dictation of their
leaders, and not their own individual judgments. But the principle
is at work throughout. To many, though hardly acknowledged, it is
still apparent. On almost all it has its effect; though there are
the intriguers, the clever conjurers, to whom politics is simply
such a game as is billiards or rackets, only played with greater
results. To the minds that create and lead and sway political
opinion, some such theory is, I think, ever present.
The truth of all this I had long since taken home to myself. I had
now been thinking of it for thirty years, and had never doubted.
But I had always been aware of a certain visionary weakness about
myself in regard to politics. A man, to be useful in Parliament,
must be able to confine himself and conform himself, to be satisfied
with doing a little bit of a little thing at a time. He must
patiently get up everything connected with the duty on mushrooms,
and then be satisfied with himself when at last he has induced
a Chancellor of the Exchequer to say that he will consider the
impost at the first opportunity. He must be content to be beaten
six times in order that, on a seventh, his work may be found to
be of assistance to some one else. He must remember that he is one
out of 650, and be content with 1-650th part of the attention of
the nation. If he have grand ideas, he must keep them to himself,
unless by chance, he can work his way up to the top of the tree.
In short, he must be a practical man. Now I knew that in politics
I could never become a practical man. I should never be satisfied
with a soft word from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but would
always be flinging my overtaxed ketchup in his face.
Nor did it seem to me to be possible that I should ever become a
good speaker. I had no special gifts that way, and had not studied
the art early enough in life to overcome natural difficulties. I
had found that, with infinite labour, I could learn a few sentences
by heart, and deliver them, monotonously indeed, but clearly. Or,
again, if there were something special to be said, I could say it
in a commonplace fashion--but always as though I were in a hurry,
and with the fear before me of being thought to be prolix. But I
had no power of combining, as a public speaker should always do,
that which I had studied with that which occurred to me at the
moment. It must be all lesson,--which I found to be best; or else
all impromptu,--which was very bad, indeed, unless I had something
special on my mind. I was thus aware that I could do no good by
going into Parliament--that the time for it, if there could have
been a time, had gone by. But still I had an almost insane desire
to sit there, and be able to assure myself that my uncle's scorn
had not been deserved.
In 1867 it had been suggested to me that, in the event of a dissolution,
I should stand for one division of the County of Essex; and I had
promised that I would do so, though the promise at that time was
as rash a one as a man could make. I was instigated to this by the
late Charles Buxton, a man whom I greatly loved, and who was very
anxious that the county for which his brother had sat, and with
which the family were connected, should be relieved from what he
regarded as the thraldom of Toryism. But there was no dissolution
then. Mr. Disraeli passed his Reform Bill, by the help of the
Liberal member for Newark, and the summoning of a new Parliament
was postponed till the next year. By this new Reform Bill Essex
was portioned out into three instead of two electoral divisions,
one of which,--that adjacent to London,--would, it was thought,
be altogether Liberal. After the promise which I had given,
the performance of which would have cost me a large sum of money
absolutely in vain, it was felt by some that I should be selected
as one of the candidates for the new division--and as such I was
proposed by Mr. Charles Buxton. But another gentleman, who would
have been bound by previous pledges to support me, was put forward
by what I believe to have been the defeating interest, and I had
to give way. At the election this gentleman, with another Liberal,
who had often stood for the county, was returned without a contest.
Alas! alas! They were both unseated at the next election, when the
great Conservative reaction took place.
In the spring of 1868 I was sent to the United States on a postal
mission, of which I will speak presently. While I was absent the
dissolution took place. On my return I was somewhat too late to
look out for a seat, but I had friends who knew the weakness of my
ambition; and it was not likely, therefore, that I should escape
the peril of being put forward for some impossible borough as to
which the Liberal party would not choose that it should go to the
Conservatives without a struggle. At last, after one or two others,
Beverley was proposed to me, and to Beverley I went.
I must, however, exculpate the gentleman who acted as my agent, from
undue persuasion exercised towards me. He was a man who thoroughly
understood Parliament, having sat there himself--and he sits there
now at this moment. He understood Yorkshire,--or, at least, the
East Riding of Yorkshire, in which Beverley is situated,--certainly
better than any one alive. He understood all the mysteries of
canvassing, and he knew well the traditions, the condition, and the
prospect of the Liberal party. I will not give his name, but they
who knew Yorkshire in 1868 will not be at a loss to find it. "So,"
said he, "you are going to stand for Beverley?" I replied gravely
that I was thinking of doing so. "You don't expect to get in?" he
said. Again I was grave. I would not, I said, be sanguine, but,
nevertheless, I was disposed to hope for the best. "Oh, no!"
continued he, with good-humoured raillery, "you won't get in. I
don't suppose you really expect it. But there is a fine career open
to you. You will spend (pounds)1000, and lose the election. Then you will
petition, and spend another (pounds)1000. You will throw out the elected
members. There will be a commission, and the borough will be
disfranchised. For a beginner such as you are, that will be a great
success." And yet, in the teeth of this, from a man who knew all
about it, I persisted in going to Beverley!
The borough, which returned two members, had long been represented
by Sir Henry Edwards, of whom, I think, I am justified in saying
that he had contracted a close intimacy with it for the sake of
the seat. There had been many contests, many petitions, many void
elections, many members, but, through it all, Sir Henry had kept
his seat, if not with permanence, yet with a fixity of tenure next
door to permanence. I fancy that with a little management between
the parties the borough might at this time have returned a member
of each colour quietly; but there were spirits there who did not
love political quietude, and it was at last decided that there
should be two Liberal and two Conservative candidates. Sir Henry
was joined by a young man of fortune in quest of a seat, and I was
grouped with Mr. Maxwell, the eldest son of Lord Herries, a Scotch
Roman Catholic peer, who lives in the neighbourhood.
When the time came I went down to canvass, and spent, I think, the
most wretched fortnight of my manhood. In the first place, I was
subject to a bitter tyranny from grinding vulgar tyrants. They were
doing what they could, or said that they were doing so, to secure
me a seat in Parliament, and I was to be in their hands, at any
rate, the period of my candidature. On one day both of us, Mr.
Maxwell and I, wanted to go out hunting. We proposed to ourselves
but the one holiday during this period of intense labour; but I
was assured, as was he also, by a publican who was working for us,
that if we committed such a crime he and all Beverley would desert
us. From morning to evening every day I was taken round the lanes
and by-ways of that uninteresting town, canvassing every voter,
exposed to the rain, up to my knees in slush, and utterly unable
to assume that air of triumphant joy with which a jolly, successful
candidate should he invested. At night, every night I had to
speak somewhere,--which was bad; and to listen to the speaking of
others,--which was much worse. When, on one Sunday, I proposed to
go to the Minster Church, I was told that was quite useless, as
the Church party were all certain to support Sir Henry! "Indeed,"
said the publican, my tyrant, "he goes there in a kind of official
profession, and you had better not allow yourself to be seen in the
same place." So I stayed away and omitted my prayers. No Church of
England church in Beverley would on such an occasion have welcomed
a Liberal candidate. I felt myself to be a kind of pariah in the
borough, to whom was opposed all that was pretty, and all that was
nice, and all that was--ostensibly--good.
But perhaps my strongest sense of discomfort arose from the conviction
that my political ideas were all leather and prunella to the men
whose votes I was soliciting. They cared nothing for my doctrines,
and could not be made to understand that I should have any. I had
been brought to Beverley either to beat Sir Henry Edwards,--which,
however, no one probably thought to be feasible,--or to cause him
the greatest possible amount of trouble, inconvenience, and expense.
There were, indeed, two points on which a portion of my wished-for
supporters seemed to have opinions, and on both these two points
I was driven by my opinions to oppose them. Some were anxious for
the Ballot,--which had not then become law,--and some desired the
Permissive Bill. I hated, and do hate, both these measures, thinking
it to be unworthy of a great people to free itself from the evil
results of vicious conduct by unmanly restraints. Undue influence
on voters is a great evil from which this country had already done
much to emancipate itself by extending electoral divisions and by
an increase of independent feeling. These, I thought, and not secret
voting, were the weapons by which electoral intimidation should be
overcome. And as for drink, I believe in no Parlimentary restraint;
but I do believe in the gradual effect of moral teaching and
education. But a Liberal, to do any good at Beverley, should have
been able to swallow such gnats as those. I would swallow nothing,
and was altogether the wrong man.
I knew, from the commencement of my candidature, how it would be.
Of course that well-trained gentleman who condescended to act as
my agent, had understood the case, and I ought to have taken his
thoroughly kind advice. He had seen it all, and had told himself
that it was wrong that one so innocent in such ways as I, so
utterly unable to fight such a battle, should be carried down into
Yorkshire merely to spend money and to be annoyed. He could not
have said more than he did say, and I suffered for my obstinacy. Of
course I was not elected. Sir Henry Edwards and his comrade became
members for Beverley, and I was at the bottom of the poll. I paid
(pounds)400 for my expenses, and then returned to London.
My friendly agent in his raillery had of course exaggerated the
cost. He had, when I arrived at Beverley, asked me for a cheque
for (pounds)400, and told me that that sum would suffice. It did suffice.
How it came to pass that exactly that sum should be required I never
knew, but such was the case. Then there came a petition,--not from
me, but from the town. The inquiry was made, the two gentlemen
were unseated, the borough was disfranchised, Sir Henry Edwards
was put on his trial for some kind of Parliamentary offence and
was acquitted. In this way Beverley's privilege as a borough and
my Parliamentary ambition were brought to an end at the same time.
When I knew the result I did not altogether regret it. It may be
that Beverley might have been brought to political confusion and
Sir Henry Edwards relegated to private life without the expenditure
of my hard-earned money, and without that fortnight of misery; but
connecting the things together, as it was natural that I should
do, I did flatter myself that I had done some good. It had seemed
to me that nothing could be worse, nothing more unpatriotic, nothing
more absolutely opposed to the system of representative government,
than the time-honoured practices of the borough of Beverley. It had
come to pass that political cleanliness was odious to the citizens.
There was something grand in the scorn with which a leading Liberal
there turned up his nose at me when I told him that there should
be no bribery, no treating, not even a pot of beer on one side.
It was a matter for study to see how at Beverley politics were
appreciated because they might subserve electoral purposes, and
how little it was understood that electoral purposes, which are in
themselves a nuisance, should be endured in order that they may
subserve politics. And then the time, the money, the mental energy,
which had been expended in making the borough a secure seat for
a gentleman who had realised the idea that it would become him to
be a member of Parliament! This use of the borough seemed to be
realised and approved in the borough generally. The inhabitants
had taught themselves to think that it was for such purposes that
boroughs were intended! To have assisted in putting an end to this,
even in one town, was to a certain extent a satisfaction.