Shorter Notices THIS book is a summary of political and
parliamentary history from the late seventeenth century to the present day. As a summary it is on balance neither much better nor very much worse than other similar potted versions of English history. A little better in that it is not a mere string of generalisations and that it is clearly written, without prejudice (except in the contemporary period) and without sentimentality or gush. A good deal worse in that it not based upon the most recent authorities and is rather carelessly put together. The book does not justify its title as a history of the Liberal Party because it ignores or treats with extreme sketchiness nearly all the questions specially relevant to the position of party in English life. Thus there is far too little mention of the con- stituencies, the party organisations, or the Press, and no serious attempt to analyse the composition of the Liberal Party at the different stages of its history or to explain the changing constitutional background of the parliamentary conflicts. Sir Henry Slesser does not even tell the reader how the Liberal Party obtained its name. This last omission is significant. Sir Henry regards a Liberal as more characteristically " a product of English ways of thought and action " than a Tory. The Liberal Party. pf Great Britain 'he party is very far from being purely "English ") is, of course, 3 British phenomenon ; but Liberalism as such is much mare European than Toryism, and it is impossible to understand *he development of our own Liberal Party, even in the narrowest se:.,=. without understanding certain large developments in Europ :31 thought to which Sir Henry Slesser gives insufficient attention. Ind, he dismisses all Continental Liberal politicians as having ab 1.1,t them " an academic quality which fortunately is here (Great Brit ..n wanting." In other words, Liberal politicians are spoiled if t:ieY
have a philosophy of Liberalism. It is not surprising that anyone who thus fails to see the driving force of the later Whig as well as of the earlier Liberal movements should quote, as a final judgement upon Mr. Gladstone, a foolishly unhistorical remark of Lytton Strachey that, compared with Disraeli, Gladstone's attitude towards life was that of an ingenuous child.
Previous page
