The excellence of much French acting attracted Sir Charles and his wife to the theatre in Paris, though in London their visits to a play were rare. M. Jules Claretie, the Academician, and for nearly thirty years, till his death in 1913, the distinguished Director of the Theatre Francais, constantly put his box at their disposal, and rarely failed to join them for a talk between the acts.
There is a reply from General de Galliffet, the "beau sabreur"--that brilliant soldier whom Sir Charles had followed through the French manoeuvres accepting a theatre invitation in 1892: "J"ai, en principe, l"horreur du theatre; j"en benis le ciel puisque je pourrai ainsi mieux jouir de votre societe et de celle de Lady Dilke."
In these visits to Paris they went always to the Hotel St. James, in the Rue St. Honore, attracted by the beauty and interest of their rooms there. It is the old Hotel de Noailles, and the staircase and landing, and several of the rooms, are still as they were when three members of the family--grandmother, mother, and daughter--were guillotined at the time of the French Revolution. The guardroom at the head of the stairs, with its great folding doors, and the paved landing with its old _dalles_, are intact, as are some of the state-rooms. Their sitting-room and the great bedroom opening from it looked out on to the courtyard, where in old days, before it became a courtyard and when the garden stretched away to the Seine, Marie Antoinette walked and talked, the story goes, with La Fayette, with whom her friend Mme. de Noailles had arranged an interview. The windows and balconies here, and part of the garden front, resemble exactly their representations in pictures of the period.
They saw many of their friends during the year both at the House of Commons and at Dockett. Describing them in London, dining in the room decorated by Gambetta"s portrait, M. Jules Claretie writes: "La premiere fois que j"eus l"honneur d"etre l"hote de Sir Charles la charmante Lady Dilke me dit, souriante, "Ici vous etes en France. Savez-vous qui est notre cuisinier? L"ancien brosseur de General Chanzy."" And among Sir Charles"s collection of Dockett photographs was one in which the chef, accompanied by the greater artist, the elder Coquelin, was fishing from a punt on the Thames.
"Je me rappelle avec tristesse," says the same friend in February, 1911, "les beaux soirs ou, sur la terra.s.se du Parlement, en regardant, de l"autre cote de la Tamise, les silhouettes des hauts monuments, la-bas, sous les etoiles, dans la nuit, nous causions avec Sir Charles de cet _Athenaeum_, la revue hebdomadaire ou il acc.u.mulait tant de science, et dont j"avais ete un moment, apres Philarete Chasles et Edmond About, le correspondant Parisien; puis de Paris, de la France de Pavenir-du pa.s.se aussi."
When M. Jules Claretie came to London to deliver a lecture in 1899 on the French and English theatre, Sir Charles was asked to preside, and also to a.s.sist in welcoming him at the Amba.s.sador"s table. The charming and unfailing friendship of that Amba.s.sador, M. Paul Cambon, is worthy of record, and Sir Charles"s admiration for him was very marked. He used to say that so long as a great Amba.s.sador, either French or English, represented his nation in Paris or London, the other representative might be a cipher, and M. Cambon"s emba.s.sy in London sufficed for both countries. "He is a man," he wrote to Mr. Morley in 1892, "who (with his brother Jules) will survive Ribot, and even Freycinet."
Another close friend was M. Jusserand, whose graceful studies of English literary history adorned the Pyrford bookshelves. While he was counsellor to the Emba.s.sy in London he was a frequent guest at 76, Sloane Street, and when he became Amba.s.sador at Washington he still kept in constant touch with Sir Charles.
