The difference of caste no longer exists in England since the time of
the Stuarts and since the Whig oligarchy (in contradistinction to the
Tory county families) allowed the bourgeoisie in the towns to rise in
society. There is greater difference in political opinions on
constitutional or Church questions than on financial or political
questions. Aristocrats who have joined the popular party, Radicals such
as Grey, Churchill, Harcourt, and Crewe, are most hated by the Unionist
aristocracy. None of these gentlemen have I ever met in great
aristocratic houses, only in the houses of party friends.
We were received in London with open arms and both parties outdid one
another in amiability.
It would be a mistake to undervalue social connections in view of the
close connection in England between society and politics, even though
the majority of the upper ten thousand are in opposition to the
Government. Between an Asquith and a Devonshire there is no such deep
cleft as between a Briand and a Duc de Doudeauville, for example. In
times of political tension they do not foregather. They belong to two
separate social groups, but are part of the same society, if on
different levels, the centre of which is the Court. They have friends
and habits in common, they are often related or connected. A phenomenon
like Lloyd George, a man of the people, a small solicitor and a
self-made man, is an exception. Even John Burns, a Socialist Labor
leader and a self-taught man, seeks society relations. On the ground of
a general striving to be considered gentlemen of social weight and
position such men must not be undervalued.
In no place, consequently, is an envoy's social circle of greater
consequence than in England. A hospitable house with friendly guests is
worth more than the profoundest scientific knowledge, and a learned man
of insignificant appearance and too small means would, in spite of all
his learning, acquire no influence. The Briton hates a bore and a
pedant. He loves a good fellow.