Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-nf276 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-24T19:52:18.962Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The “Diehards” and the Myth of the “Backwoodsmen”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2014

Gregory D. Phillips
Gregory D. Phillips*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The term “backwoodsmen” originated in the rhetoric of an embattled Liberal Government intent on discrediting an overwhelmingly Unionist House of Lords during the struggle over the “People's Budget” of 1909. The description applied to those peers, supposedly the great majority of the Upper Chamber, who almost never attended debates and had nothing to do with national affairs. The “diehards”, the 112 temporal peers who voted against the Parliament Bill of 1911, have been characterized by both their contemporaries and later historians as conforming to the “backwoodsmen” stereotype. This politically motivated description of the “diehards” has been accepted as substantially accurate since it was first formulated. It is a prime example of a received historical “truth” repeated by many historians, but left uninvestigated.

Like other clichés used by historians, this characterization of the diehards as “backwoodsmen” has hindered the effort to understand the politics and society of the period in question. As Lord Willoughby de Broke, a prominent diehard, stated in his autobiography, the result of contemporary and later comment has been that “backwoodsmen” have “occupied a special niche in the public vision. They were presented as being a rare and rudimentary species of the human race.” The study of the diehards, believed to be composed of members of this odd species, has been perfunctory at best. For if the group is thought to be almost completely divorced from national politics and affairs, perhaps by its own choice, and if it is further thought to behave either simply in terms of landed reaction or as the willing tool of the Unionist leadership, further analysis would seem to be both unnecessary and unproductive for the understanding of modern British society.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , Spring 1977 , pp. 105 - 120
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. The diehards, the 112 peers who voted against the Parliament Bill of 1911, were as follows: 7th Earl of Abingdon, 5th Baron Abinger, 4th Earl Amherst, 2nd Baron Ampthill, 3rd Baron Ashtown, Baron Atkinson (Life Peer), 4th Baron Bagot, 9th Viscount Barrington, 7th Earl Bathurst, 11th Duke of Bedford, 3rd Baron Brabourne, 4th Marquess of Bristol, 4th Marquess of Bute, 4th Earl Cathcart, 1st Viscount Churchill, 2nd Marquess of Clanricarde, 5th Earl Clanwilliam, 5th Earl of Clarendon, 9th Baron Clifford of Chudleigh, 4th Baron Clonbrock, 3rd Baron Colchester, 4th Viscount Combermere, 9th Earl of Coventry, 26th Earl of Crawford and Balcarres, 4th Baron DeFreyne, 9th Earl of Denbigh, 3rd Baron Deramore, 14th Earl of Devon, 10th Baron Digby, 7th Baron Dynevor, 2nd Baron Ebury, 4th Earl of Erne, 20th Earl of Erroll, 12th Viscount Falkland, 11th Baron Farnham, 11th Earl of Fingall, 7th Earl Fitzwilliam, 5th Baron Forester, 15th Viscount Gormanston, 2nd Viscount Halifax, 1st Earl of Halsbury, 8th Earl of Hardwicke, 3rd Baron Harlech, 2nd Baron Holmpatrick, 5th Viscount Hood, 1st Baron Hothfield, 6th Baron Kensington, 2nd Baron Kesteven, 5th Baron Kilmaine, 13th Earl of Kinnoul, 13th Earl of Lauderdale, 3rd Baron Leconfield, 10th Duke of Leeds, Baron Leith of Fyvie, 5th Earl of Leitrim, 4th Earl of Limerick, Viscount Llandaff, 2nd Earl of Londesborough, 11th Earl of Loudoun, 16th Baron Lovat, 3rd Earl of Lovelace, 5th Earl of Malmesbury, 27th Earl of Mar, 9th Duke of Marlborough, 6th Baron Massy, 12th Earl of Meath, 1st Baron Merthyr, Viscount Milner, 3rd Baron Monkswell, 4th Earl of Morley, 24th Baron Mowbray, Segrave, and Stourton, 4th Baron Muskerry, 7th Duke of Newcastle, 15th Duke of Norfolk, Baron Northcote, 10th Earl of Northesk, 7th Duke of Northumberland, 1st Earl of Plymouth, 6th Earl of Portsmouth, 6th Earl of Radnor, 3rd Baron Raglan, 5th Earl of Ranfurly, 3rd Baron Rayleigh, Earl Roberts, 2nd Baron Rosmead, 5th Earl of Rosslyn, 19th Earl of Rothes, 2nd Baron St. Levan, 4th Marquess of Salisbury, 18th Baron Saltoun, 5th Baron Sandys, 10th Earl of Scarbrough, 2nd Earl of Selborne, 18th Baron Sempill, 20th Earl of Shrewsbury and Talbot, 15th Baron Sinclair, 15th Duke of Somerset, 3rd Earl Sondes, 4th Baron Southampton, 7th Earl Stanhope, Baron Stanmore, 14th Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorne, 4th Viscount Templetown, 3rd Baron Tollemache, 7th Baron Vaux of Harrowden, 4th Baron Vivian, 9th Earl Waldegrave, 2nd Duke of Westminster, 7th Earl of Wicklow, 19th Baron Willoughby de Broke, 16th Marquess of Winchester, 6th Baron Wynford. The Bishops of Bangor and Worcester also voted against the Bill.

