JOHNBULL AND SONS.

Otautau Standard and Wallace County Chronicle, Volume VII, Issue 361, 9 April 1912, Page 2

JOHNBULL AND SONS.

THROUGH NEW ZEALAND EYES,

AN INTERESTING BOOK,

LONDON, February 16. In his interesting book ' The Imperial Conference of 1911 from Within,' which Messrs Constable and Co. have just published, Sir J. G. Findlay is careful to point out that the wording of the title is not intended to imply that it contains any information not already published, but only to draw attention to the faot that the writer had tho advantage of being present throughout the sittings and discussions of the conference. His volume consists practically of two parts — a description of the general work of the conference, which occupies the first 60 pages, and a fuller presentation of the proposal made by New Zealand for a Representative Imperial Council, and with the attitude of the present British Government towards that proposal, which runs to nearly double the number of pages. The latter half is necessarily controversial, but the account which Sir John Findlay gives his readeis of the men, the methods, and the matters dealt with at the conference is decidedly entertaining. His sketches of the leading Ministers at the conference — Mr \s*jnith, Mr Harcourt, Sir Edward Grey, Mr Lloyd George, General Botha, Sir Wilfrid Launer — are marked by keen insight and shrewd- common sense, but, of course, it is very probable that many who read the book will "agree to differ" with the author over his estimate of their several personalities.

— A Portrait Gallery. — Concerning these let ub quote Sir John's own words. This ie his picture of M r Asquith, Chairman of John Bull and Sons' " family gathering for business purposes " : —

"Mr Asquith is himself m face and figure reminiscent of * Punch's ' best representations of John Bull. Thick 6et, 6trongly built, heavy of features, with an habitual look of determination — some people would call it dogged, and 6ome stolid — he wou<d be a noticeable and remarkable man m any company. . . . In intellectual force and grasp — m L*ain power — he has_ few equals m England. What he does-^-even if the task be great or difficult — he performs with an ease that discloses not so much an effort as an unlimited reserve of power, of which the performance at the moment is but a 6m all example. You see a logical athlete achieving hi 6 fine feats with a surprising air of ease and confidence. In early, briefless days he wrote for the ' Economist,' and thi6 'practice, added to an intellect clear, keen, and coldly practical, has made him m thought and speech that exact man of whom Bacon speaks. There is no rhetorical embroidery. The stream of hi 6 ideas never loses itself m wordy sands . . . but Tuns smoothly on between well-defined continuous banks m the directest course to its destination. His is not a mathematical terseness, which calls for a concentrated attention beyond the faculty of most audiences, but Tather an aptness, expressiveness, and simplicity of speech which enables you to perceive his meaning as a plain, well-fitting dress enables you the more readily to recognise the wearer But it is not the choice or economy of his words -which impresses a hearer co much as the. orderly arrangement of his ideas. There is an almost mechanical precision m his methods of developing an argument. Ite parts eeerii to fall into their places with the metallic regularity and certainty of the operations of a linotype. He is one of the finest debaters m England — an intellectual force without a superior m the House of Commons; but when all this is 6aid, it must nevertheless be admitted that he has less personal magnetism about him than any of the leading public men m Great Britain.- He cannot be called a popular figure. He owes his success to the qualities of hi 6 brain, not to those of his heart. He seems never to divest himself of a mantle of mental aloofness. He does not shake you by the hand— you shake his, while he wears an air of abstraction which leaves you m doubt as to whether he is not going through the courtesy unconsciously. He clearly is not voluntarily resisting any warmth of feeling. It is not an intentional austerity, but a fact. His jdemeanor does not seem to alter with ihe importance of the man he is addressing. He to all men best seems the thing he is. A strong intellectual character, untouched by— or at least betraying— none of the emotions and feelings of the common heart of our humanity— a fine mental gymnast, who m his best turns seems to feel neither inspiration noT perspiration. Such qualities have their corresponding defects. . . . Sentiment plays a very minor part m Mr Asquith's outlook upon pubhc life. Cool, careful, sagacious, and

— 'A Daring Pilot m Extremity,'— but a pilot -who steers only by the authorised chart, and m charted seas. He will not willingly trust his bark to an unexplored ocean, under the guidance of the stare. He is never likely to originate any great,* bold, or novel reform, although, should it ultimately secure his approval, he will support it with his splendid advocacy. These qualities and detects are commonly found m company. Ihe intellect is naturally conservative. * . • * . Intellectual methods and considerations, if pursued exclusively m connection with schemes of human progress, produced a distrust of new experinienti —an excessive caution. Mr Asqui.ft, however, has no 'craven scruple of tHinking teo precisely on the event which hath out one part wisdom and ever three parts coward It is with him not fear,' but a constitutional dislike of new departures from the tried and beaten way of the past. A strong, safe, able man— one of the ablest m England— but never likely to be stirred by any large new gospel of human progress, or by Gladstone's lofty aspirations for a truer social justice." And this is

