CHAPTER I

WHILE I REMEMBER

STEPHEN McKENNA

_By Stephen McKenna_

WHILE I REMEMBER

THE SENSATIONALISTS

PART ONE: LADY LILITH

PART TWO: THE EDUCATION OF ERIC LANE

PART THREE: THE SECRET VICTORY

SONIA MARRIED

SONIA

MIDAS AND SON

NINETY-SIX HOURS' LEAVE

THE SIXTH SENSE

SHEILA INTERVENES

_New York: George H. Doran Company_

WHILE I REMEMBER

BY

STEPHEN McKENNA

NEW YORK

GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY

COPYRIGHT, 1921,

BY GEORGE H. DORAN COMPANY

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

TO

THOSE WHO MAY FORGET

"Two men I honour, and no third. First, the toil-worn Craftsman

that with earth-made Implement laboriously conquers the Earth, and

makes her man's. Venerable to me is the hard Hand; crooked, coarse;

wherein notwithstanding lies a cunning virtue, indefeasibly royal

as of the Sceptre of this Planet. Venerable too is the rugged face,

all weather-tanned, besoiled, with its rude intelligence; for it

is the face of a Man living manlike. O, but the more venerable

for thy rudeness, and even because we must pity as well as love

thee! Hardly-entreated Brother! For us was thy back so bent, for

us were thy straight limbs and fingers so deformed: thou wert our

Conscript, on whom the lot fell, and fighting our battles wert so

marred. For in thee too lay a god-created Form, but it was not to

be unfolded; encrusted must it stand with the thick adhesions and

defacements of Labour: and thy body, like thy soul, was not to know

freedom. Yet toil on, toil on: _thou_ art in thy duty, be out of it

who may; thou toilest for the altogether indispensable, for daily

bread.

"A second man I honour, and still more highly: Him who is seen

toiling for the spiritually indispensable; not daily bread, but

the bread of Life. Is not he too in his duty; endeavouring towards

inward Harmony; revealing this, by act or by word, through all

his outward endeavours, be they high or low? Highest of all, when

his outward and his inward endeavour are one: when we can name

him Artist; not earthly Craftsman only, but inspired Thinker, who

with heaven-made Implement conquers Heaven for us! If the poor and

humble toil that we have Food, must not the high and glorious toil

for him in return, that he have Light, have Guidance, Freedom,

Immortality? These two, in all their degrees, I honour: all else is

chaff and dust, which let the wind blow whither it listeth."

THOMAS CARLYLE: _Sartor Resartus_.

"People who are old enough to write memoirs," says my friend Shane

Leslie in _The End of a Chapter_, "have usually lost their memory."

They have always, he might have added, lost the enthusiasm which

once inspired and is alone able to explain their part in what they

are trying to remember. Going farther, he might have challenged in

words, as his book challenged by implication, the belief that there

is any day in a man's life on which--though not an hour before--he

is entitled to set down his reminiscences; yet one page from the

journal of Alcibiades at twenty might well be more instructive than

three volumes of the wisdom of Socrates at seventy.

My reason for writing the present book is that I wish to record

certain impressions of a vanished generation while I remember

them clearly and sympathetically; my excuse for publishing it

is that the opinions and recollections of middle life are so

seldom articulate. Reminiscences of childhood, where they survive

undimmed, find their place in fiction and in autobiography;

reminiscences of youth and manhood, collected and chastened from

the sober angle of old age, are compressed into one patronising

chapter of every standard life; but we are hardly ever allowed

to look through the spectacles of thirty at the world as it

appears to the eyes of thirty. Sometimes we are, indeed, admitted

to the intimacy of a diary; but, if it has been composed with a

view to publication, we may suspect that behind the pretext of

self-communing the author is striking an attitude; if it was never

intended for publication, we may wonder whether it should ever have

been published. Possibly there is still room for recollections

that have frankly been written for publication before age has too

greatly blurred the outline of memory or distance eliminated too

ruthlessly the unimportant.

As the art of the novelist demands of him that he should first

and foremost be a spectator of life, so the accident of race

makes of him an involuntary critic if his lot be cast amid alien

surroundings, however congenial; and the further accident of health

not always robust may remove him a yet greater distance from the

active life of his generation. In so far as this detachment gives

him a separate standard of comparison, it may be not without value

in the review of past manners and ideals.

It is with the life of that generation and not with gossip

about this or that member of it that I am concerned. A new and

inexcusable terror is added to social intercourse when the

confidence, the indiscretion or the malice of a dinner-table is

industriously recorded and published; and it is still believed

by some who were trained in a tradition of reticence that

intimate portraits and studies should be withheld so long as the

originals or their friends can be offended or hurt by unsought

publicity. While a man of even thirty-three, spending most of his

life in London, may have met more than a few of the statesmen

and financiers, the sailors and soldiers, the artists, authors

and actors who have now chief place in the interest of their

countrymen, I feel that it would be impudent for him publicly to

scatter his unsolicited opinion on those whom he has been invited

to meet privately. This book will therefore be free from what has

been called an "index of improper names."

