Nelson evening Mail SATURDAY, JUNE 20, 1936 A NOTABLE ANNIVERSARY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 20 June 1936, Page 6

Nelson evening Mail SATURDAY, JUNE 20, 1936 A NOTABLE ANNIVERSARY

THE Bth of next month will be the centenary of the birth of Joseph Chamberlain, who is remembered, not only because of his advocacy of Free Trade within the Empire, but because of the political distinction of his sons, Sir Austen Chamberlain and Mr Neville Chamberlain; the latter filling at the present time the post of Chancellor of the Exchequer in Mr Baldwin’s Cabinet. Joseph Chamberlain began his political life by serving on the Birmingham School Board, his Radical tendencies causing him to be dubbed a Republican. Sitting on the Birmingham town council for several years, he was elected Mayor, and in that capacity it was his duty to receive the Prince and Princess of Wales, on the occasion of their visit

to the great Midland city in 1874. Those who imagined, and probably hoped, that the meeting of the Radical Mayor and the Heir to the Throne would lead to some exhibition of disloyalty or bad taste On the part ol ‘ Gentleman Joe” (as Mr Chamberlain was familiarly called by his admirers and opponents, alike) were completely disappointed, and the effect of the Royal visit was that the Mayor stood higher than ever in the estimation ol his fellow-citizens, who two years later elected him as their representative in Parliament, and in 1880 he was included in Mr Gladstone’s Cabinet as President of the Board of Trade. In his new capacity Mr Chamberlain was responsible for several liberal measures, such as the framing of a Bankruptcy Act and a Patent Act, but wem out of office when Mr Gladstone’s Budget of 1385 was defeated. In the year, last mentioned, Mr Chamberlain associated himself with what was Known as the “Unauthorised Programme,” which included free education, small holdings, graduated taxation, and local government, all Oi winch seem quite natural to-day, but were considered revolutionary in England, fifty years ago. But his political association with Mr Gladstone was not for long. Radical though he might be, Mr Chamberlain was a good patriot, and he broke with his chief, in 1886, over the Irish question. As he explained in the House of Commons, “he had always been in favour of the largest possible extension of local government to Ireland consistently with the integrity of the Empire and the supremacy of Parliament, and had therefore joined Mr Gladstone When he believed that this was what was intended,” but “he was unable to consider that the scheme communicated by Mr Gladstone to his colleagues maintained those limitations.” It is necessary to make that point clear, because Mr Chamberlain’s desertion of his political chief has been much misrepresented, and in justice to his memory it should be said that t.t was on high political principle that Mr Chamberlain abandoned Mr Gladstone. For that action he was bitterly attacked by Mr Gladstone’s followers, who stigmatised him as “Judas,” and did their best, or worst, to drive aim from politics. When Mr Gladstone introduced his second Home Bill in 1893, Mr Chamberlain was the life and soul of the Opposition, and though the measure was read a third time in the Commons, it was largely through Mr Chamberlain’s criticism in the Lower House that it was thrown uut by the House of Lords. But it was m connection with South Africa that Mr Chamberlain’s energies were most seriously engaged. At the beginning of 1896 the Jameson Raid embittered Briton and Boer in South Africa, and on the Colonial Secretary rested the task of trying to prevent the two white races in South Africa from setvling their antagonism by force of arms. That Mr Chamberlain failed vvas no fault of his. There is no doubt that among the Boers, led by Paul Kruger, there was a movement, not merely to dominate the political situation in the Transvaal and the Orange Free State, but to keep the growing British community of Johannesburg in a state of political servitude. The plan went further, for in 1899 the Tranvaalers invaded Natal, and the Boers of the Orange Free State invaded Cape Colony, their object being to drive the British out of South Africa, and make it a vast, independent Boer republic. Nevertheless we read in the annals of those times that in England hostility towards Mr Chamberlain’s South African policy “reached such a pitch that there was hardly an act of the British Cabinet during the negotiations with President Kruger which was not attributed to the personal malignity and unscrupulousness of the Colonial Secretary. Those who can recall those days will remember the bitter attacks made by the press of European countries and the United States upon the British Government, and particularly on Mr Chamberlain, because of the policy which upheld British sovereignty in South Africa. There is not much doubt that it was the strength of the British Navy which prevented such hostility taking the form of active interference. The German Kaiser wrote encouragingly to Kruger, but, when the arch-rebel fled to Germany, Wilhelm ignored him. Those were trying times for Britain and the Empire, for they stood alone, .facing an unfriendly world; but throughout that anxious time Mr Chamberlain remained unperturbed. He was thus described by one who knew him: “As an orator Joseph Chamberlain was of a straightforward, unrhetorical type, cool, alert in debate, and hard-hitting, his personality always had a peculiarly irritating effect on his opponents; and his spare figure, incisive features, and single eyeglass made him a favourite subject for the caricaturist.” His favourite hobby was orchid-growing, and he frequently appeared in public with a rare flower of that species in his button-hole. Both the eyeglass and the orchid were typical of the man: he looked on the world with an alert and discerning glance, and fully appreciated the possibilities which it presented to the bold and enterprising mind. It was not his fault that his romantic dream of Imperial Federa--4 ion did not come true.