"Des qu"on nous parle d"un homme d"etat etranger, ministre ou diplomate," says M. Joseph Reinach, writing of Sir Charles, "c"est notre premiere question: Aime-t-il la France? C"est une sottise. Un Italien n"aime que l"Italie, un Russe n"aime que la Russie, un Anglais n"aime que l"Angleterre." It may be so. In 1887 Sir Charles wrote to M. Reinach concerning the possibility that Bismarck would attack France, which, he added, "everybody thinks likely except your humble servant, Lord Lyons, and Sir E. Malet, our new man at Berlin." If it did happen, said he, "whatever use I can be I shall be, either if I can best serve France by writing here, or by coming to be a private of volunteers and by giving all I can to the French ambulances." Some there are who can recall Sir Charles"s face as he turned over the pages of M. Boutet de Monvel"s _Jeanne d"Arc_, and dwelt on that first picture in which the little "piou-pious" of the modern army advance, under the flag on which are inscribed the battles of the past; while the Old Guard rises from the earth to reinforce their ranks, and the ghostly figure of Jeanne d"Arc, symbolizing the spirit of France, leads on to victory. Listening as he talked, his hearers became infected with Sir Charles"s spirit, and thinking of the past, looking to the future, he so kindled them that when he closed the book they all were "lovers of France."
CHAPTER LII
LABOUR
1870-1911
I.
"From 1870 to this date one man has stood for all the great causes of industrial progress, whether for the agricultural labourers, or in the textile trades, or in the mining industries, or with the shop a.s.sistants. That man is Sir Charles Dilke." So, in 1910, spoke Dr. Gore, the present Bishop of Oxford, at that time Bishop of Birmingham.
In Sir Charles"s early days, economists were still governed by individualist doctrines. The school of _laissez faire_ was the prevailing school of thought, and in its teaching he was trained. "We were all Tory anarchists once," was his own summary of the views which characterized that economic theory. But to "let alone" industrial misery early became for Sir Charles a counsel of despair. _Greater Britain_, published in 1868, when he was twenty-five, gave indications of a change of view, and his close friendship with John Stuart Mill directly furthered this development. Mill"s lapses into heresy from the orthodox economics of the day were notable, and Sir Charles was wont to point to a pa.s.sage written by Mill in the forties showing that sweated wages depressed all wages, and to claim him as the pioneer of the minimum wage.
It was left for Mill"s disciple to become one of the foremost champions of the legislation which now protects the industrial conditions of the worker, and also the guardian of its effective administration.
His policy was distinguished by his determination to act with those for whom the legislation was created, and to induce them to inspire and to demand measures for their own protection. The education of the industrial cla.s.s, the object of "helping the workers to help themselves," was never absent from his mind. This view went farther than the interest of a cla.s.s: he held the stability of the State itself to be menaced by the existence of an unorganized and depressed body of workers. An organized and intelligent corporate demand put forward by trained leaders chosen from the workers" own ranks was essential to the development and stability of industrial conditions and to appropriate legislation. Sir Charles was therefore the unwavering advocate of trade-unionism. It is worth while to emphasize his att.i.tude, since views now generally accepted were not popular in the sixties. His first speech to his Chelsea electors in 1867 dealt with his trade-union position, as it did with the need for strengthening the Factory Acts.
Violent utterances on the part of certain sections of Labour did not affect his advocacy of its claims, for he would have endorsed the words of Cardinal Manning written to him on September 13th, 1884: "It is the cause of the people mismanaged by imprudent and rough words and deeds; but a people suffering long and stung by want of sympathy cannot speak like county magistrates." During the later period of his life he tried, at innumerable meetings all over Great Britain, to help trade-unionists to make their claims understood. So he came to fill "a unique position as counsellor, friend, and adviser to the Labour cause." [Footnote: Letter from the Rt. Hon. George Barnes, Labour M.P. for the Blackfriars division of Glasgow, and Minister for Pensions in Mr. Lloyd George"s Government of 1916, once general secretary of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers.]
His belief in trade-unionism was never shaken; for though he did not pretend that in the distant future trade-unionism would be sufficient to redress all social ills, holding it, as Lady Dilke did, to be, not "the gospel of the future, but salvation for the present," he believed that during his lifetime it was far from having perfected its work. He was a strong munic.i.p.al Socialist, but with regard to State Socialism he would never bind himself to any general theory; he was in favour of large experiments and of noting those made elsewhere; beyond this he "did not see his way."