It would be no less impudent for him to assume that anyone is

interested in the insignificances of his private life. I venture

to write of this epoch because I hope to present some aspects

of it which might elude the historian who ranges over a wider

field, preeminently the aspect from the standpoint of youth. Any

autobiographical matter deserves no more honourable place than a

footnote and is included only to explain how and why one super was

found at certain times on a certain stage.

The generation which ended with the Peace of Versailles in 1919 is

likely to be cut off from all that follows more completely than any

of which we have record: a higher proportion of its youth has been

destroyed, and of those who remain hardly one has been left in the

place that he filled before the war; the standard and distribution

of wealth have changed; and former lines of social demarcation have

been obliterated. Though the old forms continue, the life that

inspires them is new: the schools and universities, the learned

professions and public services, the government itself are manned

from a different class and actuated by different ideals. It may be

not altogether wasted labour to sketch a corner of that old world

as it was known to the men who were reared in time to be sacrificed

in the late war.

Impelled by a common interest in changing fashions, Professor

Sir Denison Ross, Mr. Hugo Rumbold and I once agreed to compile

an encyclopædia of the catch-words and cant phrases, the popular

songs and popular dances, the endearments and greetings of the

last twenty years; though the work has not yet been begun, I am

not without hope that there may be published in our lifetime

a social survey of England which shall contain some few of the

things commonly considered to be below the dignity of history,

for the change in manners during the last generation is worthy of

an exhaustive treatise; it is at once the effect and the cause

of a corresponding change in morals; and, whatever progress

the future have in store, those who first drew breath in Queen

Victoria's reign may congratulate themselves, if it be a matter

for congratulation, on having passed in thirty years from the

civilisation of the Stone Age to that of the Cities of the Plain.

This book is as deliberately incomplete as the sketch-book of a

traveller who records some few of the scenes that he most wishes to

conjure up again and none that he would prefer to forget. Whether

my reminiscences and reflections at thirty-three or at any other

age are of interest to anyone I must leave my readers to determine,

comforting myself with the thought that the years through which

I have lived are themselves of interest and reminding those who

regard memoir-writing as a prerogative of septuagenarians that in

the life of most men there is a time when they are unable to look

forward with confidence and must be deemed fortunate if they can

look back without regret.

I have striven to avoid inaccuracy, but I have been compelled to

write at a distance from all works of reference.

S. McK.

_Talcahuano,

31 January, 1921._

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

I WESTMINSTER 17

II A SETTING AND A DATE 40

III CHRIST CHURCH 59

IV LONDON AND ELSEWHERE 80

V THE FRINGE OF POLITICS 100

VI ON THE EVE 132

VII THE FRINGE OF WAR 154

VIII AT THE LIBERAL GRAVE-SIDE 183

IX ON THE ROAD TO WASHINGTON--AND AFTER 201

X LONDON AGAIN 226

XI DEMOBILISATION 244

XII LITERARY TOTEMS 268

XIII POLITICS IN A DISSOLVING VIEW 290

XIV A MEMORY RETOUCHED 314

WHILE I REMEMBER

WHILE I REMEMBER

CHAPTER I

WESTMINSTER

"A man, whom the fond imagination of his worshippers invested with

the attributes of a god, gave his life for the life of the world;

after infusing from his own body a fresh current of vital energy

into the stagnant veins of nature, he was cut off from among the

living before his failing strength should initiate a universal

decay, and his place was taken by another who played, like all his

predecessors, the ever-recurring drama of the divine resurrection

and death.... The sceptic ... will reduce Jesus of Nazareth to the

level of a multitude of other victims of a barbarous superstition,

and will see in him no more than a moral teacher, whom the

fortunate accident of his execution invested with the crown, not

merely of a martyr, but of a god...."

J. G. FRAZER: _The Golden Bough_.

I

On the last Sunday of July, in the year 1906, Little Dean's

Yard filled slowly with sixty or seventy boys in evening dress.

All but about ten wore the black gown, which is one mark of the

Westminster Scholar, and, over the gown, a white surplice open

or buttoned according to the seniority of the wearer. It was not

yet ten o'clock in the morning; but on Election Sunday all King's

Scholars and Major Candidates appear in evening clothes, the Major

Candidates distinguished by carnations of the prized Westminster

pink which has been worn since the day, nearly a hundred years

ago, when the school rowed against Eton and settled that colour

question by trial of strength: the victors were to have pink, the

vanquished blue; and the deeper pink of Leander derives from the

Westminster founders of the club.

