Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T06:29:30.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recasting Bourgeois Britain?

The British State in the years which followed the First World War

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Christopher J. Nottingham
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In Recasting Bourgeois Europe, his study of the responses of the major States of Western Europe to the conditions created by the First World War, Charles Maier makes only, according to his standards, passing reference to Great Britain. Initially this must appear quite reasonable, for if one compares the post-war situation of Britain with that of most of Continental Europe it must seem that Britain escaped, or at least experienced with a greatly reduced intensity, the disorder which beset other nations. It might therefore be assumed that the efforts of the British political elite to adjust to the post-war world are less worthy of attention than those of their Continental counterparts.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Review of Social History , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , December 1986 , pp. 227 - 247
Copyright
Copyright © Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis 1986

References

1 Maier, Ch. S., Recasting Bourgeois Europe (Princeton, 1975).Google Scholar

2 Arendt, H., On Revolution (London, 1963), p. 5.Google Scholar

3 The Times, 1 February 1919.

4 Jones, Th., Whitehall Diaries, ed. by Middlemas, K. (3 vols; London, 1969–1971), I, p. 100.Google Scholar

5 Duke of Northumberland, “The Real Meaning of Nationalisation”, in: National Review, No 74(1919), p. 69.Google Scholar For a full discussion of this debate, Cowling, M., The Impact of Labour (London, 1969).Google Scholar

6 The Times, 2 April 1919.

7 A Collection of Reports on Bolshevism in Russia [Cmd 8] (1919). Lord Curzon was an inveterate collector of the more dubious stories. One agency in Berlin concocted and sold many of them. See Northedge, F. S. and Audrey Wells, Britain and Soviet Communism (London, 1982), p. 34.Google Scholar

8 The Times, 8 11 1919.Google Scholar

9 Cabinet Papers 24/90, Public Record Office, London.

10 Brace, W., “Industrial Unrest“, in: Contemporary Review, CXVI (1919), p. 257.Google Scholar

11 A. Henderson, “The Outlook for Labour”, ibid., CXIII (1918), p. 121.

12 Id., “The Industrial Unrest: A New Policy Required”, ibid.. CXV (1919), pp. 364.

13 Gould, G., The Coming Revolution (London, 1920), p. 19.Google Scholar

14 S., and Webb, B., The Decay of Capitalist Civilisation (London, 1923), p. 164.Google Scholar

15 Halévy, E., L'Ere des Tyrannies (Paris, 1938), p. 151; The Era of Tyrannies (London, 1960), p. 180.Google Scholar

16 Taylor, A. J. P., English History 1914–45 (London, 1970), pp. 186–88;Google ScholarMowat, C. L., Britain Between the Wars (London, 1968), p. 43.Google Scholar

17 Gilbert, B. B., British Social Policy 1914–1939 (London, 1970), p. 1,Google Scholar and, for example, Marwick, A., “The Impact of the First World War on British Society”, in: Journal of Contemporary History, III (1968), No 1, pp. 51–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Havinghurst, H., Britain in Transition (Chicago, 1979), p. 136.Google Scholar

19 Kendall, W., The Revolutionary Movement in Britain 1900–1921 (London, 1969), p. 195.Google Scholar

20 McKibbin, R., The Evolution of the Labour Party 1910–1924 (London, 1974), p. 239.Google Scholar

21 ibid., p. 240.

22 Englander, D. and Osborne, J., “Jack, Tommy, and Henry Dubb: The Armed Forces and the Working Class”, in: Historical Journal, XXI (1978), pp. 593–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 Gardiner, A. G., “The Present Discontents”, in: Contemporary Review, CXVI, p. 494.Google Scholar

24 Cabinet Papers 24/96.

25 Cronin, J. E., “Coping with Labour, 1918–1926”, in: Social Conflict and the Political Order in Modern Britain, ed. by id. and Schneer, J. (London, 1982), pp. 134–35;Google ScholarWendt, B.-J., “Vom Interventjonsstaat zum Industrieparlament: Ordnungspolitische Vorstellungen in England nach dem Ersten Weltkrieg”, in: Geschichte und Gesellschaft, XII (1986), pp. 5–33.Google Scholar

