Kitabı oku: «Recollections of a Busy Life: Being the Reminiscences of a Liverpool Merchant 1840-1910», sayfa 9
CHAPTER X.
POLITICAL WORK
Party politics have always been very prominent in Liverpool, partly no doubt due to the old Conservative associations, and partly to the presence in the city of so many Orangemen. Liverpool in my time has been mainly Conservative, and indeed, except for a brief period, this party has held the Town Hall and ruled over the municipal destinies of the town. It is, however, pleasant to recognise the good work done by the Liberals, who have always taken their share of committee work and most loyally helped forward the government of the city. The annual fight for the possession of the Town Hall has not been so much to secure party domination in the city as to control its representation in Parliament. This was an important consideration when the city voted as one unit for its three members. But it is of less importance now that the city is divided up into nine wards, each having its own representative in Parliament. The day may come when politics will happily cease to influence the municipal elections.
My earliest recollection of a general election is of being present on the hustings erected in front of the Town Hall. The nominations took place on the hustings, and the occasion was taken advantage of to ply the candidates with questions, and the proceedings seldom ended without some horse-play, the throwing of rotten eggs and bags of flour, etc. Of those prominent in these early elections I remember Tom Bold, the Tory tactician; Alderman Livingston, always to the front in a political fight; Mr. Alderman Rigby, the Blucher of the party. Money flowed freely, and also beer on the day of the election, and the town was kept more or less in a turmoil. All must rejoice in the quiet and orderly character of an election day under the new conditions which now prevail.
Very shortly after entering the Town Council I was asked to undertake the duties of "Whip," though we did not then dignify the position by that high-sounding name; in other words I acted as honorary secretary to the Conservative party in the Council. The appointment was probably made at the instance of my brother Arthur, who was already very active in the political world, but for business reasons could not at that time make himself very prominent. "Party" politics were never very congenial to me, although all my leanings were Conservative. I have felt that "Party" makes one acquainted with strange bedfellows, and induces men to do and say things from which they would shrink in everyday life; and I think "party" considerations are carried too far, and the best interests of the country are too often sacrificed at its call.
In my early years the parliamentary representation of the borough was divided, Mr. T. B. Horsfall and Mr. Ewart being our members. I knew them only slightly. Mr. S. R. Graves defeated Mr. Ewart in 1865. Mr. Graves had a fine commanding presence and all the address and bonhomie of an Irishman. He quickly became very popular at Westminster and did excellent work for Liverpool. His knowledge of shipping was much appreciated in the House, and it was generally expected that he would be the Secretary or the First Lord of the Admiralty, but his career was prematurely cut off, to the great grief of Liverpool; he died in 1873. His statue stands in St. George's Hall. I was secretary to the memorial committee. After defraying the cost of the statue we devoted the balance of the money collected to the endowment of "Graves" scholars at the Seamen's Orphanage, an institution with which Mr. Graves had been very closely identified.
The parliamentary candidates for the vacancy were Mr. John Torr, a prominent merchant, who stood in the Conservative interest, and Mr. William S. Caine, another Liverpool man, supported by the Radicals and teetotalers. I acted as the honorary Secretary for Mr. Torr. The election was hotly contested, but Mr. Torr was returned by a majority of nearly 2,000. In those days we paid much court and deference to our members. They were held in high personal esteem, always received the hospitality of our leading men, and were never allowed to stay at an hotel.
Lord Sandon became our member in 1868, defeating Mr. William Rathbone. Naturally a very delicate man with a highly strung nervous system, the representation of such an important constituency as Liverpool was a source of much anxiety to him. Any subject brought under his notice became to him a matter of the first and most urgent importance. Lord Sandon was a true aristocrat, refined in manner and most courteous and considerate to all. He continued to represent Liverpool until 1880, when he succeeded his father in the Peerage and became the Earl of Harrowby.
Upon the death of Mr. Torr in 1880, Mr. Edward Whitley became our member. Mr. Whitley had for many years been the most popular man in Liverpool. An ardent Conservative, a good Evangelical Churchman, and excelling in good works, the name of Edward Whitley was a household word in Liverpool. He was the leader of the Tory party in the Council, and was a frequent speaker, but his speeches, though fluent, were not convincing. Mr. Whitley, although a very diligent member, was not a conspicuous success in Parliament; he failed to catch the ear of the House. Few men have done more for their native town or were more highly respected in their day and generation. He died in 1892.