These were the last few flying moments of the last scene. Six years

ago the seniors in the swelling group, escaping from the thunder

of traffic in Victoria Street and Broad Sanctuary, had entered

the silent backwater of Little Dean's Yard as Minor Candidates;

their parents or the masters of their preparatory schools led

them under the arch and past the fives' courts; they turned shyly

wondering eyes at Home Boarders, Rigaud's, Grant's, College and

Ashburnham, at the Bursary and the head master's house; then they

were shepherded through the Inigo Jones doorway and up the steps

into School. It was the first day of the Challenge, wherein the

candidates of other days met all-comers in a disputation--lasting a

week or more--on the elements of learning and those who outlasted

their opponents were elected to scholarships. Now, after six years,

they were competing for the close scholarships and exhibitions at

Christ Church and at Trinity, Cambridge. The written work was over;

on Election Monday would come the _viva voce_, then the annual

cricket match between the King's Scholars and the Town Boys on

Vincent Square, then Election dinner in College Hall enlivened by

the Greek, Latin and English epigrams which Westminster subsidises;

then on Election Tuesday, still in evening dress, they would attend

the school service in Abbey for the last time and for the last time

answer "_Adsum_" at roll-call; the results of Election would be

read out, the prizes distributed, the office-holders would divest

themselves of office and they would walk down School for the last

time, into their houses, out of them again and into the world.

The Captain of the King's Scholars came out of College; the Head

Town Boy joined him at the entrance to the cloisters; next to them

were the other two School Monitors. The involuntary began; and the

procession passed through the nave and under the organ loft: first

the choir, then the Abbey clergy and the Dean of Westminster; the

Dean of Christ Church and the Master of Trinity; the examiners from

Oxford and Cambridge; the Head Master of Westminster; the assistant

masters in gowns and hoods; the King's Scholars in surplices, gowns

and evening dress, those of them who were leaving chastened by the

thought that, after the Election Tuesday service two days later,

they would enter the Abbey as members of the public only.

Westminster is so much the embodiment and shrine of English history

that even the alien and the iconoclast cannot spend six years in

the shadow of the Abbey without becoming steeped in the spirit and

associations of the place. It is the influence of such foundations

that makes of English life its present compromise between the

rational and the traditional. From their places in the stalls

could be seen the arches of the triforium which are filled at

coronations by the Westminster Scholars: no king, they assert, can

be duly crowned unless he is acclaimed by their triple shout of

"_Vivat Rex_". It is their privilege to be present in Palace Yard

when the soveran opens Parliament; Scholars and Town Boys walk,

of unchallenged right, into the gallery of the House of Commons,

Scholars--in cap and gown--into the gallery of the House of Lords

and, on Sundays, on to the Terrace; when the Courts of Justice

were at Westminster, they could wander unchecked into Westminster

Hall. Their daily service takes place in the Poets' Corner; they

are present at State funerals, their confirmation is held in Henry

VII's chapel; and the whole Abbey is their heritage. Is not the

school descended lineally from that group of lay scholars whom the

monks of Westminster taught? Is not the monks' dormitory their

Great School? Among the documents discovered of late years in the

Abbey Muniment Room is a record, under the year 1284, of _expensæ_,

being provision for the teaching of scholars, and a further record,

under the year 1339, of payments for "Westminster School." Already

old when Winchester and Eton were founded, with its roots struck

deep in the Abbey's earliest history and with its life immemorially

intertwined with the life of the Abbey, the two have remained side

by side until Westminster is the last of the London schools to

resist the pressure which has already urged younger rivals from

their seats. Changing slowly with the slow unfolding of English

history, the school was refounded by Queen Elizabeth on a secular

footing; and the monitor of the week, kneeling with his back to

Busby's birch-table[1] and facing the school, returns thanks "_pro

fundatrice nostra Regina Elizabetha_" on the spot where Robert

South prayed "_pro rege Carolo_" on the 30th of January, 1649. It

retains, by the Act of Uniformity, its "almost unique privilege of

using Latin in religious offices", though--as a concession to the

Reformers--the monkish pronunciation was abandoned for that which

was the universal English form until misguided empiricists set

up confusion where none existed before by introducing a "modern"

method.