His faith in the maintenance of all safeguards for trade-unions was well demonstrated by his action on the occasion of the Taff Vale judgment and its sequel. [Footnote: _Taff Vale Judgment_.--As trade-unions were not incorporated, it was generally a.s.sumed that they could not be sued, but in 1900 Mr. Justice Farwell decided that a trade-union registered under the Trade-Union Acts, 1871 and 1876, might be sued in its registered name; and this decision, after being reversed in the Court of Appeal, was restored by the House of Lords in 1901. The result of this case (the Taff Vale Railway Company _v_. the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants) was that damages could be obtained against a trade-union for the acts of their officials in "picketing" during a strike; and by making the trustees in whom the funds were vested defendants, an order could be obtained for the payment of damages and costs out of the acc.u.mulated funds of the trade-union.] He wished to keep for them the inviolability of corporate funds which formed their strength and staying power. While he admitted that theoretically a good case could be made out against such inviolability, he was clear that in practice it was essential to the continued existence of Labour as an organized force, capable of self-defensive action. The conference on the effect of the Taff Vale decision held in October, 1901, was arranged by him after consultation with Mr. Asquith, who suggested Sir Robert Reid and Mr.
Haldane as legal a.s.sessors. How grave was the position which the judgment had created may be gathered from the declaration of Mr. Asquith in a letter to Sir Charles written on December 5th, 1901: "How to conduct a strike legally now, I do not know." He advised the introduction of two Bills, one to deal with the question of trade-union funds, the other with picketing, etc. In April, 1902, Sir Charles Dilke introduced the deputation, organized to ask for special facilities for discussion, to Lord James of Hereford, who received it on behalf of the Cabinet, and to Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman as Leader of the Opposition.
In an article contributed by him to the _Independent Review_ of June, 1904, he notes a private offer of the Government for dealing with the matter by a small Royal Commission of experts, whose recommendations should be immediately followed by legislation. This was refused by the Labour leaders, and he thought it a lost opportunity for what might have been a favourable settlement. [Footnote: Mr. D. J. Shackleton, an Insurance Commissioner, and appointed Permanent Under-Secretary of the Ministry of Labour in December, 1916, was in 1906 M.P. for c.l.i.theroe, and a prominent member of the Labour party. He writes of the pa.s.sing of the Trade Disputes Act, which reversed the Taff Vale judgment: "It was my privilege to be the spokesman for the Labour party and Joint Board on the Trade Disputes Bill in the House of Commons. On the evening when the Bill was read a third time in the House of Lords, the three National Committees gave me a complimentary dinner at the House of Commons. In the course of my speech in reply to the toast, I expressed, on behalf of the Labour movement and myself, our sincere and grateful thanks to Sir Charles for the very valuable help he had given us through all our Parliamentary fights. My consultations with him whilst the Bill was before the House were almost daily. On many occasions he crossed the floor to give me points in answer to speeches that were made in opposition to the Labour position."] But at the same time "the Taff Vale judgment virtually brought the separate Labour party into existence, and the difficulty of upsetting the judgment and of amending the law of conspiracy will," he said, "nurture, develop, and fortify it in the future." To him this was matter for satisfaction. [Footnote: A full account of the action taken by Sir Charles on the Taff Vale judgment and the Trade Disputes Act which reversed its decision will be found in Appendix II. to this chapter, furnished by Miss Mary Macarthur (now Mrs.
W. C. Anderson). Miss Macarthur, secretary of the Women"s Trade-Union League from 1903, worked with Sir Charles on many questions.]
His absence from the House of Commons from 1886 to 1892 gave him leisure for deep study of industrial questions, and he drew much of ill.u.s.tration and advice from his knowledge of colonial enterprise in social reform.
Thus, in his advocacy of a general eight-hour day, observation of colonial politics largely guided his suggestions. In his first speech in the Forest of Dean in 1889, he said: "Australia has tried experiments for us, and we have the advantage of being able to note their success or failure before we imitate or vary them at home." The experiments in regard to regulation of hours and wages which colonial a.n.a.logy justified should, he urged, be carried out by Government and by the munic.i.p.alities as employers and in their contracts. His visits to our Colonies were followed by constant correspondence with Colonial statesmen, especially with Mr. Deakin, and the introduction here of minimum-wage legislation may be traced to Sir Charles"s close study of Colonial experiment.