In 1885 the party representation of Liverpool underwent an important change, a partition of the city into nine divisions being effected, each returning one member. It has seemed to me that this has involved some loss of individuality on the part of the nine members, and that Liverpool has taken comparatively little interest in their doings, and I am inclined to doubt if the city exercises as much influence in the affairs of the nation, or if our local parliamentary business is as well looked after.
The effacement of the private member is due very much to his inability to initiate legislation. If he introduces a bill it has to run the chances of the ballot, and if it is a good measure and gets a good place in the ballot, it is too frequently adopted by the Government, and in this way the private member loses his individuality and there is little inducement for him to originate legislation.
Mr. Rathbone, when he was our member, had an office and a staff of clerks in his house at Prince's Gate, London, for the purpose of looking after the parliamentary business of Liverpool, and it has never since been so systematically and so well attended to.
The contest for the County in 1868, when Mr. Gladstone and Mr. R. A. Cross (now Lord Cross) were the candidates, is very fresh in my memory. The question of the day was the Irish church. Mr. Gladstone delivered a series of very brilliant addresses, but to the surprise of everyone Mr. Cross's replies were equally brilliant, and we thought very crushing. We took the candidates, Cross and Blackburn, in a coach and four, to canvass Colonel Blundell at Crosby Hall, and Mr. Weld Blundell at Ince.
I was shortly afterwards made chairman of the Waterloo Polling District, and in 1880 became chairman of the Southport Division. The first contest in this division was between our candidate, Mr. John Edwards Moss (now Sir John Edwards Moss, Bart.), and Dr. Pilkington (now Sir George Pilkington). It was an uphill fight; Southport had always been a Radical place, and remained true to her Radical principles. The electors were very fastidious; they took exception to our candidate wearing rings on his fingers, and helping himself while speaking to a little sherry and water out of his flask. We unfortunately lost the election.
When the next election came round, we had to look about for another candidate, and tried for several, but they were not attracted to Southport; in the end we invited the Honourable George Curzon, the eldest son of Lord Scarsdale, of Kedleston. He had lately been defeated at Derby, but he was a young man, only 27, with a record of a very brilliant university career, and had been president of the Union at Oxford. Mr. Curzon accepted our invitation, and came down to Southport to deliver his first speech, which was very brilliant, and quite took everyone by surprise. He was very boyish in looks, which occasioned one rough Lancashire man to get up in the meeting and exclaim, "Thou art o'er young for us." Mr. Curzon quickly replied, "If you will return me as your member I promise I will improve upon that every day I live."
In moving a vote of confidence in Mr. Curzon I predicted that he would one day be Prime Minister, he so greatly impressed me with his intellectual power and great eloquence.
Mr. Curzon made a splendid and most active candidate. He addressed meetings in every village in the division, every speech was carefully thought out and prepared, and his industry was remarkable. When he stayed, as he frequently did, at "Ramleh," he retired to his room after breakfast and we did not see him again until dinner-time; he had been engaged all day working at his speech. He had the gift of taking pains. We won the election only by a majority of 460. Mr. Curzon remained our member for thirteen years, until he was appointed Viceroy of India. We fought three contests, winning each with an increased majority, until at the last election, in 1895, Mr. Curzon's majority was 804. His opponent, then Sir Herbert Naylor-Leyland, was formerly a Conservative, and as such stood for Colchester. He was made a baronet by the Liberals, and came and fought Southport as a Radical. When he stood for Colchester as a Conservative he had made abundant use of Mr. Curzon's speeches at Southport, delivering them as his own, and we did not fail to make capital of this amusing episode when he stood as a Radical for Southport.
Lady Naylor-Leyland was a beautiful American woman, one of the society beauties of the day, and she created a sensation as she drove about in an open carriage all decked with roses. But Mrs. Curzon was equally attractive; she was a bride, and had most charming and winning manners, and her presence on our platforms was a great help. It was my duty as chairman to escort her to our meetings, and I remember almost the last words she said to me on leaving Southport were, "Sir William, I shall always think of you getting me through crowds." Mr. Curzon occupied a furnished house at Southport during the election, and I stayed part of the time with them; and shall never forget Mrs. Curzon's gracious manner and her loving devotion to her husband. Alas for him and his great career, she died too soon. She gave her life, I fear, that she might support her husband in the splendid discharge of his duties in India.
Lord Curzon has gone into the House of Lords, where he will, I have no doubt, render great and distinguished service to the country; but had Lady Curzon lived I feel he would have entered the more congenial atmosphere of the Commons, and my prophecy that he would one day be Prime Minister would have been fulfilled.
