We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 August 2014
A rough measure of the resilience of the British Conservative party is indicated by the relatively rapid comeback from the electoral defeat of 1945. Instead of a twenty years' exile, like that of American Republicans, the Conservatives were out of office only six years. To be sure, their return to power was by a very slim parliamentary majority, representing less than half the popular vote cast in the General Election of 1951. And the ups and downs of the Conservative Goverment's popularity, as reflected in by-elections during 1952 and 1953, have shown little more than a capacity to hold the existing narrow margin. For many it must still seem difficult, as it did for Professor Herman Finer in the late 1940's, “to conceive a policy which, within some decades even, might win back for the Conservatives enough votes to support a solid government.” Naturally the Conservatives themselves have hardly accepted the fate of serving only an occasional interregnum between periods of Labour rule. Almost entirely without the spectacular issues which have characterized recent electoral successes of American Republicans, the British Right has sought to refute the assumption that it is incapable of presenting a sufficiently attractive political alternative to socialism.
First-hand observations included in this article were made in Great Britain during the author's tenure of a fellowship granted by The Fund for the Advancement of Education to enable him to broaden his qualifications for college teaching. The article represents the independent work of the author, however, and he is solely responsible for it.
1 Following a period of apparent political adversity in the first nine months after the General Election of 1951, Conservative popularity seemed on the increase late in 1952 and during the spring of 1953. The most notable triumph was at Sunderland, South, where the Conservatives in capturing a Labour seat accomplished what no Government party had been able to do in a by-election against its opposition since 1924. The (London) Times, May 14, 1953, p. 8. However, in the fall of 1953 the voting trend in by-elections was favorable to Labour. No seats changed hands but particularly in the marginal constituency of Holborn and St. Pancras South the Conservatives appeared to have lost ground. The (London) Times, Nov. 20, 1953, p. 8.
2 Theory and Practice of Modern Government, rev. ed. (New York, 1949), p. 317 Google Scholar.
3 Introduction (by the editor) to The Conservative Tradition, ed. White, Reginald J. (London, 1950), p. 1 Google Scholar.
4 The word “given” is used here in the same sense employed by Daniel Boorstin to describe the general American belief that values are “in some way or other automatically denned: given by certain facts of geography or history peculiar to us.” The Genius of American Politics (Chicago, 1953), p. 9 Google Scholar.
5 Notably in Russell Kirk's entirely sympathetic appraisal of Anglo-American conservatism, The Conservative Mind from Burke to Santayana (Chicago, 1953)Google Scholar.
6 Utley, T. E., “The State and the Individual,” lecture published in the Conservative Political Centre's The Good Society (London, 1953), p. 41 Google Scholar.
7 For example, Oakeshott, Michael, “Contemporary British Politics,” Cambridge Journal, Vol. I, pp. 474–90, at p. 479 (April, 1948)Google Scholar.
8 Conservatism (London, 1912), p. 40 Google Scholar.
9 G. Kitson Clark, “The Historial Basis of Conservatism,” in The Good Society, op. cit., p. 24.
10 The pre-1945 undergraduate trend is readily associated with the subsequent rise in the proportion of Oxford and Cambridge men in the Parliamentary Labour party from fifteen per cent, as an interwar average, to thirty-seven per cent in 1951. Ross, J. F. S., “The 1951 House of Commons,” Quarterly Review, Vol. 290, pp. 305–6 (July, 1952)Google Scholar. Ross's figures make it clear that this was not at the expense of the Conservatives, whose proportion of Oxford and Cambridge products also rose in the same period—from fifty-two per cent to sixty-three per cent.
11 Toryism's apparently thriving intellectual status raises some doubt concerning the broad applicability of Joseph Schumpeter's well-known dictum that the intellectual class accompanying the rise of modern capitalism inevitably becomes hostile to the existing order. Of course, some of the Tory intellectuals may not belong to a class accompanying the rise of modern capitalism. For Schumpeter's discussion, see his chapter, “The Sociology of the Intellectuals,” and his additional paper, “The March into Socialism,” both in the third edition of Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (New York, 1950)Google Scholar.
12 Party conference debates are illuminating in this respect, as reflected, for instance, in the 69th Annual Report of the National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations (London, 1948), pp. 64–71 Google Scholar.
13 Radio address contained in Conservatism: 1945–1950 (Conservative Political Centre, 1950), p. 96 Google Scholar.
14 A full account of Oastler's reforming career is given by Driver, Cecil, Tory Radical (New York, 1946)Google Scholar.
15 Of Lord Randolph's role his son wrote long ago: “… he urged that energetic sympathy with practical social reform and indifference to selfish class instincts which alone can convince democracy that time-honoured institutions are not merely safeguards but may be made effective instruments of progress.” Churchill, Winston, Lord Randolph Churchill, 2 vols. (London, 1906), Vol. 2, p. 404 Google Scholar.
