Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T12:55:30.412Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Radicalism, Pressure Groups, and Party Politics: from the National Education League to the National Liberal Federation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2014

Patricia Auspos
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The National Education League came to prominence in the 1870s as the most militant of the pressure groups that spearheaded the so-called “Nonconformist Revolt” from the Liberal Party. The revolt began in 1870, reached its peak in 1873, and contributed to the Liberal defeat in the general election of 1874. It finally petered out in the wake of that defeat and the emergence of a revitalized liberalism during the Eastern Question agitation in the late 1870s. The National Education League was founded in 1869, and disbanded in 1877, in the midst of the Eastern Question agitation. Because its dates are coincident with the revolt, and because it did play a crucial role in that movement, the league's history has been treated as an integral part of the Nonconformist Revolt. The revolt itself has been generally interpreted as a sectionalist attack on the Liberal Party, launched by Nonconformist grievance organizations for narrow, and largely sectarian, aims. According to this view, the revolt ended when the Nonconformists finally accepted the notion of a comprehensive liberalism that transcended their particularist interests; when they recognized that, politically speaking, they were Liberals before they were Nonconformists.

This explanation is misleading because it ignores the generally radical thrust of the Nonconformist Revolt and the agitations of groups such as the United Kingdon Alliance and the Liberation Society. In particular, the rise and fall of the National Education League cannot be understood solely within the context of Nonconformist politics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , Fall 1980 , pp. 184 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, for example, Hanham, H.J., Elections and Party Management (hereafter, Elections) (London, 1959), pp. 114–25Google Scholar, and Hamer, D.A., The Politics of Electoral Pressure (hereafter, Politics) (Hassocks, 1977), pp. 122–38Google Scholar.

2 See Hamer, Politics, and also his Liberal Politics in the Age of Gladstone and Rosebery (Oxford, 1972)Google Scholar.

3 See the author's “Pressure Groups and Liberal Politics, 1870-80” (hereafter, “Pressure Groups”); (PhD thesis, Columbia, 1978), especially, pp. 50–111.Google Scholar

4 Adams, Francis, History of the Elementary School Contest in England (hereafter, History) (London, 1882), p. 76Google Scholar.

5 The best short history of the bill, its provisions, and the nonconformist opposition is found in Adams, History. See also, the National Education League's Monthly Paper and the Liberation Society's paper, the Liberator, for nonconformist opinion on the bill between its introduction in February 1870 and its enactment in August. This paper adopts the usage of the league and refers to the twenty-fifth “clause.” Technically, after the passage of the act, the twenty-fifth clause became the twenty-fifth section.

6 These themes can be traced in the Monthly Paper and the series of pamphlets published by the league. The speeches reprinted in National Education League, Third Annual Report (Birmingham, 1871)Google Scholar are as representative as any.

7 See the author's “Pressure Groups,” pp. 59-87

8 For Chamberlain's political activity before 1869 and his early involvement with the league, see Garvin, J.L., The Life of Joseph Chamberlain, I (hereafter, Chamberlain) (London, 1932), pp. 85–101Google Scholar.

9 Ibid., p. 97.

10 National Education League, List of Donors to the Election Fund (Birmingham, 1872)Google Scholar. Of 2,500 pounds collected in sums of fifty pounds or more, 1,200 pounds were contributed by the Chamberlains and their in-laws.

11 University of Sheffield, A.J. Mundella to R.E. Leader, 3 November 1873, Leader-Mundella Letters.

12 See the author's “Pressure Groups,” pp. 186-92.

13 George Dixon, Liberal M.P. for Birmingham and co-founder of the league, remained its parliamentary spokesman until his retirement in 1876. He and Chamberlain became political rivals, and his influence in the league was soon superseded by Chamberlain's. Jesse Collings, the other co-founder, became secretary. William Harris, secretary of the Birmingham Liberal Association and leader writer for the Birmingham Daily Post, chaired the parliamentary committee; J. Thackery Bunce, editor of the Post, was chairman of the publications committee. John Jaffray, proprietor of the Post, was the league's first treasurer. Birmingham's nonconformist elite was also represented in the league: the ministers R.W. Dale, W.H. Crosskey, and George Dawson were all on the executive committee.

14 List of the executive committee in National Education League, Third Annual Report (Birmingham, 1871)Google Scholar.

15 National Education League, Executive Report (Birmingham, 1870), p. 7Google Scholar; Third Annual Report (Birmingham, 1871), p. 19Google Scholar; Monthly Paper, October 1872, p. 1Google Scholar.

