. . .

The Empire which has grown up around these islands is essentially commercial and marine. The whole course of our history, the geography of the country, all the evidences of the present situation, proclaim beyond a doubt that our power and prosperity alike and together depend on the economic command of markets and the naval command of the sea; and from the highest sentimental reasons, not less than from the most ordinary practical considerations, we must avoid a servile imitation of the clanking military empires of the European continent, by which we cannot obtain the military predominance and security which is desired, but only impair and vitiate the natural sources of our strength and vigour. There is a higher reason still. There is a moral force – the Divine foundation of earthly power – which, as the human race advances, will more and more strengthen and protect those who enjoy it; which would have protected the Boers better than all their cannon and brave commandos if, instead of being ignorant, aggressive, and corrupt, they had enjoyed that high moral reputation which protected us in the dark days of the war from European interference – for, in spite of every calumny and lie uttered or printed, the truth comes to the top, and it is known alike by peoples and by rulers that on the whole British influence is healthy and kindly, and makes for the general happiness and welfare of mankind. And we shall make a fatal bargain if we allow the moral force which this country has so long exerted to become diminished, or perhaps even destroyed for the sake of the costly, trumpery, dangerous military playthings on which the Secretary of State for War has set his heart.

‘AN AGE OF GREAT EVENTS AND LITTLE MEN’

21 November 1901

Philomathic Society Dinner, Liverpool

Given that there was a Conservative Government in office, this speech is further evidence of the scant regard the new Member had for the leaders of his own Party.

One aspect of modern life which strikes me very much is the elimination of the individual. In trade, vast and formidable combinations of labour stand arrayed against even vaster and more formidable combinations of capital, and, whether they war with each other or cooperate, the individual in the end is always crushed under. Let us look into the political world and see how the combination grew and the individual steadily diminished. At one period the House of Commons possessed Pitt and Fox, Burke and Sheridan; at another, Peel and Bright, Disraeli and Gladstone. We are not quite so well off now, but Governments were never more stable and secure. I think the late Lord Randolph Churchill one of the last of the old school of politicians. . . . Nothing would be worse than that independent men should be snuffed out and that there should be only two opinions in England – the Government opinion and the Opposition opinion. The perpetually unanimous Cabinet disquiets me. I believe in personality. The House of Commons depends for its popularity, and consequently for its power, on the personality of its members.

We live in an age of great events and little men, and if we are not to become the slaves of our own systems or sink oppressed among the mechanism we ourselves created, it will only be by the bold efforts of originality, by repeated experiment, and by the dispassionate consideration of the results of sustained and unflinching thought.

‘A NAVY . . . STRONG ENOUGH TO PRESERVE THE PEACE OF THE WORLD’

17 January 1903

Oldham, Lancashire

The young Member for Oldham renews his attack on ‘Mr Brodrick’s Army’.

The failure of this Army scheme is a very serious business, and it is a matter which Parliament will have to discuss. We have frittered away money. We have wasted time. Above all, we have exhausted that public interest in the Army which the war had excited, and which might have been made the driving power of great and beneficial and sorely needed reforms. But there is one consolation, though it is, perhaps, rather a grim consolation. It was a scheme all along unsuited to our needs; it never ought to have succeeded; it never could have succeeded. From the very beginning it deserved opposition, and was doomed to failure. We did not want to have in England three army corps or soldiers to sail away and attack anybody anywhere at a moment’s notice. That is a dangerous and provocative provision.