16 Garvin, James L., The Life of Joseph Chamberlain, 4 vols. (London, 1932), Vol. 2, pp. 155–59 and pp. 448–69Google Scholar.
17 Conservatism, p. 64.
18 The reformist spirit of Neville Chamberlain at the Ministry of Health, 1924 to 1929, is described by Feiling, Keith, The Life of Neville Chamberlain (London, 1946), pp. 126–48Google Scholar.
19 “For the tradition of authority is naturally a Tory tradition, and, but for the influence of Conservative prudence and justice, the successors of the Tories might probably have been ready to use the authority of the State with a freedom which we associate with Socialism.” Cecil, Lord Hugh, Conservatism, p. 247 Google Scholar.
20 The Case for Conservatism (Harmondsworth, 1947), pp. 15, 53 Google Scholar.
21 Lord Randolph Churchill (cited in note 15), p. 121.
22 Theory and Practice of Modern Government (cited in note 2), p. 317.
23 Introduction to Conservatism: 1945–1950 (cited in note 13), p. 3.
24 68th Annual Report of the National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations (London, 1947), pp. 46–54 Google Scholar.
25 Industrial Charter (Conservative Central Office, 1947), p. 14 Google Scholar.
26 Hogg, Quintin, The Case for Conservatism (cited in note 20), p. 63 Google Scholar.
27 Emphasized in Agricultural Charter (Conservative Central Office, 1948), pp. 4–5 Google Scholar.
28 For example, in Anthony Eden's electoral broadcast of Oct. 19, 1951, issued by British Information Services, ID 1109, pp. 7–8.
29 Gammans, L. D., in 68th Annual Report (cited in note 24), p. 97 Google Scholar.
30 Fraser, Michael, “The Ownership of Property,” in The Good Society (cited in note 6), p. 54 Google Scholar.
31 71st Annual Report of the National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations (London, 1950), pp. 56–65 Google Scholar. First, the platform ruled out of order the suggested inclusion of the 300,000 figure, then attempted to conduct a vote on a much less specific amendment to the housing resolution, and only finally yielded to an uproar in behalf of the fixed number. Speaking for the leadership, Lord Woolton graciously said “This is magnificent,” but he was also reported to have added sotto voce, “This is deuced awkward.” Bulmer-Thomas, Ivor, “How Conservative Policy is Formed,” Political Quarterly, Vol. 24, pp. 190–203, at p. 202 (April-June, 1953)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
32 Britain Strong and Free (Conservative Central Office, 1951), p. 26 Google Scholar.
33 These figures are based on a study of one in four election addresses made by Butler, David E., The British General Election of 1951 (London, 1952), pp. 55–59 Google Scholar.
34 72nd Annual Report of the National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations (London, 1952), pp. 62–64 Google Scholar.
35 H. C. Deb., Vol. 422, col. 66 (April 30, 1946)Google Scholar.
36 The Right Road for Britain (1949) contained in Conservatism: 1945–1950 (cited in note 13), p. 204.
37 “Conservative Policy,” Political Quarterly, Vol. 20, pp. 317–325, at p. 325 (Oct.-Dec., 1949)Google Scholar.
38 Electoral broadcast of Oct. 8, 1951, issued by British Information Services, ID 1085, p. 4.
39 H. C. Deb., Vol. 515, cols. 1725–26, 1742 (May 18, 1953)Google Scholar.
40 “Conservative Policy,” op. cit., p. 320.
41 Thorneycroft, G. E. P., President of the Board of Trade, H. C. Deb., Vol. 514, col. 671 (April 20, 1953)Google Scholar. The Conservative defense was in the same vein at Vol. 516, cols. 481–554 (June 11, 1953).
42 H. C. Deb., Vol. 418, cols. 701–834 (Jan. 29, 1946)Google Scholar and cols. 874–1074 (Jan. 30, 1946).
43 Conservatism: 1945–1950 (cited in note 13), p. 192.
44 Britain Strong and Free (cited in note 32), pp. 20–22.
45 H. C. Deb., Vol. 507, col. 1405 (Nov. 17, 1952)Google Scholar.
46 H. C. Deb., Vol. 508, col. 266 (Nov. 25, 1952)Google Scholar.
47 The British General Election of 1951 (cited in note 33), p. 242.
48 The important subject of party structure is not dealt with here in detail. On the basis of the available published materials, the postwar Conservative organization has already been described in an American journal. See Beer, Samuel, “The Conservative Party of Great Britain,” Journal of Politics, Vol. 14, pp. 41–71 (Feb., 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A more intimate account is provided in the work of a former M.P. with experience in both major parties. Bulmer-Thomas, Ivor, The Party System in Great Britain (London, 1953)Google Scholar, Part III.