But he never narrowed his policy to developments which would confine the leaders of Labour to the management of the internal affairs of their trade-unions; he early urged the representation of Labour by Labour in Parliament, where its influence on legislation affecting its interests would be direct, and there is a note in his Diary in 1906, when the "Labour party" in Parliament came into existence, chronicling the "triumph of the principles" to which during his life that part of his activities devoted to Labour had been given.
In 1894, when the Independent Labour party was emerging into light, he had advocated in talks with Labour friends its development into the Labour party of later days. But he noted the limits which bounded his own co-operation except as an adviser: "My willingness to sink home questions and join the Tories in the event of a war, and my wish to increase the white army in India and the fleet--even as matters stand--are a bar."
There were those who prophesied that the Labour party"s appearance had no permanent interest; that it owed its existence to political crises, and would soon fade out of the life of Parliament. Sir Charles, on the contrary, was clear that it const.i.tuted a definite and permanent feature in Parliamentary life. It might vary in number and in efficiency; it might, like other parties, have periods of depression; but it was henceforth a factor to be reckoned with in politics. Its power, however, must largely depend upon its independence. The point to which an independent party can carry its support of the Government in power must not be overstepped, and when, as in 1910, in the case of the "Osborne judgment" [Footnote: Mr. Osborne was a member of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants. He brought an action against them for a declaration that the rule providing contribution for Parliamentary representation is invalid, and for an injunction to restrain the funds being used in this way. He was successful in the Court of Appeal and in the House of Lords (A.S. of R.S. _v_. Osborne, 1910, A.C., 87). This practically made it impossible for trade-unions to support the Labour party.] or the Unemployed Bill, he thought that he detected weakening in the ranks of the Labour party in their fight for these Bills, he noted it gravely.
His view that Labour should find its leaders in its own ranks was not shared by Chamberlain and others who initiated Labour legislation; [Footnote: April, 1893, letter to Dilke from Chamberlain: "A political leader having genuine sympathy with the working cla.s.ses and a political programme could, in my opinion, afford to set them [Labour leaders]
aside." Reference to this letter has been made also in Chapter XLIX., p.
288.] but Dilke"s principle was to act as spokesman for Labour only so long as it stood in need of an interpreter; when the movement had attained stability and become articulate, his work as the advocate who had expressed its aspirations and compelled public attention for them was done.
His policy did not involve his silence on points in which he differed from the Labour party. In his first speech in the House of Commons in 1893, on the question of the dest.i.tute alien, he did not agree with some trade representatives, who would in those days have excluded aliens, in fear of their compet.i.tion. His dissection of the figures on which the plea of exclusion was based showed that they were misleading, since emigration and immigration were not accurately compared. He maintained that protective legislation with regard to conditions and wages would deal with the danger from compet.i.tion which the trades feared, and he pointed out that anti-alien legislation must strike at the root of that right of asylum which had always been a distinguishing feature of British policy.
He met the contention of those who wished for a Labour Ministry by pointing out that co-ordination and readjustment, not addition to the number of Ministers, was needed. The size of our Cabinets was responsible for many governmental weaknesses in a country where Ministers were already far more numerous than was the case in other great European countries; too numerous to be accommodated on the Treasury Bench, and with salaries which would almost have met the cost of payment of members.
From Labour developments everything was to be hoped, and nothing to be feared, in the interests of the State or community. The only danger which menaced the gradual and wise evolution of Labour was "an unsuccessful war." The danger to peaceful evolution from such a war would be great indeed. He warned those who advocated the settlement of international difficulties by arbitration, that this result could only be obtained when the workers of the different countries were in a position to arrive at settlement by this means. Till then we could not neglect any precaution for Imperial Defence.
Complete data are needed to carry out efficient work, and to Sir Charles"s orderly mind the confusion of our Labour and other statistics, and the absence of correlation arising from their production by different departments, were a source of constant irritation. Both by question and speech in the House of Commons and as President of the Statistical Society he laboured to obtain inquiry into "this overlapping, to obtain co-ordination of statistics and the possibility of combining enforcement with economy under one department," instead of under three or four. [Footnote: Sir Bernard Mallet, Registrar-General, gives an account of Sir Charles"s work in this direction. See Appendix I. to this chapter.]