Since that new Tower of Babel was erected, Westminster has watched

other foundations arguing and striving to discover the correct

pronunciation of classical Latin. Despite the periodical rebukes

of its rivals, it has held stubbornly to its course, knowing

that there is no sure means of recreating the speech of Cicero

and that Westminster at least is too deeply bedded in the past

to bend before each new breeze of educational fashion. A hundred

customs are preserved to teach new generations that progress need

not be divorced from the historic sense: when the bell rings for

prayers at the end of afternoon school, a Second Election knocks

with his cap at the doors of the form-rooms adjoining school and

calls out, "_Instat quinta_", or, on "plays" (half-holidays),

"_Instat sesquiduodecima_", although the actual hour is now nearly

one o'clock; a Second Election has knocked thus since the time

was told from a single clock and shouted through the school by a

junior; before prayers begin, the doors are locked, and, when they

are opened, one of the School Monitors[2] mounts guard outside to

repel a chance raid by the "sci's"[3] of the neighbourhood who in

less orderly days carried on a town-and-gown warfare against the

school. At the lowest, such customs are a picturesque survival,

like the Latin play acted in College Dormitory, the Pancake Greeze

on Shrove Tuesday, the countless phrases and customs which only a

Westminster understands and which all Westminsters love; perhaps,

too, they foster, in the alien and the iconoclast, a sense of the

past. Abbey and School are a monument to continuity and ordered

progress; in 1906, they were a monument at which the leaving

seniors had been involuntarily staring for half a dozen years.

II

It is probable that few of them had much attention to spare for

the sermon on that Election Sunday. At eighteen they had spent a

third of their life at Westminster; it is a foundation in which

son succeeds father and brother follows brother, as witness the

carved and painted names of Madans and Waterfields, Goodenoughs and

Phillimores up School, and on a September night of 1900 tradition

had set them in the footsteps of their families and had sought a

place for them in the old houses, there to serve and perhaps to

suffer, to learn and, later, to rule.

"You will sometimes be punished when you do not deserve it", was

the wise parting advice of one preparatory-school headmaster;

"before giving vent to your indignation, reflect how much oftener

you have deserved punishment without receiving it."

It is but fair to say that this consoling philosophy was little

required at Westminster: provided that he incurred no suspicion

of "side", there was so general a disposition to help the strange

newcomer that he suffered little; and even his service was

made easy for him. The "shadow", in Westminster language, was

instructed at once in the rules and customs of the house by a

senior fag, his "substance", who shouldered his sins for the first

fortnight and was theoretically liable to suffer vicariously

for his shortcomings; after the days of grace a new boy could

be fagged, though this involved little more than fetching and

carrying, washing cups, filling saucepans and preparing call-over

lists; he could also be "tanned", with an instrument appropriately

designated a "pole"; but, though this was less agreeable, corporal

punishment was not employed with undue frequency. There was always

a right of appeal, too, with the menace of two extra strokes if the

appeal was dismissed; but, as it was a point of honour never to

appeal, the sufferer could only comfort himself with the thought

that a tanning was over more quickly than "lines" or "drill" and

with the hope that he might fall into weak or inexpert hands. Of

bullying there was little; of systematic oppression and torture

of the weak by the strong there was none at all, though the small

boys of that generation (as of every other) believed that, if a

companion was offensive, their right and duty impelled them to drum

the offensiveness out of him.

The war has caused the English people to examine searchingly its

scheme of education and especially that public-school system

which trains the sons of the well-to-do for future eminence in

government, the public services and the learned professions.

There have been many books and much discussion: the English love

of finding fault with cherished institutions while approving the

result has led to a hazy belief that the English public-schoolboy

is the finest raw material in the world, but that only his inborn

superiority has saved him from destruction by a burthen of useless

learning, devastating ignorance, insane athleticism and vicious

associations. It is more than time to suggest that his excellence

is a delicate bloom nurtured and saved by the public school from

the criminal neglect of his parents and that most critics, failing

to distinguish between the phases through which every boy passes,

have written down as chronic disease what was but temporary

green-sickness.

Few men can speak with knowledge of more than one school, but

there is little risk in the assertion that the natural history of

the public-schoolboy is broadly the same at all times and places.

Withdrawn at an early age from the dry-nursing of his natural

guardians, he is flung into a vast adolescent society and left to

struggle through as best he may: his parents commonly escape the

embarrassment of explaining to him the elements of physiology,

preferring that he should learn them from the gloating confidences

of other boys hardly less ignorant than himself. Native chastity

of soul keeps some unsmirched, but most go through an ugly period

of foul tongues, foul minds and sometimes foul propensities which

the school seeks to circumvent by vigilance and hard physical

discipline. During the middle phase, this blind, misunderstood

groping towards maturity comes to be gradually controlled; and, in

the last, the adult boy is seen as a clean-living, clean-speaking,

rather solemn blend of scholar, sportsman and despot, very

conscious of his responsibilities and zealous to repress the

primitive exuberance by which he himself was afflicted two or three

years earlier.