2. Verney, Richard Greville, Lordde Broke, Willoughby, The Passing Years (London, 1924), p. 256Google Scholar.

3. Parliamentary debates, Lords, 5 Hansard 5: 442 (21 March 1910)Google Scholar.

4. Ibid., 5 Hansard 8: 649 (22 May 1911).

5. Jones, Harry, Liberalism and the House of Lords (London, 1912), pp. 151–52Google Scholar.

6. Winterton, Earl, Pre-War (London, 1932), p. 177Google Scholar.

7. Dangerfield, George, The Strange Death of Liberal England (New York, 1935), pp. 22, 42, 43Google Scholar.

8. Charlotte, Viscountess BarringtonThrough Eighty Years (1855-1935) (London, 1936), p. 171Google Scholar.

9. Webb, R. K., Modern England (New York, 1971), p. 460Google Scholar.

10. Jenkins, Roy, Mr. Balfour's Poodle (London, 1954), p. 171Google Scholar.

11. Ibid., p. 179.

12. Parliamentary debates, Lords, 5 Hansard 8: 408 (15 May 1911)Google Scholar.

13. Temporal Peers: Return to an Order of the House of Lords, in House of Lords Sessional Papers, 1910 (13), 143Google Scholar.

14. Attendance statistics for the diehards were obtained from the daily attendance lists included in the Journals of the House of Lords (hereafter, J.H.L.) for 1902 and 1906. The diehard figures for 1909 were compiled from a detailed attendance list prepared for the Earl of Onslow: Guildford Muniment Room, Memorandum marked “Confidential”, April 27, 1910, Onslow Archive, 173/19/33.

Attendance statistics for the whole House of Lords were taken from Temporal Peers, in House of Lords Sessional Papers, 1910 (13.), 143Google Scholar. The eligibility of peers to sit in the House of Lords was determined by reference to Burke's Peerage and Baronetage (London, 1911)Google Scholar. Figures for both the diehards and the whole House include minors and those away due to illness or official business, but they exclude those who had no title, had not yet succeeded to a title, or had not been elected to a representative peerage that would hold in 1911.

Table I. FREQUENCY OF ATTENDANCE IN HOUSE OF LORDS

15. The random sample was selected from all peers eligible to sit in the House of Lords in 1911. Every fourth peer listed in Burke's Peerage and Baronetage for 1911 was chosen,, excluding diehards and those ineligible to sit in 1911. If a peer selected for the study was unavoidably absent or ineligible to sit in any or all of the years included in the study, those years were excluded from the computation of his personal average annual attendance. Ten of the peers in the random sample were unable to sit during the years studied.

16. Raw data obtained from daily attendance lists in the J.H.L. for 1902, 1904, 1906, 1908.

17. The mean was calculated by totalling the personal average annual attendance figures for the peers in the sample group and in the diehard group and then dividing each total by the number of peers in each group eligible to sit during at least one of the four years studied.

18. Jenkins, , Poodle, p. 171Google Scholar.

19. Amherst, Brabourne, Dynevor, Hardwicke, and Monkswell succeeded to their titles during 1909-11. Farnham, Kilmaine, and Sempill became Representative Peers during these years. Merthyr was granted a title in 1911.

