Read Online Baldwin by Roy Jenkins - Free Book Online Page A
Authors: Roy Jenkins
Tags: General, Biography & Autobiography
Ads: Link
in favour. The terms were endorsed at a five-minute Cabinet that afternoon.
Not surprisingly, neither Law’s relations with Baldwin nor his authority in the Government ever fully recovered from these incidents. Beaverbrook, indeed, who knew Law very well but was also addicted to dramatic interpretations, believed that the collapse of Law’s health stemmed partly from this destruction of his position as undisputed captain, maybe of ‘the second eleven’ in Churchill’s phrase, but at least of a team oflike-minded, straightforward and loyal men. And there is some indication that Baldwin, from this time forward, felt that he was dealing with a time-expired Prime Minister. He began to flex his political muscles.
The first overt expression of this came in a House of Commons speech on 16 February, replying to a Labour amendment in the debate on the Address. He ranged far wide of any possible Treasury brief or of the broadest interpretation of his Exchequer responsibilities. He replied to MacDonald and Lloyd George. He discussed the basis of the Government’s foreign policy as well as the debt settlement and unemployment. He envisaged not the possibility but the certainty of a Labour Government—‘when the Labour Party sit on these benches’. And he ended with a homily, trite or profound according to taste.
Four words, of one syllable each, are words which contain salvation for this country and for the whole world, and they are faith, hope, love and work. No Government in this country today which has not faith in the future, love for its fellow-men, and which will not work and work and work will ever bring this country through into better days and better times, or will ever bring Europe through, or the world through. 6
It was the first of a whole series of his ruminative House of Commons orations, at once homespun and high-flown, which, whatever else may be thought about them, rarely failed to capture the ears of his listeners. Even more notably it was the speech, not of a subordinate minister, but of a leader, striking a new note, and invoking an enthusiastic response from a broad segment of the electorate.
Baldwin’s next major public appearance was his Budget speech in April. It was a dull Budget, but not a dull speech. Almost its only significant proposal was concerned with debt management and the creation of a new sinking fund. But the speech was brief and unplatitudinous and earned many compliments. It did nothing to impair his rising reputation. This wasimportant, for Bonar Law’s health was on the point of finally breaking up. On 1 May he left for a Mediterranean cruise in the vain hope that this might cause an improvement. It did not. He had cancer of the throat, and on 19 May, too ill to go to Buckingham Palace, he resigned by letter.
The drama of the succession, whether it should go to Curzon or to Baldwin, has always been treated as one of the great hair’s-breadth decisions of British constitutional history. In retrospect, however, it is difficult to see how, unless the King had shown most remarkable misjudgment, it could have been decided other than it was. No doubt there was room for argument as to whether in 1923 it was still possible to have a peer as Conservative Prime Minister. It was only twenty-one years since Salisbury had concluded his long and successful period of power, and only twenty-eight years since another peer (Rosebery) had presided (although less successfully) over a Liberal Government. And no doubt it needed Balfour’s subtle reasoning 12 to convince the King of this
constitutional
point, particularly as there were others—Salisbury, for example -strongly urging the claims of Curzon.
The constitutional point, however, was by no means the only one at issue. There was also the personal one. Curzon had a long record of devoted although doubtfully successful public service. He was a weak man, and in some ways a slightly ridiculous one. Davidson, who was of course a committed
Not surprisingly, neither Law’s relations with Baldwin nor his authority in the Government ever fully recovered from these incidents. Beaverbrook, indeed, who knew Law very well but was also addicted to dramatic interpretations, believed that the collapse of Law’s health stemmed partly from this destruction of his position as undisputed captain, maybe of ‘the second eleven’ in Churchill’s phrase, but at least of a team oflike-minded, straightforward and loyal men. And there is some indication that Baldwin, from this time forward, felt that he was dealing with a time-expired Prime Minister. He began to flex his political muscles.
The first overt expression of this came in a House of Commons speech on 16 February, replying to a Labour amendment in the debate on the Address. He ranged far wide of any possible Treasury brief or of the broadest interpretation of his Exchequer responsibilities. He replied to MacDonald and Lloyd George. He discussed the basis of the Government’s foreign policy as well as the debt settlement and unemployment. He envisaged not the possibility but the certainty of a Labour Government—‘when the Labour Party sit on these benches’. And he ended with a homily, trite or profound according to taste.
Four words, of one syllable each, are words which contain salvation for this country and for the whole world, and they are faith, hope, love and work. No Government in this country today which has not faith in the future, love for its fellow-men, and which will not work and work and work will ever bring this country through into better days and better times, or will ever bring Europe through, or the world through. 6
It was the first of a whole series of his ruminative House of Commons orations, at once homespun and high-flown, which, whatever else may be thought about them, rarely failed to capture the ears of his listeners. Even more notably it was the speech, not of a subordinate minister, but of a leader, striking a new note, and invoking an enthusiastic response from a broad segment of the electorate.
Baldwin’s next major public appearance was his Budget speech in April. It was a dull Budget, but not a dull speech. Almost its only significant proposal was concerned with debt management and the creation of a new sinking fund. But the speech was brief and unplatitudinous and earned many compliments. It did nothing to impair his rising reputation. This wasimportant, for Bonar Law’s health was on the point of finally breaking up. On 1 May he left for a Mediterranean cruise in the vain hope that this might cause an improvement. It did not. He had cancer of the throat, and on 19 May, too ill to go to Buckingham Palace, he resigned by letter.
The drama of the succession, whether it should go to Curzon or to Baldwin, has always been treated as one of the great hair’s-breadth decisions of British constitutional history. In retrospect, however, it is difficult to see how, unless the King had shown most remarkable misjudgment, it could have been decided other than it was. No doubt there was room for argument as to whether in 1923 it was still possible to have a peer as Conservative Prime Minister. It was only twenty-one years since Salisbury had concluded his long and successful period of power, and only twenty-eight years since another peer (Rosebery) had presided (although less successfully) over a Liberal Government. And no doubt it needed Balfour’s subtle reasoning 12 to convince the King of this
constitutional
point, particularly as there were others—Salisbury, for example -strongly urging the claims of Curzon.
The constitutional point, however, was by no means the only one at issue. There was also the personal one. Curzon had a long record of devoted although doubtfully successful public service. He was a weak man, and in some ways a slightly ridiculous one. Davidson, who was of course a committed
Similar Books
