THE MODERN GREVILLE
MEMOIRS and reminiscences pour from the Press and are usually disappointing. But the two volumes just produced by the late Clerk to the Privy Council stand in a class apart. They are indeed profoundly interesting and, like Charles Greville's memoirs of his long service in the Privy Council office between 1821 and 1859, will henceforth be regarded as an authentic source for the history of Sir Almeric FitzRoy's own time. The Clerk, of course, has exceptional opporttmi- ties of seeing and hearing how the country is governed. He is not absorbed in the business of any one department, but has to deal with all the departments. In ensuring that executive acts are done in due form he is brought into intimate relations with Ministers and other public men, and learns many secrets. But most holders of the office have kept their knowledge to themselves. Greville has had to wait two generations for a successor as well informed and as communicative as himself. Many critics, we notice, have fastened upon Sir Almeric's indiscretions, and it is not to be denied that there are many ; but to concentrate upon these is to misrepresent the whole book. Sir Almeric has given us full extracts from his diary from 1898 to 1923, which throw much light on the actual working of the Constitution and on the leading political figures of our generation, such as the Duke of Devonshire, Lord Morley, Lord Balfour, Lord Oxford and others. He is as ready with invective for people he disapproves of or dislikes as he is with generous eulogy for those he admires. He has a quick sense of humour and a sound political instinct. Even when he is indiscreet he is never a scandal-monger, and his wide social connexion lends variety to the political
narrative. . •
The late Duke of Devonshire is Sir Almeric's herb. He was private secretary to the Duke before he became Clerk to the Privy Council, and he served under the Duke as Lord President ` for five years. He attempts no formal estimate of the Duke, but in successive scattered entries he builds up such a picture of that remarkable Englishman as can be found nowhere else. Everyone knows of the Duke's utter disregard of con- ventions. He delighted Digraeli by yawning in the middle -of his maiden speech. Sir Almeric was present when the Duke, being asked to explain why the Edbeation Department was to become a Board, " characteristically replied that the point had been carefully considered by-the Government but for the life of him he could not remember the reasons which had weighed with them in adopting a Board, but he could assure their Lordships that they were sufficient.", But the Duke's nonchalance was superficili. Few people realized the intense earnestness with which he studied politicarquestions. " He is never convinced (1901) until he has traced to his own satisfac- tion the ultimate developments of a line of policy and is not content, like most Men, with a general pereelition of it." This was written when the Conservative Cabinet was trying to agree on an Education Bill, and Mr. Chamberlain was threaten- ing to secede if rate-aid were given to voluntary schools. The Duke was indolent by nature. On hearing of a suicide, he asked if the luckless man had had anything to do with the Education Bill. But he set himself, none the less, to master the question and made up his mind in favour of rate-aid. His characteristic qualities were shown at their best in the Tariff Reform controversy of 1903. Until he hid convinced himself that there must be a split in the Cabinet, he did his utmost to maintain unity. On June 16th, 1903, he spoke so adroitly on Mr. Chamberlain's proposals that he pleased their author and also the Free Traders. At the end of July he had come to the conclusion that Mr. Chamberlain's arguments were too flimsy to justify a change of policy. By the middle of Sep- tember he felt that he ought to resign his office, but he hesitated for another fortnight before taking the final plunge.
" With the best intentions towards to mutual understanding, the flexibility of the one is a puzzle to the other," writes the author regarding Mr. (now Lord) Balfour and the Duke at this crisis. Mr. Balfour, he thinks, really wanted to keep the Duke, and the Duke did not want to go but felt that he must uphold his principles. King Edward agreed with him. When Ritchie asked whether he would tam fobd, the King replied : " No, and I do not care who knows it."
The author confirms the impression that a new era began with King Edward, not so much because of his personality, but because there was a general reorganization. Under Lord Salisbury each department went its own way. The Prime Minister made many a bitter jest at the expense of the War Office, for instance, but did not try to reform it. In offering that office to Mr. Brodrick, as he then was, Lord Salisbury said, " I have the Queen's commands to offer you the Secretary- ship of State for War. You are so well aware of the disadvan- tages of the position that I need not enlarge upon them." Sir Almeric's account of King Edward's first Council illustrates the confusion that prevailed. The King addressed his coun- cillors, but no note was taken of what he said. Afterwards it was found that the declaration had to be published in the Gazette. The text had to be made up from what Lord Rosebery and others thought that they remembered of the King's remarks, and this " has now taken its place among State documents of the highest interest and value." Sir Almeric's narrative of the prolonged disputes over the arrangements for King Edward's coronation is another case in point. flints dropped here and there suggest that Mr. Lloyd George would have gladly reverted—and often did revert—to the old casual ways of conducting business, and the author's references to Mr. Asquith's reluctance to assert his authority as Prime Minister in co-ordinating the work of his colleagues tell the same tale.
Sir Almeric's entries relating to the rejection of the Budget by the House of Lords in 1909 are instructive. Lord Lans- downe, the author says, moved the fatal amendment with very grave misgivings. The Court, through Lord Knollys, expressed the view that' the Press had 'gone mad. It is curious to learn that at the end of 1910, atter the second election of that year, Lord Morley, discussing the situation with his philosophic calm, thought that " the Opposition held the stronger cards" because the Government majority was composite and uncertain. When Lord Morley made his famous announcement that the King was prepared to create hundreds of new peers to pass the Parliament Bill, " His Majesty had been much disturbed by the vapourings in Tory circles that the whole thing was a brutum fulmen, meant not for use but to terrify, and had expressly desired that the announcement should be made in the most explicit and authentic terms." Of the Buckingham Palace conference on Ireland just before the War we are told nothing new. Lord Morley talked very freely to Sir Almeric, and there is no doubt much truth in the author's suggestion that Lord Morley left the Cabinet on the eve of war because he hated Russia and regarded the conflict as one of Slav aggression against Teuton. Mr. Burns' reasons are not stated. We could forgive Mr. Burns much in any case for some of the pithy comments here noted. He was asked how the Cabinet was getting on with the draft of Mr. Lloyd George's Budget ; he replied, " Like nineteen ragpickers round a 'cap o' muck." And his prescription for handling the Nationalist allies was simply, " If you tell Redmond to go to 'ell, he'll come to 'eel." That was profoundly true.
Sir Almeric FitzRoy writes well of many people and many places unconnected with polities, but he should not call Camber Castle " a Norman pile " (p. 277) ; it MIS built by Henry the Eighth. Finally, we may say that Sir Almeric's work as chairman of the Inter-Department Committee on Physical Deterioration in 1908 was of lasting value. The Report was the basis and the inspiration of much that has been done since.
Previous page