Before public schools are denounced for making boys licentious of

habit and obscene of tongue, parents might ask themselves what

preventive measures they themselves have taken. And, before any

one attacks the insistence on athletics in public schools, he

might ask himself what better physical discipline he can propose

and whether this derided love of sport is inculcated at school or

at home. If a boy were not compelled by fear of punishment to take

part in games, he would be coerced by the opinion of parents who

would not understand nor tolerate a son without the Englishman's

normal and natural preoccupation with sport; and, though compulsory

games are easy to ridicule, they do not kill the chivalry of good

sportsmanship: an early Westminster memory is of a football shield

passing, after long and honourable contest, from one house to

another; while the head and captain of the winning house fetched

away the trophy, the losing house lined up to cheer their victors

and, if possible, to drown the cheers of the winning house for the

one that had lost.

A defence of the public-school system would deserve at least as

much space as the critics have given to attacking it. This is

neither the place nor time to engage in the endless controversy;

it was not the place nor time, fifteen years ago, for any who sat

thinking of their own school and of the days that they had spent

there.

III

Many of those who were leaving must have wondered where the

outgoing draft would be in another six years' time. Westminster

contains about three hundred boys, drawn chiefly from the

professional classes, and in turn sends a steady stream of recruits

to the civil service and the learned professions. Barristers and

doctors abound; government servants are to be discovered richly

distributed through Whitehall, India and the colonies; the school

has its share of clergymen and more than its share of soldiers.

In less than six years all would have come down from Oxford

and Cambridge, unless any had had the good fortune to secure a

fellowship; and, while those who were destined for a profession had

already decided on their careers, those who dreamed of public life

and looked, perhaps, towards the north transept where, in white

marble and late-won peace, Beaconsfield and Gladstone stood side

by side, may have preferred to keep locked in their own hearts the

ideals which they had diffidently set before themselves.

The changing and strengthening aspirations of a boy have won as

little space in all the crop of analytical school literature as

have the vagaries of his religious faith or the evolution of

his civic morals. The Victorians, indeed, in strict accordance

with formula, loaded their hero with vague disquiet which was

only relieved when he recalled that he had ceased to receive

the sacraments; a later generation arrested him in full flight

to perdition by intervening opportunely with a soul-steadying

preparation for confirmation; the Catholic propagandists habitually

threw a sympathetic priest across his path in the course of a

holiday ramble; and, if there be a school literature of dissent, I

doubt not but that some harassed hero found peace in the practice

of Congregationalism. It was recognised, therefore, that the

faith of childhood is not infrequently discarded at school; it

was assumed with less justification that boys undergo spiritual

distress at such a time; and, as the hero of a novel is not

expected to suffer as long or as acutely as any one in life, one

or other of the conventional escapes could always be chosen. It

is hard to remember a book in which the hero sheds his belief

in super-natural religion as lightheartedly as once he outgrew

his faith in Santa Claus; and, even if it be assumed from private

knowledge and experience that many schoolboy heroes have passed

through this spiritual transformation, it is harder to recall even

one who has been described as constructing a new system to take the

place of that which has been overthrown.

This reconstruction, nevertheless, was being attempted twenty

years ago, in the aftermath of the higher criticism, by all boys

with a speculative bent of mind; they were distinguished from

their predecessors by inherited scepticism; and their natural

history, to venture once more on a generalization from admittedly

incomplete data, was roughly the same everywhere in England.

Were it reasonable to fancy for a moment that modern boys were

distressed when their faith left them, severe blame would attach

to the timorous, indolent or dishonest parents who shirk the

burden of explaining and who teach as truth what they themselves

believe to be untrue, hoping that, when their children are older,

they will somehow have learned better at the hands of masters,

who are debarred from religious controversy, or of boys, who can

only contribute an equal ignorance. In fact, the boy who lost his

faith in revealed religion lost it more slowly, but no whit more

painfully than his belief in fairies; he no longer wrote to his

fellows, as Gladstone and Manning would write, to discuss the

state of his soul; he sought no spiritual director and asked no

one to pray for him, though he may have wondered why his parents

preserved a grotesque imposture for so long. In reading and in

discussion he had absorbed ideas of biological evolution, of

geological testimony and of religion studied comparatively; he

applied to historical Christianity the tests which he had been

taught to use on the history of Greece and Rome, accepting nothing

that could not be proved by evidence and rejecting the pretensions

of faith as he rejected the statements of a secular historian

that his history was literally inspired. Already he had heard

that the Old Testament was no longer accepted as heretofore; he

may even have learned that, for thousands of years before Christ,

countless gods were sacrificed annually by crucifixion or other

means and that a Barabbas was annually released to the people;

the distillation continued until he was left with the residuum

that a man named Jesus Christ, claiming or having claimed for him

a divine fatherhood, was crucified after a short life of healing

and teaching; there were, he found, no independent contemporary

documents, and the fullest accounts, written many years after

the events they described, were inspired by the devotion of his

followers, whose critical judgement, however, was on a level of

education to be expected in one harassed and turbulent corner of

the Roman Empire.