16 For Merthyr, , see Nonconformist, 12 January 1870, p. 3Google Scholar: Monthly Paper. February 1870, p. 2Google Scholar. For London, see Monthly Paper, January 1872, pp. 1, 4Google Scholar; February 1872, p. 16. For Sheffield, , see Monthly Paper, May 1871, p. 7Google Scholar, and National Education League, Correspondence Between the Sheffield Branch and the Parent Society in Birmingham (Birmingham, 1871)Google Scholar.

17 National Education League, Correspondence Between the Sheffield Branch and the Parent Society in Birmingham (Birmingham, 1871)Google Scholar. In a similar situation, the United Kingdom Alliance acted quite differently. A plan to reorganize its London agency and reduce the responsibility of the London agent was interpreted as a personal affront to him. He resigned in a pique, and his cause was taken up by the London Alliance members. After months of negotiations, the alliance central office finally worked out a compromise acceptable to both sides. The concern to avoid a split in the ranks was symptomatic of the alliance's relations with its branch societies. Alliance House, London, Minute Books of the Executive Committee of the United Kingdom Alliance, 30 October 1878 through 5 February 1879.

18 West Sussex County Record Office, Chamberlain to Frederic Maxse, 27 May 1872, Frederic Maxse Papers.

19 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Dilke, 14 November 1871, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/24/278.

20 Chamberlain to Jesse Collings, 27 July 1876. Quoted in Fraser, Peter, Joseph Chamberlain, Radicalism and Empire, 1868-1914 (London, 1966), p. 24Google Scholar.

21 On radical faddism, see Hamer, , Politics, pp. 1–9Google Scholar.

22 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to J. Thackery Bunce, 9 July 1870, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/8/1.

23 Monthly Paper, December 1872, p.6Google Scholar; National Education League, Pamphlet 298 (October, 1872).

24 A comparison with the United Kingdom Alliance and the Liberation Society again illustrates the dictatorial quality of Chamberlain's rule. In the other pressure groups, electoral policy was reviewed, debated, and voted at the general session of the annual meetings before being implemented at the local level.

25 Garvin, , Chamberlain, I, 129Google Scholar.

26 A full record of the meeting is provided in General Conference on Nonconformists, held in Manchester, January 23-25, 1872, Authorized Report of the Proceedings (London, 1872)Google Scholar.

27 For the Shrewsbury election of September 1870, see the coverage in the Shrewsbury Free Press and Shrewsbury Chronicle. See also, Monthly Paper, October 1870, p. 5Google Scholar.

28 The evidence of the league's intention to field an independent candidate at Preston is largely circumstantial, based on an election address found among the papers of H. J. Wilson, University of Sheffield, Box 4. See the author's “Pressure Groups,” pp. 202-03.

29 National Education League, Pamphlet 298 (October 1872).

30 At Bath, league agents found themselves in the embarrassing position of having the nomination papers signed by three members of the local Conservative candidate's committee. (Bath Express, 21 June 1873, p. 8Google Scholar). At Bristol, too, league agents “got into [a] fearful disgrace” because of their ignorance of local conditions (University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Dilke, 14 November 1871, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/24/278.

31 For the league's role in the Bath contest, see Monthly Paper, July 1873, p. 3Google Scholar; Adams, , History, pp. 292–94Google Scholar; and coverage in the local press in late June 1873. Particularly useful are the Bath Chronicle, Bath Argus, Bath Express, and Western Daily Press.

32 Monthly Paper, July 1873, p. 2Google Scholar.

33 Chamberlain, Joseph, letter to the editor, Spectator, XLVI (5 July 1873), 857Google Scholar.

34 Monthly Paper, July 1873, p. 2Google Scholar.

35 West Sussex County Record Office, Chamberlain to Maxse, 26 June 1873, Frederic Maxse Papers.

36 British Museum Library, Chamberlain to Dilke, 6 July 1873, Charles Dilke Papers, Add. MS 43855. Copy at University of Birmingham, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/24/283.

37 West Sussex County Record Office, Chamberlain to Maxse, 26 June 1873, Frederic Maxse Papers.

38 See fn 52. See also, Chamberlain to Henry Allon, 13 February 1874, in Peel, Albert (ed.), Letters to a Victorian Editor (London, 1929), p. 43Google Scholar.

39 University of Birmingham, Morley to Chamberlain, 15 July 1873, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/2.