Trade-unionism had by no means achieved "its perfected work," and outside the highly organized trades there was a vast unorganized ma.s.s of labour, largely that of women. The existence of such a body of workers undermined the Labour position, and of all Sir Charles"s efforts to improve industrial conditions none is more noteworthy than that which was done by himself and Lady Dilke for women and children. His wife"s work for the Women"s Trade-Union League, to which are affiliated women"s trade-unions (the League increased its membership from ten to seventy thousand during her lifetime), brought him increasingly in touch with women"s work; and, from his return to Parliament in 1892 to the end, scarcely a month in any Session pa.s.sed without many questions being put by him in the House of Commons on points dealing with their needs. These questions tell in themselves a history of a long campaign; sometimes dealing with isolated cases of suffering, such as accident or death from ill-guarded machinery, or a miscarriage of justice through the hide- bound conservatism of some country bench; sometimes forming part of a long series of interrogatories, representing persistent pressure extending over many years, directed to increased inspection, to the enforcement of already existing legislation, or to the promotion of new.
The results were shown not only by redress of individual hardships and by the general strengthening of administration, but by the higher standard reached in the various measures of protective legislation which were pa.s.sed during his lifetime. Nearly every Bill for improving Labour conditions, for dealing with fines and deductions, for procuring compensation for accident, bore the stamp of his work. [Footnote: As Minister he helped in measures far outside his department. Mr. W. J.
Davis, father of the Parliamentary Committee of the Trade-Union Congress, tells how once, at Dilke"s own suggestion, he and Mr.
Broadhurst came to see Sir Charles, then Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, about the Employers" Liability Bill and the Contracting-out Clause. "We spent an hour with him in the smoking-room," says Mr. Davis, "and left, Sir Charles having agreed to see the full Committee at 9.30 next morning. The House did not rise until 3 a.m., but Sir Charles was at our offices in Buckingham Street prompt to time. In the afternoon he met a few of us again, to consider an amendment for extending the time for the commencement of an action to six months instead of six weeks.
This desirable alteration he succeeded in obtaining. When the Bill was pa.s.sed--which, with all its faults, restored the workers" rights to compensation for life and limb--there was no member of the Government, even including the Home Secretary (Sir William Harcourt), from whom the Parliamentary Committee had received such valuable help as from the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs."]
Characteristically he mustered for use every sc.r.a.p of information available on a subject. Thus, he detected in the Employment of Children Act (1903) powers which neither the framers nor the promoters of the Act had foreseen, and, by speech and question, pressed their use till these previously unknown powers of protection for children were exercised by the officials to the full. Equally characteristic was his fashion of utilizing his specialized knowledge of regulations in one department in order to drive home his point in another. Thus, having cited the case of a stunted child told off to carry loads amounting to 107 pounds, he was able to add the information that, "in regulating the weight to be lifted by blue-jackets in working quick-firing guns, the limit was put at 100 pounds."
His care for women workers was not confined to public advocacy; it showed itself in unostentatious and unremitting help to those who worked with him or came to him for advice. Such advice was not confined to large questions of policy: he spent himself as faithfully on the smallest points of detail which made for the efficiency of the work. His knowledge furnished "briefs" for that group of workers which his wife"s care for the Women"s Trade-Union League drew round them both, and it guided and inspired their campaign. He watched every publication of the League. However busy, he would find time to correct the proofs of articles brought to him, to dissect Blue-books and suggest new points; each quarter he read the review which was issued of the League"s work.
The man who knows, and is ready to help, is early surrounded by clients.
Tributes from the organizers and leaders of the great trades are as frequent as the testimony to his help which came from workers in unorganized and sweated trades. The representative of a mining const.i.tuency in later years, his work for the miners was great, and repaid by their trust and support. [Footnote: "During the whole of his Parliamentary life he was always ready and willing to help the miners, a.s.sist in preparing and drafting Mines Bills, regulations for increased safety in mines, and the eight hours. He was in charge of the Mines Regulation Amendment Bill, bringing it before the House every Session until the Government appointed a Royal Commission, and ultimately brought in a Bill which became an Act of Parliament. By his tact and influence he managed some years ago to get a short Bill pa.s.sed raising the working age underground from twelve to thirteen," writes Mr. T.