The concluding passage from _The Golden Bough_, of which a few

words have been quoted at the beginning of this chapter, defines,

in prose of rare beauty, the attitude of an agnostic towards

Christianity. "A man," wrote Sir James Frazer, "whom the fond

imagination of his worshippers invested with the attributes of a

god, gave his life for the life of the world; after infusing from

his own body a fresh current of vital energy into the stagnant

veins of nature, he was cut off from among the living before his

failing strength should initiate a universal decay, and his place

was taken by another who played, like all his predecessors, the

ever-recurring drama of the divine resurrection and death.... It

was played in Babylonia, and from Babylonia the returning captives

brought it to Judæa, where it was acted, rather as an historical

than a mythical piece, by players who, having to die in grim

earnest on a cross or gallows, were naturally drawn rather from

the gaol than the green-room. A chain of causes which, because we

cannot follow them, might in the loose language of daily life be

called an accident, determined that the part of the dying god in

this annual play should be thrust upon Jesus of Nazareth, whom the

enemies he had made in high places by his outspoken strictures

were resolved to put out of the way. They succeeded in ridding

themselves of the popular and troublesome preacher; but the very

step by which they fancied they had simultaneously stamped out his

revolutionary doctrines contributed more than anything else they

could have done to scatter them broadcast not only over Judæa but

over Asia; for it impressed upon what had been hitherto mainly an

ethical mission the character of a divine revelation culminating in

the passion and death of the incarnate Son of a heavenly Father.

In this form the story of the life and death of Jesus exerted an

influence which it could never have had if the great teacher had

died, as is commonly supposed, the death of a vulgar malefactor. It

shed round the cross on Calvary a halo of divinity which multitudes

saw and worshipped afar off; the blow struck on Golgotha set a

thousand expectant strings vibrating in unison wherever men had

heard the old, old story of the dying and risen god. Every year, as

another spring bloomed and another autumn faded across the earth,

the field had been ploughed and sown and borne fruit of a kind

till it received that seed which was destined to spring up and

overshadow the world. In the great army of martyrs who in many ages

and in many lands, not in Asia only, have died a cruel death in

the character of gods, the devout Christian will doubtless discern

types and forerunners of the coming Saviour--stars that heralded

in the morning sky the advent of the Sun of Righteousness--earthen

vessels wherein it pleased the divine wisdom to set before

hungering souls the bread of heaven. The sceptic, on the other

hand, with equal confidence, will reduce Jesus of Nazareth to the

level of a multitude of other victims of a barbarous superstition,

and will see in him no more than a moral teacher whom the fortunate

accident of his execution invested with the crown, not merely of a

martyr, but of a god. The divergence between these views is wide

and deep. Which of them is the truer and will in the end prevail?

Time will decide the question of prevalence, if not of truth. Yet

we would fain believe that in this and in all things the old maxim

will hold good--_Magna est veritas et prævalebit_."

The sceptics of the last Victorian decade left school as agnostics;

of their number, the more reflective set themselves to fill the

vacuum. As a boy, with a prospect of life too long to measure,

has an equal distaste for the sentimentality of heaven and for

the melodrama of hell, he probably concerned himself little with

the condition that he could only attain eternal life by believing

in the divinity of Christ. Scepticism may have forced him to

doubt whether eternity was intelligible and to be certain that it

was undesirable; but his knowledge of history and his taste for

speculative enquiry suggested that eternity in another existence

might be less important than the conditions on which his present

existence was carried on: the ethics of Christianity were more

valuable, in his eyes, than its dogma.

It is here that the reconstruction commonly began, with the

question: "If there be no God, no eternal life, no reward for

virtue, nor punishment for evil, why should any one strive after

godliness? The policeman, indeed, watches for a breach of the

civil law, but only a fool would clothe the naked or feed the

hungry without thought of reward. Hitherto this was said to be

'right', 'charitable', 'kind'; but why _should_ any one be kind or

charitable?"

The answer of history was that every member of every community

gained in security and comfort by the comfort and security of the

community and that none was tolerable in which fear and injustice,

want and cruelty were permitted; in his own interest every man must

strive to eradicate them, for the other members were his daily

neighbours. Side by side with the teaching of the biologists, who

destroyed with their theory of evolution the belief in a special

creation, there came into the common stock of ideas the teaching

of the utilitarians, who offered a new criterion for private and

public conduct. While Christian dogma might be an obsolete shortcut

to an eternity which few desired and fewer still could contemplate,

Christian ethics remained the noblest and gentlest counsel to

perfection. At length reconstruction found itself back at the

injunction that a man should love his neighbour as himself.