The following incident proves the one great secret of Lord Curzon's success in life has been his remarkable industry. He made a journey to Persia, and wrote a book which is to-day the standard work on Persia. He was anxious to make an index, which he could have had done for him for a small expenditure, but he preferred to do it himself in his own way, and for this purpose he remained in rooms at Croydon for a month hard at work, and I believe I was the only person who knew his address.
The value of Lord Curzon's work in India cannot very well be overstated. Travelling through India some two years after his return home, we found everywhere the impress of his remarkable industry and thoughtfulness.
One day when visiting the cutcherry of a far distant province, we found the entire system of correspondence had been personally revised by the late Viceroy. On another occasion, the engineer of a coal mine to whom I was talking told me that the Viceroy visited his mine and personally interested himself in obtaining improved traffic facilities on the railway. On another day, when visiting a palace at Delhi, we found a number of Italians restoring the mosaics; they informed us they were still in the pay of Lord and Lady Curzon. I could go on enumerating instances of his activity and his abiding interest in India. In the restoration of the old landmarks and monuments in India, Lord Curzon has done a work which for generations to come will make his name memorable.
After Lord Curzon retired from Southport we had another election; this time Lord Skelmersdale, now the Earl of Lathom, was our candidate, and Sir Herbert Naylor-Leyland our opponent. The fight was a severe one. We missed the great personality of Mr. Curzon, and although Lord Skelmersdale was an industrious candidate, and was very ably assisted by Lady Skelmersdale, we lost the election. After this I retired from the chairmanship of the division, and was presented by the Southport Conservative Association with a handsome silver bowl.
I congratulated myself as a political leader that I was able to accomplish the conversion of the two largest landowners in the Southport Division, Mr. Weld-Blundell, of Ince Hall, and Colonel Blundell, of Crosby Hall. They had been for generations Liberal, and in the 1868 election Mr. Gladstone stayed with Mr. Weld-Blundell; but in 1886, on the Home Rule for Ireland question, they both supported Mr. Curzon, held meetings for us in their villages, and on the day of the election Colonel Blundell rode down to the poll at the head of his tenants. These, however, did not all vote for us. They had always voted Liberal and did not know why they should change because the squire had done so.
Crosby Hall and Ince were pleasant country houses to visit in the days of the old squires. It is strange that although the two estates march together the families have never inter-married since 1401.
The duties of a chairman of a division, in which both parties are evenly balanced, are not light, and can only be successfully accomplished if made personal. The secret of political success lies largely in organisation, and this must be vigilantly carried on in times when there is no political excitement, and when there is apparently no reason to work. A political organisation to be of any value must be continuous and must be thorough; it is not possible to organise a party on the eve of an election; you must have trusty lieutenants who know their work and do it. One of the weaknesses of any party organisation is the number of loafers, men ready to shout, but who are not capable of steady work. The quiet, but not very exciting task of looking after the register, watching removals, and having a careful canvass and cross-canvass of every elector, is the organisation and work which wins elections.
We had in Southport many excellent leaders, Mr. John Formby, Mr. Beauford, Mr. Clinning, and many others I could name, with whom it was a great pleasure to work, and my political association with the Southport Division will ever remain with me as a sunny memory.
I have declined several invitations to stand for Parliament – on two occasions from Southport, one from Walton, one from Everton, and more recently one from Westmorland. When in business it was not possible for me to enter Parliament, as my brother Arthur was already a member; and I have since felt that if a member is to make any position in Parliament he should enter the house on the right side of fifty.
Of late years my Free Trade principles have been a barrier to my taking an active part on the Conservative side. I did my best to prevent my friends delivering themselves up to Tariff Reform, and published a series of letters in the Daily Post on Free Trade v. Protection, which were afterwards published in pamphlet form, and had a very extensive circulation.
Economic subjects have been my favourite studies, and I have seen much of the working of Protection in America. In 1870 I delivered an address on Free Trade before the New York Chamber of Commerce, and at their request I repeated this address before the Chambers of Commerce in Cleveland, Chicago, etc., but with little success. The question of a Tariff had already become "political." I was present in America during some of their industrial crises, upon which I addressed several letters to the London Times and Standard. It is difficult to describe the intensity and the prolonged suffering caused by the over-production encouraged by Protection, with no outlet save the home market. The only relief was the "scrapping" of the surplus manufacturing power, which brought great suffering to the working people. I have since written many papers on the subject; the controversy does not therefore come upon me as something new. This is not the place, however, to discuss these matters, but one cannot understand Liverpool becoming enamoured with Tariff Reform. Liverpool lives on her shipping and carrying trade, and whatever else may happen, this is at least certain, that Tariff Reform must reduce the quantity of imports and exports, and there must be less freight for our shipping to carry. Tariff Reform may give temporary prosperity to the manufacturer, but if ever adopted will be a serious blow to the trade and prosperity of Liverpool, and indeed of Lancashire, as the cotton manufacturing industry depends entirely upon our ability to turn cotton into yarn and cloth at the lowest possible cost.
