Parliament and Prime Ministers Considered as Exhibits P ARLIAMENT can on
occasion afford the most exciting show of any place in London ; Prime Ministers can be picturesque like Mr. Gladstone, or engaging like Mr. Baldwin ; but not even Mr. Gladstone was picturesque all the time, and Mr. Baldwin might pass us in the street without any radiation of his personal appeal. If the truth has to be told, the exhibition now gathered in two rooms of the London Museum represents the less inspiring aspect of both Parliament and Prime Ministers.
They should have got Mr. John Burns to run it. Who— of a certain age—has not been shown round the Houses of Parliament by Mr. Burns ? What Member of Parlia- ment having constituents on his hands, in the good years when Mr. Burns was there, did not grasp at the chance of getting them shown round by the most competent show- man—and the most willing ? This show is too academic. Mr. Burns had a great reverence and knowledge of the mediaeval past, but he knew that what people really wanted to see (in pre-War days) was the hole in the heating apparatus where a suffragette hid herself. On the other hand, he would never have bothered to show them Mr. Asquith's walking stick—hardly even Mr. Balfour's golf-club, had that been accessible. Yet Lord Balfour's golf-club is one of the exhibits with which the devisers of this show have sought to modify its academic character. Mr. Asquith's walking stick is not there, but Mr. Gladstone's is. and one person at least, though much interested in Mr. Gladstone, regarded it without interest. His axe is another story—there is a case to be made for showing what type and weight of weapon Mr. Gladstone affected (yet perhaps this applies also to Mr. Balfour's deck, if deck it is). Then there is Mr. Baldwin's pipe—under the same glass case—to all appearance a cherrywood article, but described as a briar. No doubt by any other name it will smell as sweet ; but it is at least significant that those who are suitably chosen to put Prime Ministers on exhibit do not know the commonest kind of pipe from the next commonest. What would Queen Victoria have said to the idea that a Prime Minister—and a Tory Prime Minister—should be denoted by his pipe ? Probably she would have expressed satisfaction that nothing in that case of exhibits connects itself with Lord Beaconsfield.
Yet one of the few objects which really do bring us near to the man is an autograph of this illustrious person— the manuscript of an unfinished novel whose opening words are these : " Of all the pretty suburbs that adorn our metropolis there are few that exceed in charm Clapham Common." Is he quite serious ? Does he truly admire those whom he extols, the inhabitants of this favoured region who show by the " solid convenience and rich comfort of their dwellings " that they have no intention of quitting the sylvan retreat ? Or is the so much older Eastern laughing all the time in that queer Semitic beard ? Of course Disraeli of the novels is not quite Dizzy of the House of Commons ; yet this manuscript scrap gives a contact with the living man—who, like his rival and antagonist, is so much more alive to-day than men who are not yet dead. All their other contemporaries, even Palmerston, are not much more than nominis umbrae. As for their forerunners : Pitt and Fox in- evitably leap to memory, but it is not easy to visualize Pitt and Fox, for all the portraits we have of them ; while Chatham is a legend, a name to conjure with, but unintelli- gible as any other spell.
According to Lord Esher. who contributes a Preface to the catalogue, neither Gladstone nor Beaconsfield was titularly Prime Minister : the appellation only became official with Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman: But he says also that the Prime Minister in the last century was less of a chief than now. He ought to know, for when Mr. Gladstone was at the height of his power from 1880 to 1885, Lord Esher (as Mr. Brett) was private secretary to Lord Hartington, Mr. Gladstone's second-in-command, and no ordinary private secretary either ; rumour said that if he did not like his chief's despatches he altered them. Yet with all deference to Lord Esher, it is doubtful whether Mr. Baldwin exercises so close a control on the actions of his colleagues or keeps himself in so close touch with their problems as did Mr. Gladstone.
The series of engravings which illustrate Parliament's material abode through its long history have no doubt an academic interest ; but even pictures of the destroying Fire leave us cold. None of the representations of either House in session conveys much. The most alive, or the least dead, is a study by Pugin and Rowlandson of the old House of Commons ; but it is probably inaccurate, for a large proportion of the members are shown. sitting behind the Speaker, and completely out of his sight, yet presumably order had to be kept in those days. One thing should be noted. Lord Harcourt (whom the House of Commons knew as Lulu) did more than anyone else to adorn Parliament and make it a convenient club : the Harcourt Room where strangers dine is fittingly called after him. He is not mentioned in this catalogue ; yet undoubtedly many of the curious engravings lent by Parliament to this collection were collected by him.
The one thing of vivid and outstanding interest shown --a real " slice out of life "—is the bundle of pencilled notes for Mr. Lloyd George's Victory speech on Novem- ber 9th, 1918. But to exhibit these properly a print of the speech from Hansard should accompany them.
STEPHEN GWYNN•
Previous page