Each with his own formula, the young agnostics of the last

generation worked by discussion, reading and reflection to a new

imperative; and those who found satisfaction in Christian ethics

as a guide to conduct found also that the Christianity which they

had fashioned for themselves was a militant faith. Injustice and

fear, suffering and cruelty are not to be eradicated by private

renunciations and protests; those who care enough for beauty to

wish the world beautiful have to make the world beautiful. And the

machine in which the form of the world is changed seemed in those

days to be politics.[4]

Vast as had been the progress of recorded history, vaster progress

remained to be accomplished if civilisation was not to be judged an

hypocrisy or a failure; and, though the saddest limitation of youth

be its utter misunderstanding of the obstacles in the way of any

change, its most glorious endowment is surely its impulsive desire

to realise its ideals. Impatient of muddle, intolerant of laziness,

sensitive to beauty and fiercely sympathetic with suffering, youth

glances with disgust at the meanness and squalor that desecrate

every part of its world and offers the generous ardour of a

world-builder to set it right. Childhood with its wooden blocks and

sand-castles, boyhood with its tools and engines, youth with its

instruments and diagrams are the constructive times of life: there

is little that lusty youth will not make, nothing that impatient

youth is afraid to reform; its heroes are the great conquerors

and builders who tidied some corner of a dilapidated world, the

explorers who sought new worlds to tidy, even the prophets and

lawyers who tried to bring uniformity into religion and society.

In a thousand hours of meditation or wrangling the boys of that

generation hammered out each his own formula of political change.

The ethics of private property and communism, of war and peace,

of equal democracy and paternal despotism, of the national ideal

and the ideal of internationalism were argued at school from the

standpoint which had been taken up at home and at home from a

standpoint which had been startlingly occupied at school. Whatever

had been the inherited preconceptions, every political doctrine

was now required to justify itself: the party which had enjoyed

almost unbroken tenure of office for nearly a fifth of a century

fell from power in 1905, to be succeeded by one which brought up

for settlement or readjustment all the old problems of domestic

controversy and many that were new.

IV

It is easy to guess the political path chosen by an Irish boy

brought up in England and sent to a tory stronghold by a father

who had reared him on the pure milk of late-Victorian radicalism;

it is not difficult to imagine what lions beset that path. The

way of the minority politician in a public school is hard but

stimulating: while the Boer war continued, any doubts of British

wisdom or justice in South Africa were ill-received and answered by

violence; for two years more, since free trade had been abandoned

by Mr. Chamberlain, a solitary free-trader would be beaten to

his knees by phrases about dying industries, dumping and unfair

competition; and, all the while, there was little chance of

agreement between those who would have solved the Irish difficulty

by holding Ireland under the sea for five minutes and any one who

was never able to forget the sailing of crowded emigrant ships from

Queenstown and the keening which rose to Heaven in acknowledgment

of British rule.

Only in the dignified atmosphere of the Debating Society, when a

general election had sent hundreds of radicals to Parliament and

proved that radicals existed, in hundreds of thousands, outside

it, did radical policy get a hearing. Political interest revived

sharply in 1905 and 1906: more than ever did the rising politicians

use their privilege of attending debates in the House of Commons.

It has been said that politics are made tolerable in England by

the fact that hardly any one takes them seriously except the

politicians, who are for the most part not English; but they are

dangerous food for the young in the expectations that they arouse

and in the disillusionment that they entail. After nearly twenty

years of tory rule, the liberals in 1905 were healed of their long

domestic dissensions and assured of a majority; the ministry so

judiciously chosen by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman was overwhelming

in its varied strength; with the pacification of South Africa

and the repatriation of the indentured Chinese labourers, the

dark infamy of the Boer war and of a calamitous plunge into Rand

politics were to be forgotten; social reform was sketched with a

bold hand; a message of peace and good-will was sent to the other

powers.

So vast was the ministerial majority after the election of 1906

that a liberal prime minister, for the first time since 1880,

seemed able to fulfil his promises without having to balance the

claims of ill-assorted groups or to consider the vague menace of

the House of Lords; the ambitions of the Liberal League had been

defeated, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman had survived the efforts

of his more spirited colleagues to kick him upstairs. In 1906,

for those who cared to see the world beautiful and would spend

their ardour to make it beautiful, there was still a sufficient

part of the population illiterate, hungry and diseased, rendered

miserable by fear and savage by injustice to keep the social

reformers employed; Ireland, Egypt and India all demanded a change

of administrative system. Those were days in which it seemed good

to be a liberal.