26 Gilbert, British Social Policy, op. cit. See also on this Maier, Recasting Bourgeois Europe, op. cit., pp. 41–43. He argues: “Total war meant social transformation, the centralization of power, the equalization of income, the concession of new rights to the working classes.” While this accurately reflects how many people felt at the time, the reality was more complex. There was actually, between 1913−14 and 1922−24 a move in wage levels in favour of non-manual over manual workers. Routh, G., Occupation and Pay in Great Britain 1906–1960 (London, 1965), p. 107.Google Scholar See also Bowley, A. L. and Hogg, M., Has Poverty Diminished? (London, 1922).Google Scholar

27 For the Industrial Unrest and Strike Committees see Cabinet Papers 27/59, 77, 83 and 84.

28 Arthur Henderson's accusation that the “War Machine” was being used to thwart the legitimate demands of labour was discussed in Cabinet on 3 October 1919. Cabinet Papers 23/12.

29 Foster, J., “British Imperialism and the Labour Aristocracy”, in: The General Strike 1926, ed. by Skelley, J. (London, 1975), p. 20.Google Scholar

30 ibid., p. 33.

31 ibid., p. 32.

32 See for example a private letter from John Gretton MP to Baldwin, 12 February 1925, Baldwin Papers, Vol. 11, Cambridge University Library. He did not regard the moderation of the Labour Party as being significant: “The most dangerous position is where a “moderate” party by so called constitutional means soothes public opinion while stealthily and with smooth words it proceeds step by step to revolution.”

33 Cabinet Papers 23/50. That the argument was very bitter is reflected in the fact that on 30 July 1925 it was recorded in the minutes that the decision was not unanimous. This was most unusual.

34 Middlemas, K., Politics in Industrial Society (London, 1979), p. 372.Google Scholar

35 ibid., p. 373.

36 ibid., p. 371–72.

37 ibid., p. 376.

38 Dintenfass, M. in Bulletin of the Society for the Study of Labour History, No 41 (1980), p. 64.Google Scholar

39 Lowe, R., “The Ministry of Labour 1916–1924. A Graveyard of Social Reform?”, in: Public Administration, LII (1974), pp. 415–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40 Anderson, A., “The Political Symbolism of the Labour Laws”, in: Bulletin of the Society for the Study of Labour History, No 23 (1971), pp. 13–15.Google Scholar

41 Poggi, G., The Development of the Modern State (London, 1978), pp. 117–49.Google Scholar

42 Cabinet Papers 23/52.

43 For the Home Office role in the 1918 railway strike see Home Office Papers 45/346578, Public Record Office.

44 ibid. 11032.

45 Desmarais, R., “The Supply and Transport Committee of the British Government” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Wisconsin. 1972). p. 83.Google Scholar

46 Cabinet Papers 24/128.

47 ibid. 23/11 and 27/59.

48 While middle- and upper-class representatives of the State could normally be trusted, central government was quite capable of punishing and rebuking those who failed to come up to the mark. Some magistrates were criticised and others removed from the bench because they were insufficiently enthusiastic for the government case in the General Strike. Some were “reported” to the Lord Chancellor by Lords Lieutenant. The Bishop of Exeter was “reported” to the Prime Minister for allowing Margaret Bondfield to speak on church property. Baldwin Papers, Vol. 22.

49 See Cabinet Papers 27/260 for how the government risked the whole supply in London rather than allow unions to supply hospitals and emergency services only.

50 ibid.

51 ibid. 83.

52 See Poulantzas, N., Political Power and Social Classes (London, 1973), p. 188. He described this phenomenon as the “isolation effect”.Google Scholar

53 The two largest and most respectable organisations were National Propaganda and Industrial Information. Both went to considerable lengths to keep their existence secret. Chairman of the former was Rear Admiral Sir Reginald Hall MP, a former head of Naval Intelligence. It sought to propagate “the necessity for increased production” and oppose “all acts against constitutional government” by pamphlets, speakers, meetings etc. Industrial Information had the same respectable connections and objectives, but worked through the existing newspapers. See Cabinet Papers 27/84.

54 Schwarz, B. and Durham, M., “A Safe and Sane Labourism”, in: Crises in the British State 1880–1930, ed. by Langan, M. and Schwarz, B. (London, 1985), p. 141.Google Scholar