—"Lulu,"— otherwise Mr Lewis Harcourt, Colonial Secretary, who, m the occasional absence of Mr Asquith, acted as chairman of John £uH and Sons' meeting: "While one's first impression of him is that he has more suavity of manner than depth or force of character, one's last impression is £jf-?£i 18 " a man °AJ nfinite Penetration, tact and resource. Only towards the closi »n t > e ,. Co , nfer ? n F e d,d 1 det <*t with what hL hnn^ d *. but ma ? terl y adroitness he f£?™ de - d lts , m embers^nd influenced the conclusions of their deliberations. He T S ards hls P ur P° se <*l™y> slowly w! h°a W l^? bi * of"?*** but raE with a hint of careless indifference, and thus achieves his purpose so quietly and unostentatiously that It seems 1 ratrfer to have happened naturally than to have been designed. It i s sa id that he has the 8 f r d I™™** He certainty preserve! unfailingly that attitude of natural cSrfi dence and repose which marks the best type of Englishman. He is, I think an incomparable judge of men-testing their metal and deciding their weight with the ease and smoothness of a machine, while he,. himself .remains as inscrutable behind his easy manners and refined suavity as the noumena behind phenomena. He is not an orator ; the matter of his speeches, however is excellent. It is not veneered but solid right through. There is none of the 9-carat politician about him. The

whole metal is genuine. His style . . . is not decorative, but dignified, finished, and graceful. Above all other qualities, he seems to have that of generalship — of strategy governed by the best rules of the game. He must, it is generally admitted, be counted as one of the few younger Ministers to whom the highest public position m England is possible. Meanwhile, and as long as he is Colonial Seoretary, his industry, tact, and judgment will do j much to improve the relations between I the Motherland and her Dominions oversea. He has great gifts of discreet reti- | cence 'and a self-command which seems imperturbable. Of this we may be sure — there will be no friction between the colonial Governments and the Colonial Office while he is Colonial Secretary, and that he will lose no opportunity to tighten and, where possible, create the true ties of Empire is equally certain." Sir John Findlay proceeds to describe the present Liberal Cabinet as one that cannot be challenged m respect of power , and attainments by the historical

—"Ministry of All the Talents."— And of all the Ministry the two who impressed him most were — Sir Edward Grey — and Mr Lloyd George. As regards Sir Edward Grey, Sir John says : "No man who heard him m that conference will ever forget Sir Edward Grey's address to us on the history and present nature of the foreign policy of Great Britain. It impressed even those who already knew all that could be told. But it was not what we were told — impressive and profoundly interesting though it was — that engraved itself most vividly and permanently on our minds and memories ; it was the man, his manner, and his profound sincerity. No faoe m public life to-day combines spirituality with the features of power and grace so perfectly as his. It is reminiscent of the best Greek sculpture. Finely chiselled, statuesque m its calm, and yet animated by an expression m lips and eyes of radiant sincerity. He began by intimating that he proposed to lay before us all — everything there was to tell — of the history and lines of the foreign policy of Great Britain, and that he felt no doubt that his confidence would be followed on our part by a sense of the honorable Obligations of reticence it necessarily imposed. Then, for over an hour, he told tbe story of our foreign relationship with a masterly grasp of his subject — with a dignified and simple eloquence made the more impressive by his clear, well-modulated voice — and ■with a frankness and unreserve that appealed to the heart as well as to the understanding. That speech, with its power, sincerity, and truthfulness, did more to stir and leave a sense of Imperial unity •m our blood than all the rest that happened or was said throughout the conference. But the man impressed us more than his words ; and the figure, the features, and the voioe that expressed it will remain a more vivid memory than even the speech itself." Concerning

— Mr Lloyd George, — Sir John Findlay tells us that he is probably the most admired and most hated personage m the public life of England to-day. "It is not his humble origin and meteoric rise that make him such a fascinating figure. . . . What the British people love above all else m a man is the fighter — is the quality of moral courage ; and he is a man who knows not fear. Whether it was leading a revolt at school — an attack on the cemetery gates that exclude the body of an old Dissenter ; that grim hour at Birmingham during the Boer War when his life was m the gravest peril from a frenzied mob — whether it was m these hours of daring or m many another situation demanding intrepidity m his public career, he has always shown himself one of the dauntless souls. He is a Celt, but his is not the blind or reckless hardihood of the Celt. . . . He is one of the men to whom, I believe, politics is essentially a gospel and not a game. He is a man with a mission. With him it is " the cause " — the cause first and the guerdon of popularity and glory afterwards, if it comes through the promotion of the cause. He is the disciple of no political school of thought. He is not cribbed, cabined, confined, or bound m by saucy doubts and fears springing from economic formulre and doctrinaire principles. He has been m the fighting line since he entered Parliament, and borne more than his share of the heat and burden of the day. . . . There is no languor m his heart, no weakness m his word, no weariness on his brow. He seems to carry eternal summer m his soul, and his laugh and manner have all the spontaneity and freshness of a boy. No man, I was told, was more personally popular m the House of Commons, and certainly it seems safe to say that no man is more widely and intensely popular with the masses of the people of England. He counts for more m the future of British politics than any other man, not mainly from his intellectual or oratorical qualities. , . . But he has fixity and sincerity of purpose ; he feels his politics as perhaps no other British Minister save Sir Edward Grey does, and it is from his heart be gets that courage and enthusiasm with which he tackles such desperate problems as that of his Insurance Bill. He can be adroit and elusive where necessary, out "his style is marked by a frankness which is very fascinating and disarming. . . . It is this spirit of courageous frankness which wirs him so many friends and so much loyal support. It* is constitution-.', with him, not mere policy. But while a score of qualities mark him out for leadership, his friends contemplate such a contingency with some uneasiness. He has ihe impulsiveness of the Celtic temperament. Naturally a tender-hearted man, he is, on thc one hand, rather too fond of concession as an act of giace ; while on the other, under sufficient provocation or from some fervent devotion to a particular principle, he will resist compromise to the point of obstinacy Should the day come when his hand must take the helm, that daring impetuosity, impressionableness, and occasional unwise resistance — that mixture of qualities or some of them — may lead to the political maelstrom. But who can tell? He has m the past risen to his responsibilities with splendid courage and self-mastery, and he may have the power, should the need arise, of subduing his constitutional weakness to the necessities of the highest office." Next Sir John Findlay gives a verbal picture of that picturesque figure I

— General Botha. — He impresses at once as a strong, resolute man, with that simplicity of .manner and modesty of nature we always like to find associated with greatness — without which, indeed, true greatness is seldom found. . . . "He was, I think, the most popular visitor to England. None on the day of the Royal procession (m which he took part) evoked so much enthusiasm ; and he took the acclaroat'on he everywhere received with the quiet dignity of a strong man unspoilt by his successes and uuembittered by his defeats. He speaks English better than he imagines, and m dealing with many topics m the conference his speeches were always short, simple, and to the point. He, indeed, has that directness of speech which grasp and clear thinking alone can give, md South Africa has been fortunate to

have for her first Prime Minister a statesman of his intellectual width and moral courage. I should not think he was capable of negotiating a sharp political curve on any grade j but while he would not compromise his principles, he knows the practical necessity of compromising party demands, and will content himself ™. ith a "halfway house" if he cannot get the whole way. He is proving as honorable and effective a general at the head of a political party as he was at the head of the Boer commandos. Above al!, no man who meets General Botha ever suspects his loyalty to the Empire. . . . He ii obviously proud of his new allegiance, and m every vote he cast and m everything he said at the conference he showed his loytilty to the Crown, and his desire for a permanent and closer Imperial unity '' According to Sir John Findlay, the most picturesque figure at the conference table was

— Sir Wilfrid Laurier, — whom he first met at Ottawa 20 years ago. Of him Sir John says : " The years have not completely whitened his hair, but it is still plentiful, and this ample silver adds to that look of refinement and intellectuality his face has always borne. He is still the same verbal epicure. His is choice English, picked phrase, and he seems to savor his words as he uttci-s them. . . . He has the grand manner, always courtly. He spoke with a greater air of assured authority than any other man at the conference,- Bave, of course, Mr Asquith. He seemed to reflect m hi:., speeches, that Canadian pride m Canada's progress and her superiority m point of territory and population over all the other Dominions. At times it seemed to me that the spirit he displayed was for tlie occasion unnecessarily independent; but there is a directness about his style which perhaps created or emphasised this impression. Still, both m Canada itself and m the tone and attitude of her representatives m the conference I recognised that Canadian nationalism is beginning to resent even the appearance — the const'tutional forms — of subordination to the Motherland. . . . There undoubtedly

seemed to me m Sir Wilfrid's words and attitude m- the conference a certain aloofness from the family circle — a civil, or rather courtly, coldness to the claims of the relationship and to any proposals for a closer co-operation. . . . But my present purpose is to outline my impressions of the man, not of his politics, and there was no more impressive and striking figure at that table than he. His cast of mind is French — quick, delicate, dialectic, elusive. His prestige is already great, and prestige usually affects our judgments favorably ; but if he were placed, alike unknowing and unknown, amid a multitude of strangers, his appearance, bearing, and abilities would soon attract attention and win respect."