40 For an analysis of these elections, see my “Pressure Groups,” pp. 208-12. Information based on coverage in local journals.

41 See, for example, Monthly Paper, August 1873, p. 3Google Scholar, and Chamberlain, Joseph, “The Liberal Party and its Leaders,” Fortnightly Review, n.s. XIV (September, 1873), 287–302Google Scholar.

42 League agents were trying to induce H.J. Wilson to stand at Dover in August and looking for general election candidates at Whitby and Hastings. University of Sheffield, H.J. Wilson's correspondence with R.F. Martineau, 1-3 August 1873, H.J. Wilson Papers, Box 4; University of Birmingham, Morley to Chamberlain, 6 August 1873, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/8; British Library of Political and Economic Science, Morley to Frederic Harrison, 14 August 1873, Frederic Harrison Papers.

43 Monthly Paper, September 1873, p. 1Google Scholar. See also, West Sussex County Record Office, Chamberlain to Maxse, 28 August 1873, Frederic Maxse Papers.

44 Quoted in Garvin, , Chamberlain, I, 139Google Scholar.

45 Representative statements are quoted in Monthly Paper, September 1873, p. 4Google Scholar.

46 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 23 August 1873, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/15. See also in the Joseph Chamberlain Papers, Chamberlain to J. Thackery Bunce, 10 August 1873, JC 5/8/8a, and Chamberlain to Morley, 14 August 1873, JC 5/54/10; West Sussex County Record Office, Chamberlain to Maxse, 28 August 1873, Frederic Maxse Papers; British Library of Political and Economic Science, Morley to Harrison, 17 August 1873, Frederic Harrison Papers.

47 West Sussex County Record Office, Chamberlain to Maxse, 28 August 1873, Frederic Maxse Papers.

48 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 19 July 1873, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/3. Among those who initially refused: Edmund Blackburn, Gerald Potter, H. J. Wilson, Morley himself.

49 University of Sheffield, H. J. Wilson, R.F. Martineau correspondence, 1-3 August 1873, and Chamberlain to Wilson, 10 July 1873, H.J. Wilson Papers, Box 4.

50 West Sussex County Record Office, Chamberlain to Maxse, 28 August 1873, Frederic Maxse Papers.

51 For the electoral policies of the United Kingdom Alliance and the Liberation Society, see my “Pressure Groups,” pp. 114-82. See also, Hamer, , Politics, pp. 91–121, 200–26Google Scholar.

52 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 19 August 1873, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/13.

53 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 23 August 1873, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/15.

54 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 19 August 1873, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/13.

55 Chamberlain, Joseph, “The Liberal Party and Its Leaders,” Fortnightly Review, n.s. XIV (September 1873), 287–303Google Scholar.

56 British Museum Library, Chamberlain to Dilke, 17 March 1874, Charles Dilke Papers, Add. MS 43855. See also, University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 13 March 1874, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/34; Sheffield Public Library, Chamberlain to H.J. Wilson, 6 November 1875, H.J. Wilson Papers, 5889; Chamberlain to Henry Allon, 13 February 1874, in Peel, Albert (ed.), Letters to a Victorian Editor (London, 1929), p. 43Google Scholar. During this period, Chamberlain became more involved in the work of the Liberation Society and in Liberal Party politics. He served as mayor of Birmingham from 1873 to 1876 and stood unsuccessfully for parliament at Sheffield in the general election of 1874. In June 1876, he was returned unopposed at a Birmingham by-election, replacing his old league rival, George Dixon.

57 For the league's role in the 1874 election, see my “Pressure Groups,” pp. 219-20, 224-57; Adams, , History, pp. 298–333Google Scholar; Monthly Paper, February and March 1874.

58 Monthly Paper, August 1876, pp. 5, 8, 9Google Scholar. See also British Museum Library, “1876 Memoirs,” Charles Dilke Papers, Add. MS 43932; and British Library of Political and Economic Science, Morley to Frederic Harrison, 3 August 1876, Frederic Harrison Papers.

59 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 6 February 1877, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/158.

60 Adams, , History, pp. 320, 328–29Google Scholar; Monthly Paper, December 1876, pp. 3, 4Google Scholar; Monthly Paper, March 1877, p. 3Google Scholar; National Education League, Eighth Annual Report (Birmingham, 1876), pp. 7–14Google Scholar.