49 Fienburgh, Wilfred, “The Tory Machine,” New Statesman and Nation, Vol. 43, pp. 636–37 (May 31, 1952)Google Scholar.
50 Figures on Conservative educational background are taken from Ross, “The 1951 House of Commons” (cited in note 10). Another analysis by Ross (of the 1950 House) included the summary statement that only one out of every forty Conservative M.P.'s had attended the elementary school, but that six out of seven Conservative voters had done so. “The Personnel of the Parties,” The British Party System, ed. Bailey, Sydney D. (London, 1952), pp. 168–70Google Scholar.
51 An American should perhaps take care to avoid exaggerating the significance of this type of affront to his social equalitarianism.
52 Final Report of the Committee on Party Organization (approved by the Central Council of the Conservative and Unionist Associations, July, 1949), pp. 31–33 Google Scholar.
53 Interim Report of the Committee on Party Organization (approved by the Conference of Conservative and Unionist Associations, Oct., 1948), p. 13 Google Scholar.
54 Salter, A., “British Conservatism Today,” Yale Review, Vol. 41, pp. 1–12, at pp. 5–6 (Sept., 1951)Google Scholar.
55 For example, Butler's, R. A. “We must never forget that the Socialist faith is simply an off-shoot of the Marxist doctrine” (May, 1948)Google Scholar; Harold Macmillan's picture of the “Socialist State, when all the means of production, distribution and exchange—that means all industry, all shops and all banking,—become State enterprises, as in Russia” (July, 1949); and Winston Churchill's “there is no real difference between a full application of the Socialist system and Communism” (July, 1949). Conservatism: 1945–1950, pp. 91, 103, and 106.
56 The frequent Conservative claim of 3,000,000 trade unionist voters is cited by Roberts, B. C., “Trade Unions and Party Politics,” Cambridge Journal, Vol. 6, pp. 395–98 (April, 1953)Google Scholar. What the Conservative party would appreciate, but can hardly hope for, is an adoption by trade union leaders of the traditional American Federation of Labor policy of rewarding labor's friends and punishing its enemies—without any fixed arrangement with one party. Although at present this seems inconceivable, there are occasional signs of T.U.C. restiveness with the current Labour party relationship. See The Economist, Vol. 169, pp. 85–86 (Oct. 10, 1953)Google Scholar, for an account of indiscreet remarks about a “candid examination” of the relationship made by Tom O'Brien, chairman of the T.U.C. in 1953. O'Brien was not considered typical, but subsequently there was a story concerning the plans of other and more important T.U.C. leaders to reduce their unions' contributions to the Labour party's general fund and to increase the sums given to individual Labour party candidates of the unions' own choice. The [London] Times, Oct. 31, 1953, p. 3.
57 Industrial Charter (cited in note 25), pp. 21–22.
58 Speech by SirFyfe, David Maxwell (Nov., 1949), in Conservatism: 1945–1950, p. 122 Google Scholar.
59 71st Annual Report (cited in note 31), p. 52.
60 Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, ibid., p. 56.
61 B. C. Roberts, “Trade Unions and Party Politics” (cited in note 56).
62 Individual unionists have taken part in Conservative campaigns, and there is a report of one successful parliamentary candidate who emphasized his union activism and was supported on a Tory platform by an official of his union. Milne, R. S., “A West Country Constituency,” The British General Election of 1951 (cited in note 33), p. 217 Google Scholar.
63 H. C. Deb., Vol. 419, cols. 192–307 (Feb. 12, 1946)Google Scholar and cols. 386–490 (Feb. 13, 1946).
64 From 1946 to 1950 the number of union members affiliated to the Labour party rose from 2,635,346 to 4,971,911. “Trade Unions and Party Politics” (cited in note 56), p. 390.
65 Industrial Charter (cited in note 25), p. 22.
66 This Is the Road (Conservative Central Office, 1950), p. 12 Google Scholar.
67 Britain Strong and Free (cited in note 32), pp. 17–18.
68 The [London] Times, Oct. 13, 1951, p. 6.
69 Ibid., Oct. 20, 1951, p. 4. Also Oct. 15, 1951, p. 2.
70 Ibid., May 22, 1953, p. 8, and May 28, 1953, p. 4.
71 Cited by Lewis, Roy and Maude, Angus, The English Middle Classes (New York, 1950), p. 9 Google Scholar.
72 Martin, F. M., “Social Status and Electoral Choice in Two Constituencies,” British Journal of Sociology, Vol. 3, pp. 231–41, at p. 236 (Sept., 1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also Mark Benney and Phyllis Geiss, “Social Class and Politics in Greenwich,” ibid., Vol. 1, pp. 310–27 (Dec., 1950).
73 John Bonham, “The Middle Class Elector,” ibid., Vol. 3, pp. 222–30, at p. 227 (Sept., 1952).
74 A. H. Birch and Peter Campbell, “Voting Behavior in a Lancashire Constituency,” ibid., Vol. 1, pp. 197–208, at pp. 201–2 (Sept., 1950).