V

It would have been a meagre tribute to the spell of Westminster

if some of those who, in passing out of Abbey on that last Sunday

of Election Term, passed also out of their pupilage, did not look

forward from the threshold of manhood in a spirit of dedication; it

would have been an admission of dubious gratitude if, in bidding

farewell that afternoon under the trees of College Garden, they

had not confessed their debt to the school. In six years some few

of them had developed into fair scholars along lines of education

which had not then been so bitterly attacked as they have been

since: no one, indeed, aimed to make them proficient in preparing a

manifest and detecting an escape of sewer gas; in their curriculum

the financial possibilities of Spanish and Russian were ignored,

like all other adjuncts to a sound commercial training; and, though

the art of Asia and the letters of Ethiopia have since been urged

as an alternative to Greek and Latin, they stuck insularly to the

literature and history of the civilisation from which all the great

modern civilisations of Europe derive. Those who cared to work

contrived to cover a wide field even in that English literature

which is popularly thought to be excluded from public-school study;

for the rest, it should be recognised that a point is quickly

reached at which those who do not wish to work can no longer be

compelled. At the lowest computation, all had received at least a

grounding in the humanities and an equipment for profounder study

of subjects that by pressure of time could not be exhausted at

school.

In addition, they were for five or six years disciplined to a

system, yielding obedience as unquestioningly as afterwards they

exacted it.

"This we learned from famous men,

Knowing not its uses,

When they showed, in daily work,

Man must finish off his work--

Right or wrong, his daily work--

And without excuses....

This we learned from famous men

Teaching in our borders,

Who declared it was best,

Safest, easiest, and best--

Expeditious, wise and best--

To obey your orders.

Some beneath the further stars

Bear the greater burden:

Set to serve the lands they rule,

(Save he serve no man may rule),

Serve and love the lands they rule;

Seeking praise nor guerdon...."

They learned initiative and responsibility; they were trained to

subordinate the individual to the community; and they acquired

a code which at its worst was limited and foolish, at its best

exalted and honourable. If the panorama of a public school has

its ugly patches, so has the panorama of life; if the prejudices

were many, they were fewer than the prejudices encountered on

leaving school; if the honour was circumscribed, its boundaries

were reached perhaps less quickly than the boundaries of honour

in later life. The convention that there is at best an armed

neutrality between boy and master leads the boy to a diplomatic

economy of truth not always distinguishable from disingenuousness;

in his dealings with seniors, contemporaries and juniors he is

honest, truthful and substantially just. As he is taught to accept

undeserved punishment without complaining, so he learns to avow the

undetected misdeeds by which a fellow might suffer; never to fail

the team, the house, the school or a single friend, always to hide

emotion and to be in hard physical condition may be crude social

ethics, but they are neither unworthy nor fruitless in their effect

on public life. Twenty years ago it would have been unnecessary

to put forward these claims, but the querulous aftermath of the

war has involved the public schools in ill-defined suspicion; yet

the leader of a crusade would find no more ardent, generous and

upright spirits than in old British public-schoolboys of seventeen

to twenty-two; and, before the worldling discharges his gibes at

their honour and their code, he might stay to reflect whether the

administration of empire, as carried out in two hemispheres by the

sons of these long-suffering schools, must yield pride of place,

for integrity and devotion, to the public services of Germany

and France, Italy and Spain, America and Japan, whether, too, the

scandals and treacheries which have broken the monotony of English

public life in the last ten years are due to excess of these

derided qualities or to want of them.

If, on the last Sunday, many lacked the detachment to set out in

detail their debt to Westminster, all could acknowledge their love

and treasure their last moments. Next morning the Major Candidates

were imprisoned in a form-room leading to School and summoned

one by one to stand before a long table for the _viva voce_

examination. There followed the match between the King's Scholars

and the Town Boys. Next morning those who were leaving rose and for

the last time put on dress clothes and a gown for their last day at

Westminster.

After the breaking-up service in the Abbey, they assembled in

School for call-over. The results of Election and the removes were

read out, the prizes distributed, the prize epigrams recited by

their authors and rewarded with one of the silver pennies that

come to Westminster in the distribution of the Maundy. Armed with

a birch ("rod"), one of the School Monitors was despatched down

the gangway between the lower forms to find and escort to the

head master's dais a young offender who paid for his too frequent

presence in penal drill by being publicly flicked across the back

of the hand. Then the Captain and three School Monitors stood up

and in turn were handed the birch which they reversed and gave back

to the head master; as soon as they had been discharged of their

dignity and duties, the new School Monitors were handed the birch

in token of office. At the "_Oremus_" the new Captain knelt facing

the school and read the Latin prayers; with the "_Ire licet_" was

born a new generation of Old Westminsters.

In an interview with the Dean of Christ Church, those who had been

elected to the House were told the day on which they had to present

themselves in Oxford.

While I Remember · 第 1 / 14 章