61 The standard account of the founding of the NLF is Herrick, Francis H., “The Origins of the National Liberal Federation,” Journal of Modern History, XVII (June 1945) pp. 116–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Following Garvin, Herrick sketched the link between the NLF and the caucus, and the NLF and the National Education League. He argued persuasively against Ostrogorski's view that the NLF was established in response to the Eastern Question agitation and the problems engendered by the minority clause of the 1867 Reform Act. See also, Garvin, , Chamberlain, I, 252–57Google Scholar.

62 Wright, J.S., quoted in National Liberal Federation, Proceedings Attending the Formation of the National Liberal Federation of Local Associations (hereafter, Proceedings) (Birmingham, 1877), p. 22Google Scholar.

63 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 6 February 1877, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/158.

64 See, for example, Chamberlain's speeches in National Liberal Federation, Proceedings, and his earlier articles, “The Liberal Party and Its Leaders,” Fortnightly Review, n.s. XIV (September, 1873), 287–302Google Scholar, and “The Next Page of the Liberal Programme,” Fortnightly Review, n.s. XVI (October, 1874), 405–29Google Scholar.

65 For a detailed discussion of this point, see the author's “Pressure Groups,” pp. 50-111, 372-90.

66 The term “caucus” was used by critics of the Birmingham system to suggest a resemblance to the corrupt system of American machine politics. Although they protested the inaccuracy, proponents of the caucus gradually came to use the term themselves. See Chamberlain, Joseph, “The Caucus,” Fortnightly Review, n.s. XXIV (November 1878), 721–41Google Scholar. For the structure of the Birmingham caucus, see Ostrogorski, M., Democracy and the Organization of Political Parties (hereafter, Democracy), I, (London, 1902), pp. 165–67Google Scholar, and Hanham, , Elections, pp. 133–37Google Scholar.

67 Constitution of the National Liberal Federation in its First Annual Report (Birmingham, 1879), p. 35Google Scholar.

68 National Liberal Federation, Proceedings, p. 14Google Scholar.

69 Ibid., p. 16.

70 For the activities of the National Liberal Federation, see its First Annual Report (Birmingham, 1879), p. 10Google Scholar, Second Annual Report (Birmingham, 1880), p. 9Google Scholar, and Watson, Robert Spence, The National Liberal Federation from its Commencement to the General Election of 1906 (London, 1907), pp. 12–13Google Scholar.

71 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Collings, 26 February 1878, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/16/79.

72 Many moderates who did not endorse Chamberlain's political aims supported the caucus for precisely this reason. For the spread of the caucus, see Hanham, , Elections, pp. 125–37Google Scholar.

73 See Fraser, Peter, Joseph Chamberlain, Radicalism and Empire, 1868-1914 (London, 1966), p. 24Google Scholar.

74 For the significance of this distinction, see Beer's, Samuel illuminating study, British Politics in the Collectivist Age (New York, 1969), pp. 33–34, 70Google Scholar.

75 Ostrogorski, , Democracy, I, 194–203, 230–40Google Scholar; Reid, Wemyss T., Life of the Rt. Hon. William Edward Forster, II (London, 1888), pp. 206–20Google Scholar.

76 The major arguments pro and con can be found in Hanham, , Elections, pp. 140–45Google Scholar.

77 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Collings, 2 March 1877, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/16/64.

78 Hanham, , Elections, pp. 149–53Google Scholar.

79 University of Birmingham, Chamberlain to Morley, 6 February 1877, Joseph Chamberlain Papers, JC 5/54/58. The officers of the NLF included Chamberlain, J.S. Wright, Jesse Collings, Francis Schnadhorst, and J. Thackery Bunce. The exception was Herbert New, chairman of the finance committee.

80 According to H.J. Wilson's computation, the Birmingham Liberal Association sent twenty-five delegates to the inaugural meeting. The second largest delegations were Leeds and Manchester, each with sixteen. In the margin of his copy of a NLF committee meeting of December 1878, Wilson penned: “Eighteen of twenty-eight representatives seem to be readers of the Birmingham Daily Post.” Sheffield Public Library, H.J. Wilson Papers, 2588/10, 2588/14.

81 University of Sheffield, A.J. Mundella to R.E. Leader, 10 July 1879, Leader-Mundella Letters. See also their correspondence of 5 June 1877, 20 June 1877, 23 June 1877.

82 Sheffield Public Library, Schnadhorst to H.J. Wilson, 15 December 1879, H.J. Wilson Papers, 5934a.