CHAPTER XI.
JUDICIAL WORK
I was placed on the Liverpool Borough Bench of Magistrates in 1873; on the Lancashire County Bench in 1882; on the Cheshire County Bench in 1900; and was made a Deputy-Lieutenant for Lancashire in 1902.
In 1900 Mr. Aspinall Tobin, on behalf of the Lancashire County Bench, invited me to be nominated as the deputy-chairman of Quarter Sessions. Lord Derby had retired from the chair, and Mr. Hugh Perkins had taken his place, therefore a deputy-chairman was wanted.
In accepting this invitation, I decided if elected to this important position to devote myself to the study of the criminal law, and to qualify myself as a magistrate, as far as a layman could do so. My spare time for several years was spent in reading the law of evidence and criminal law, and I also learnt a great deal from my chairman, who was a very painstaking magistrate, and who very kindly gave me much good advice. Mr. Perkins retired in 1894 and I was appointed chairman, and became the only lay chairman in Lancashire, the other three chairmen being all Queen's counsel. I was also elected chairman of the County Bench and of the Licensing Justices.
We had eight sessions in our court in each year, and this with the licensing work kept us very busy on several occasions. The sessions in those days lasted seven and eight days, and once even ten days.
The appeals from the decisions of the City Justices on licensing questions were very numerous; at one sessions we heard thirty-eight appeals, and as in most cases they involved the loss of the license these appeals were fought with great vigour, and Queen's counsel were generally engaged in their conduct.
Lord Mersey and the Honourable Justices Walton, Pickford, and Horridge, practised at our Quarter Sessions. I was gratified to receive a letter from one of these learned judges saying that what he knew of the rules of evidence had been mainly acquired in our court. Quarter sessions may be termed the nursery of the Bar. Young men get their first briefs, called "soups," at quarter sessions, and are naturally anxious to air their knowledge of the law, but many have to learn that the theory and the practice of the law are not quite the same, and that the application of the theory can only be obtained by practical experience in court, and this more particularly applies to the rules of evidence.
In addition to the judges named many eminent King's counsel have made their first start at our Quarter Sessions. I can recall the names of Messrs. McConnell, K.C., Steel, K.C., Collingwood Hope, K.C., W. F. Taylor, K.C., Alfred Tobin, K.C., and F. E. Smith, K.C., M.P.
For fifteen years we had no deputy-chairman of Quarter Sessions, which made my position somewhat arduous, as I could not absent myself from my post. In the end my old friend, Mr. W. Scott Barrett, the chairman of the County Council, was appointed my deputy, and a better selection could not have been made.
No part of my judicial work gave me more anxiety than the licensing appeals. One naturally felt great sympathy with the City Justices in their desire to reduce the drinking facilities which had been the cause of so much misery and wretchedness in Liverpool, but at the same time the scales of justice had to be held evenly. Whatever our decisions were, we felt they would meet with severe criticism; but this did not deter us from doing what we considered to be our duty, though we knew that our decisions might involve in many cases serious pecuniary loss and hardship. I am happy to think that our conduct of this very difficult business gave satisfaction, both to the public and to the licensees.
My experience on the bench has not been fruitful in incidents, although one day when sitting at Petty Sessions in the city a lame woman was charged with breaking a window by throwing her crutch through it. The police evidently apprehended that she might use her crutch as a weapon while standing for her trial in the dock, for she had a bad character, and they carefully surrounded her; but she was too clever for them, and managed to hurl her crutch with great force at the Bench. Fortunately, it fell short and dropped harmlessly upon the clerk's chair, which was happily vacant.
At Petty Sessions in 1889 Mr. Scott Barrett sat with me to hear the charge against Mrs. Maybrick for the murder of her husband by administering arsenic. The enquiry lasted two days and we committed her for trial on the capital charge, feeling no doubt as to our duty, though of course we heard only the evidence for the Crown. It afterwards became a cause celèbre. Mrs. Maybrick was condemned to death, but the sentence was commuted to penal servitude. She had many influential friends, and the agitation to obtain her release was continued with great activity for many years.
