I spoke last week of the General Election, more particularly with
regard to its influence on the speakers who take part in it. A treatise
on this aspect of the matter has yet to be written. One of the main
points to be determined will be the amount of influence exercised by
the speech, not on its hearers, but on the speaker himself.
* * * * *
Nothing is more remarkable than the rapidity and definiteness with
which a speaker's opinions crystallise during the course of a speech.
Let us assume, for example, that a Radical candidate has been
approached on the subject of an Eight Hours Bill, and, in order to
gain time, has promised to deal with it in his next speech, at the
same time giving an assurance of general sympathy. Probably he has
not thought much about the question before. In the evening he will
speak upon it; and suddenly, to his own intense surprise, he will find
himself declaring that all legislation will be vain, all social effort
fruitless, until the load of toil that presses on the mass of his
fellow-countrymen is lightened, and a universal Eight Hours Bill is
carried through both Houses.
* * * * *
Or again, a Conservative is confronted with the question of old-age
pensions. Precisely the same process takes place, and under the
necessity of convincing himself, while endeavouring to convince and to
please his audience, he will vow never to cease his efforts in support
of Mr. CHAMBERLAIN until a general system of State pensions
for the aged is established throughout the United Kingdom.
* * * * *
[Illustration: Sir William cultivates the "Celtic Fringe."]
* * * * *
So it is with votes of thanks and laudatory speeches of all kinds.
If you have to move a vote of thanks to A., a politician whom you do
not specially admire, the odds are about ten to one that you will
describe him as a great statesman, a profound thinker, an eloquent
orator, and the man of the future. All this may be due to your having
embarked on a rhetorical period which required more words than you had
prepared yourself to supply; and in the agitation of filling up the
gap, and rounding off the period, you say what you had not the remotest
intention of saying when you got on to your legs. Hence come in after
years parallel columns, and aggravating charges of inconsistency.
* * * * *
It was roses, roses all the way. But that was some time ago in the
case of Mr. ISAAC HOYLE, late Liberal Member for the Heywood
Division of Lancashire. He was asked to support Mr. SNAPE the
Liberal Candidate at this election, but he refused to "take any part
in sending Mr. SNAPE to Parliament, charged with duties for
which, as I think, his votes show he has no qualification." The receipt
of this letter caused the greatest excitement in the Division, and at
the Heywood Reform Club Mr. HOYLE'S portrait has been smashed
to pieces and thrown out of the building. It is stated also that his
subscriptions are being returned. Clearly a case of adding Hoyle to the
flames of controversy.
* * * * *
Mr. THOMAS MILVAIN, the Conservative who vainly endeavoured
to oust Sir WILFRID LAWSON from the Cockermouth Division,
was once a great boxer--a heavy-weight champion amongst amateurs, if
my memory serves me. In the course of his late contest he addressed a
hostile meeting at Dearham. Many questions were put to him. One was,
"What weight was ta when thoo was a boxer?" Mr. MILVAIN'S
answer was, "I was 13 st. 8 lb. That was twenty-eight years ago, and I
have not had the gloves on since." (_Laughter and cheers, and a Voice_:
"_Would you like to have them on now?_") "I am quite prepared to give
any of you a turn, if you want one." (_Great laughter and cheers._)
* * * * *
When a Candidate, heckled by enemies, finds
All his efforts to keep the place still vain,
Let him try one resource ere he pulls down the blinds,
And conform to the model of MILVAIN.
For when politics palled he referred to the years
When his skill as a boxer was lauded;
An allusion to gloves won him laughter and cheers,
Which was more than the "point of his jaw" did.
* * * * *
In a provincial contemporary I find the following startling
information, under the heading, "Mothers of Great Men."
SCHUMANN'S mother was gifted in music; CHOPIN'S
mother, like himself, was very delicate; WORDSWORTH'S mother
had a character as peculiar as that of her gifted son; RALEIGH
said that he owed all his politeness of deportment to his mother. There
are other statements about other mothers, but those I have quoted may
suffice in the meantime. What I want to know is why any reasonable
human being should care, or be supposed to care, about these ridiculous
scraps of information collected from a rubbish-heap of useless
knowledge. Here is another that I cannot leave out: HAYDN
dedicated one of his most important instrumental compositions to his
mother. Amazing.
* * * * *
In the parish of Swaffham Bulbeck (Phoebus, what a name!) there are
apparently two bridges. At the adjourned quarterly meeting of the
Parish Council the other day, Mr. C. P. FYSON in the chair,
"it was reported that Bridge No. 1 required to be re-built.... The
Chairman reported Bridge No. 2 required the same treatment, and
eventually the whole matter was adjourned"--presumably in the hope that
in the interval the bridges would rebuild themselves.
* * * * *