Ashton, secretary of the Miners" Federation.] From a standpoint which gives an estimate of all his Labour work come these words from Mr.
Sidney Webb:
"He was an unfailing resource in every emergency. No one will ever know how much the Progressive Movement, in all its manifestations, owed to his counsel, his great knowledge, and his unsparing helpfulness. Trade-unionism among women as well as men; the movement for amending and extending factory legislation; the organization of the Labour forces in the House of Commons, are only some of the causes in which I have myself witnessed the extraordinary effectiveness which his partic.i.p.ation added. There has probably been no other instance in which the workmen alike in the difficulties of trade-union organization and amid the complications of Parliamentary tactics have had constantly at their service the services of a man of so much knowledge and such extensive experience of men and affairs. But the quality that more than any other impressed me in Sir Charles Dilke as I knew him was his self-effacement. He seemed to have freed himself, not only from personal ambitions, but also from personal resentments and personal vanity. What was remarkable was that this "selflessness" had in it no element of "quietism." He retained all the keenness of desire for reform, all the zest of intellectual striving, and all the optimism, of the enthusiast."
II.
That "true Imperialism" which Sir Charles advocated was never more clearly shown than in matters of Social Reform. His demand that we should learn from the example of our Colonies was dictated by his desire to promote the h.o.m.ogeneity of the Empire. He believed in developing our inst.i.tutions according to the national genius, and he viewed, for example, with distrust the tendency to import into this country such schemes as that of contributory National Sickness Insurance on a German pattern. His att.i.tude during the early debates on Old-Age Pensions helped to secure a non-contributory scheme. He laid, then as always, special stress on the position of those workers who never receive a living wage and already suffer from heavy indirect taxation, holding that to take from such as these is to reduce still further their vitality and efficiency. During the debates on the Workmen"s Compensation Act he urged the extension of the principle to out-workers and to all trades. The protection should be universal and compulsory.
In a speech of April 27th, 1907, he promised to "fight to the death any scheme of Old-Age Pensions based on thrift or on the workers"
contributions." Later, when the proposals as to workmen"s insurance were nebulous, but nevertheless pointed to a contributory scheme, he, criticizing some words of Mr. Haldane"s, spoke his anxiety lest "to have a system for all labour, including the underpaid labour of unskilled women, based on contributions by the individual, might involve the difficulty expressly avoided by the Government in the case of pensions-- namely, the use of public money to benefit the better-paid cla.s.s of labour, inapplicable to the worst-paid cla.s.s, but largely based on taxation which the latter paid." One of his last pencillings on the margin of an article reviewing the Government"s forecast of the scheme for sickness insurance includes a note of regret and indignation at the apparent omission to make any special provision for the lowest-paid cla.s.ses of workers.
One neglected cla.s.s of Labour whose grievances he sought to remedy by a measure which has not yet reached fulfilment was that of the shop a.s.sistants. Year after year, from 1896, he spoke at their meetings, introduced their Bill in the House of Commons, urged its points, inspired its introduction in the Lords, till at last the Liberal Government, in 1909, introduced proposals embodying its main features.
The question of the representation of the shop a.s.sistants on the Grand Committee when the Bill should reach that stage was discussed by him just five days before his death, and many attributed very largely to his absence the fact that the Government were obliged to permit mutilation of their proposals before they became law in 1911. The National Union of Shop a.s.sistants have commemorated his work for them by giving his name to their new headquarter offices in London.
An amusing tribute to his legislative activities and the effect they produced on reactionaries is to be found in a speech by that famous "die-hard" of the individualist school, the late Lord Wemyss, who warned the House of Lords that their lordships should always scrutinize the measures that came from "another place," and "beware of Bills which bear on their backs the name of that great munic.i.p.al Socialist, Sir Charles Dilke."
A minor but important characteristic of Sir Charles"s views as an administrator was his conviction that wherever the interests of women and children are concerned the inspectorate should include an effective women"s staff. The appointment of women inspectors for the Local Government Board made by him in 1883 was a pioneer experiment, which he vainly urged Sir William Harcourt to follow in the Home Department--a reform delayed till twelve years later, when Mr. Asquith as Home Secretary carried it out.