Faction and Failure: 1905–1910

  • Frans Coetzee

Abstract

When Arthur Balfour’s Conservative government left office in December 1905, it was the last to do so in anticipation, rather than as a consequence, of electoral defeat.1 The Conservatives could look back on an enviable political record, having won three of the previous four general elections and having governed for 17 of the past 20 years. Few, if any, members looked to the immediate future with any expectation of comparable success. Balfour clung to the hope that after his resignation, his successor, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, and the notoriously fractious Liberals might prove unable to form an administration. But his hopes were dashed, and when the electorate went to the polls in January 1906, it was the Conservative campaign that was hobbled by division and discord.

Keywords

Corn Dust Depression Titan Income 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 2.
    St. John Brodrick to Selborne, 24 Nov. 1905, Bodleian Library, Selborne MSS, 2/118, quoted in D. Dutton,’His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition’: The Unionist Party in Opposition 1905–1915 (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1992), 14.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    The Conservatives polled 43.6 per cent of the vote, so their abysmal showing was exaggerated by the first-past-the-post electoral system. It is likely, however, that the apparent stability in the absolute number of Conservative votes cast concealed significant abstentions, and was, in any case, dwarfed by a major increase in Liberal turnout: N. Blewett, The Peers, the Parties and the People: The General Elections of 1910 (London: Macmillan, 1972), 36–7.Google Scholar
  3. A.K. Russell, Liberal Landslide: The General Election of 1906 (Newton Abbot: David and Charles, 1973).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    G. Andreopoulos and H. Selesky (eds), The Aftermath of Defeat (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Ramsden, The Age of Balfour and Baldwin 1902–1940 (London: Longman, 1978), 23.Google Scholar
  6. 7.
    J. Lawrence, ‘Class and Gender in the making of urban Toryism, 1880–1914’, English Historical Review, 108 (1993), 629–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. E.H.H. Green, The Crisis of Conservatism: The Politics, Economics and Ideology of the British Conservative Party; 1880–1914 (London: Routledge, 1995), 120–44.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    K.D. Brown, ‘The Trade Union Tariff Reform Association, 1904–1913’, Journal of British Studies, 9 (1970), 141–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blewett, Peers, 20–3; J. Cornford, ‘The transformation of Conservatism in the late nineteenth century’, Victorian Studies, 7 (1963), 35–66.Google Scholar
  10. P Marsh, The Discipline of Popular Government: Lord Salisbury’s Domestic Statecraft 1881–1902 (Brighton: Harvester, 1978).Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    A. Friedberg, The Weary Titan: Britain and the Experience of Relative Decline, 1895–1905 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988).Google Scholar
  12. G.R. Searle, The Quest for National Efficiency (Oxford: Blackwell, 1971).Google Scholar
  13. 11.
    For example, Leo Amery compared the impact of Chamberlain’s speech to Luther’s actions at Wittenberg: L.S. Amery, My Political Life, 3 vols (London: Hutchinson, 1953–55), vol. 1, 236.Google Scholar
  14. See also A. Sykes, Tariff Reform in British Politics, 1903–1913 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979).Google Scholar
  15. J. Amery, Joseph Chamberlain and the Tariff Reform Campaign (London: Macmillan, 1969).Google Scholar
  16. 12.
    The Duke of Devonshire was but one of several prominent cabinet members who would leave Balfour’s government over the issue, while other Unionist free traders (notably Winston Churchill) felt compelled to cross the floor to the opposition benches. Their troubles are chronicled in R. Rempel, Unionists Divided: Arthur Balfour and the Unionist Free Traders (Newton Abbot: David and Charles, 1972).Google Scholar
  17. 13.
    E.H.H. Green, Ideologies of Conservatism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 18–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 16.
    Dutton, Loyal Opposition, 19–32; D. Dutton, ‘Unionist Politics and the aftermath of the general election of 1906: a reassessment’, Historical Journal, 22 (1979), 861–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 18.
    Ramsden, Balfour and Baldwin, 26; R.B. Jones, ‘Balfour’s reform of party organisation’, Bulletin of the Institute for Historical Research, 38 (1965), 94–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 19.
    Sykes, Tariff Reform, 176–82; F. Coetzee, For Party or Country: Nationalism and the Dilemmas of Popular Conservatism in Edwardian England (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 23.
    A.J.A. Morris, The Scaremongers: The Advocacy of War and Rearmament, 1896–1914 (London: Routledge, 1984); Coetzee, For Party or Country, 72–85, 108–115.Google Scholar
  22. 24.
    Coetzee, For Party or Country, 109–110; F. Coetzee, ‘Villa Toryism reconsidered: Conservatism and suburban sensibilities in late-Victorian Croydon’, in E.H.H. Green (ed.), An Age of Transition: British Politics, 1880–1914 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997), 42–3.Google Scholar
  23. 25.
    Lord Malmesbury (ed.), The New Order: Studies in Unionist Policy (London: Francis Griffiths, 1908), 4–5.Google Scholar
  24. 26.
    Green, Crisis of Conservatism; G.R. Searle, ‘Critics of Edwardian society: the case of the Radical Right,’ in A. O’Day (ed.), The Edwardian Age (London: Macmillan, 1979), 79–96.Google Scholar
  25. Searle, ‘The “Revolt from the Right” in Edwardian Britain’, in P. Kennedy and A.J. Nicholls (eds), Nationalist and Racialist Movements in Britain and Germany before 1914 (London: Macmillan, 1981), 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 27.
    Wyndham to his father, 24 Jan. 1906, quoted in Sykes, Tariff Reform, 116. In a similar vein, Wyndham proposed that only ‘socialists and imperialists are living men; the others are old women and senile professors. Let them clear out of the ring for what would be a fight to the finish.’ See K. Brown, ‘The Anti-Socialist Union’, in K. Brown (ed.), Essays in Anti-Labour History (London: Macmillan, 1974), 236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 32.
    H.V. Emy, ‘The impact of financial policy on English party politics before 1914’, Historical Journal, 15 (1972), 103–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. P.F. Clarke, Lancashire and the New Liberalism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 33.
    B.K. Murray, The People’s Budget 1909/10 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980).Google Scholar
  30. 43.
    J.A. Hobson, ‘The general election: a sociological interpretation’, Sociological Review, 3 (1910), 105–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 47.
    Coetzee, ‘Villa Toryism’, 44–5; C. Cook, ‘Labour and the downfall of the Liberal Party 1906–1914’, in C. Cook and A. Sked (eds), Crisis and Controversy: Essays in Honour of A.J.P. Taylor (London: Macmillan, 1976), 38–65.Google Scholar
  32. D.M. Tanner, ‘Elections, statistics and the rise of the Labour Party, 1906–1931’, Historical Journal, 34 (1991), 893–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tanner, Political Change and the Labour Party 1900–1918 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), 124–8.Google Scholar
  34. 48.
    R. McKibbin, The Ideologies of Class (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990), 259–93.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Frans Coetzee 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frans Coetzee

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations