LORD NEWTON’S DIARY

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 64, Issue 4559, 13 April 1942, Page 3

LORD NEWTON’S DIARY

LIVELY PIER’S “SMALL BEER”

STORIES OF AN INDIVIDUALIST

(By

Ludgate)

Surely nowhere in the civilised world save in Britain could such a diary as that of the lively, veteran peer Thomas Wodehouse Legh, second Baron Newton, be received with such general pleasure as has “Retrospection” (London: John Murray). Lord Newton, now in his 87th year, was never a distinguished figure in England’s public life, and for the larger practical purposes his career ended in 1919, in which year the diary ends, though later comments encircle some of the entries. He was, and is, in the evening of his days, typical of a school of fearless Toryism, individualism and a curious and chivalrous humanitarianism which has no parallel in any other of the capitals of Europe or America. Diffident as to his own merits, fearless in controversy in both Commons and Lords, he played a part in the “counties” and in party councils which won him small but significant fame at Westminster. ONE OF FORTUNE’S FAVOURITES So Conservative as to oppose- an eight-hour day for miners, he, in his prime, was full of understanding of the lot of many an under dog, whether a prisoner of war or the helpless victims of rapacious money lenders. Wealthy, travelled, talented, the scion of a family which has lived for six centuries at Lyme, in Cheshire, Thomas Legh had all doors open to him, and could take difficult jobs, declining the salary. A friend of kings and princes, persona grata with colleagues in the lesser diplomatic service, so well read in foreign affairs and European history as to be able to write lives of Lord Lyons and Lord Lansdowne, he has wandered through embassies and palaces with none to challenge his status or privileges. His spell of office was short, viz., four years with the coalition Ministry, first as Paymaster-General (191 S-16 and then as Assistant Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs (1916-19), the latter office giving him control of certain official news services and of prisoners of war. A fine golfer, angler and a lover of outdoor life, he was never a recluse. As a defender of field sports against both bishops and nonconformists he was often in trouble because of his capacity for pouring ridicule on quite solemn people. With his class he has suffered heavily through taxation in two world wars, and at one stage was glad to receive £12,000 for an old silver rose bowl and ewer which he dug out of a family cupboard. There is, however, no bitterness in “Retrospection.” It is a wholesome “chronicle of the small beer” of a very full and, one would imagine, happy life. In the darkest days of the Home Rule fights, the Jameson raid inquiry struggles, the stand against Northcliffe insolence and arrogance, Lord Newton seems to have preserved sanity, good humour and a capacity for admiring his adversary. Afraid of none, he picked his way from Eton to Westminster with a gracious efficiency and moral courage. BRUSH WITH KIPLING Lord Newton was never frightened by even genius when genius slips or makes itself ridiculous. In a debate in 1914 he spoke disparagingly of Rudyard Kipling’s poem “The AbsentMinded Beggar,” which he described as being “admirable in sentiment but deplorable poetry,” with its “duke’s son, cook’s son, son of a belted earl.” A few days later he was surprised to receive a letter’ from Kipling complaining that “his -friends” deplored these remarks, -and saying “that, so far from being ashamed of the poem, he felt proud to think it had helped to bring over a quarter of a million pounds for the soldiers in South Africa.” Lord Newton tells the rest of the story: “I wrote and said he had overestimated the importance of my criticism and that, while I fully recognised his patriotic sentiments, I confessed that I was not an admirer of all his poetry. I also regretted having hurt the feelings of himself and ‘his friends.’ I thought that, on the whole, I had behaved handsomely, but suffered another surprise when a second -letter arrived, saying his friends were still dissatisfied. To this I made no reply, as there is no law, written or unwritten, which compels one to admire poetry which is distasteful.” ORIGIN OF NATIONAL SERVICE Always a keen advocate of conscription as the corollary of full citizenship and democracy, Lord Newton was one of the pioneers of the National Service League. In telling the tale of its inauguration, he disposes of the popular notion that Lord Roberts was the founder. The facts are set but thus:—“l came across (in 1902) a book, entitled ‘The Briton’s First Duty,’ by a Mr G. H. Shee, which seemed to me to be a useful work, and succeeded in getting several friends to assist in buying it up and issuing it as propaganda. One of these friends

was the late Sir Clinton Dawkins, a very able man and a high authority on finance. He concurred entirely with my views, and said that we might try to start a league, with a duke at the head of it. After an immense amount of trouble a meeting was held at Apsley House on February 27, and after much discussion we decided to call ourselves the National Service League, and the Duke of Wellington consented to become president. The common belief is that it was Lord Roberts who first advocated the principle of compulsion, but this is a complete delusion, for he did not join the league until 1906, when he had already ceased to be Commander in Chief. ... It is worth noting that we received little or no help from the military. On the other hand, we found much support amongst the women.” BURNS AND BRYCE Though a keen partisan and up to his neck with the Maxses and other “Balfour Must Go” leaders in the Parliamentary turmoil of the first decade of the present century, Newton’s diary shows he preserved friendly relations with notable political opponents. After describing the flouts and gibes which.he flung in he goes on:—“Later, I got to know Bryce, and conceived a great admiration for his talents and versatility. He was one of the most omniscient men I ever met, and I liked him personally; but, somehow, he was not very successful in the House of Commons, and he was reported not to be one of Gladstone’s special favourites.” Of John Burns—“the straw-hatted Docker’s champion of Battersea,” as a friend called him—our diarist has some new stories throwing light on John’s love of London’s sights. Here is the entry for July 31, 1919:—“Met John Burns and asked him if he really had conducted over 500,000 colonial and American soldiers over the Westminster Palace and the Abbey. Said that he had actually conducted over 600,000 since the beginning of the war, averaging about 8000 a week, and that on the previous Sunday he took round 3500 American soldiers. This appeared to be a very remarkable achievement, but he was thoroughly well qualified to undertake it. John Burns, who detested the Harmsworth Press, was delighted with my legal success.” Lord Newton was awarded £5OOO damages and costs in an action against the “Daily Mail,” which was concluded a few days prior to his talk with John Burns. KING EDWARD AND JAPAN An interesting titbit of international gossip is Lord Newton’s revelation of the opposition of King Edward VII. to the conferring of the Order of the Garter on the Emperor of Japan in 1902. The Royal opposition was overcome, but the incident, described in the diary as follows, shows once more the worldly wisdom and sagacity of “Edward the Peacemaker”:—“October 14, 1902—Arthur Hardinge, our Minister at Teheran, tells me that the Shah’s recent tour in this country and the Continent was paid for by the Russian Government. This cultivated potentate eventually received the Garter, and it is interesting to note that the King made no difficulties in this case,- whereas he strongly objected to the proposal to bestow the Garter upon the Emperor of Japan, who had just become our ally and was obviously a far more important world figure than the Shah. In this opposition he was supported by Rosebery, on the strange ground that the Order of the Garter should be confined to Christians. The Royal opposition was, however, successfully overcome, and the Garter was taken to Japan by Prince Arthur of Connaught.” MISPLACED CAUTION The last quotation from these entertaining chronicles concerns an instance of misplaced caution and discretion on the part of an official which, had other counsels prevailed, might have saved the Empire the Boer War of 1899-1902. “One of Lord' Salisbury’s private secretaries at the Foreign Office,” we are told, “was a .Mr Foley, and Foley had a brother who was an officer in Jameson’s force, who corresponded with him frequently, and made little secret of what it was proposed to do. Foley, unfortunately, considered that he would be overstepping his official duties if he gave his information to Lord Salisbury. Had he done so, no doubt Lord Salisbury would have taken immediate action, and history would have been written differently. It was, in fact, a repetition of the old story of the Spanish courtier who allowed the Queen to burn to death because it was not his duty to extinguish the flames.”