20. Rhys, Walter Fitz-Uryan, LordDynevor, , My Reminiscences (Carmarthen, 1937), p. 47Google Scholar.

21. Statistics obtained from lists of the membership of individual committees in the J.H.L. for 1902, 1904, 1906, 1908.

22. Bromhead, P. A., The House of Lords and Contemporary Politics, 1911-1957 (London, 1958), pp. 34–35Google Scholar.

23. Raw data obtained from indexes to Parliamentary Debates, Lords, 5 Hansard: (1911-13).

24. Ibid., Lords, 5 Hansard 8: 562 (17 May 1911).

25. Times, June 11, 1929.

26. Debrett's Peerage, Baronetage, Knightage and Companionage (London, 1912), pp. 973–94Google Scholar. Diehard Privy Councillors included Atkinson, Clarendon, Clonbrock, Coventry, Erne, Fingall, Halsbury, Llandaff, Marlborough, Meath, Milner, Norfolk, Northumberland, Plymouth, Ranfurly, Rayleigh, Roberts, Salisbury, Selborne, and Waldegrave.

27. See PRO, Northcote Papers, 30/56/1, and University of Birmingham, Joseph Chamberlain Papers.

28. Bodleian Library, Copy of letter from Sir H. S. Northcote (later Baron Northcote) to the 2nd Earl of Selborne, Jan. 10, 1902, Selborne Papers, 197/62.

29. Lockhart, J. G., Charles Lindley Viscount Halifax, Part One, 1839-1885 (London, 1935), p. 173Google Scholar.

30. Christ Church Library, Oxford, 15th Duke of Norfolk to 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, 1889, Papers of the 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, Class E.

31. See Reginald Brabazon, 12th Earl of Meath, Memories of the Nineteenth Century (London, 1923)Google Scholar. See also his Memories of the Twentieth Century (London, 1924)Google Scholar, and The Diaries of Mary Countess of Meath (London, 1928–1929)Google Scholar.

32. See SirLindley, Francis, Lord Lovat (London, 1935)Google Scholar.

33. Former M.P.'s among the diehards included Atkinson, Bristol, Clanicarde, Clarendon, Crawford and Balcarres, Digby, Dynevor, Ebury, Erne, Fitzwilliam, Forester, Halsbury, Harlech, Leeds, Llandaff, Northcote, Northumberland, Portsmouth, Radnor, Salisbury, Selborne, Stanmore, and Willoughby de Broke.

34. Clonbrock, Colchester, Dynevor, Malmesbury, Radnor, Ampthill, and Leeds had been private secretaries.

35. Dynevor, , Reminiscences, p. 23Google Scholar.

36. Clarendon, Coventry, Denbigh, Enroll, Churchill, Ranfurly, Norfolk, Bagot, and Leeds held court offices.

37. Ashtown, Farnham, Kilmaine, Massy, Muskerry, Templetown, and Wicklow were Representative Peers of Ireland.

38. Bateman, John, The Great Landowners of Great Britain and Ireland (4th ed.; London, 1883)Google Scholar. Clanricarde, Clonbrock, Erne, DeFreyne, Farnham, Gormanston, Holmpatrick, Kilmaine, Leitrim, Limerick, Massy, Muskerry, Ranfurly, Templetown, Vaux of Harrowden, and Wicklow held virtually all their land in Ireland. A total of sixty peers eligible to sit in the Lords in 1911 owned land only in Ireland.

39. Times, September 11, 1913. Parliamentary Debates, Commons, 4 Hansard 101: 708–09 (23 Jan. 1902)Google Scholar.

40. Curtis, L. P. Jr., Coercion and Conciliation in Ireland (Princeton, 1963), pp. 134, 256–58Google Scholar.

41. Harbinson, John F., The Ulster Unionist Party, 1882-1973 (Belfast, 1973), pp. 19, 24Google Scholar.

42. Buckland, Patrick, Irish Unionism; II, Ulster Unionism and the Origins of Northern Ireland, 1886-1922 (Dublin, 1973), 9, 16Google Scholar.

43. Times, March 25, 1946. Parliamentary Debates, Commons, 4 Hansard 180: 1616 (15 Aug. 1907)Google Scholar, and 181: 478 (20 Aug. 1907).

44. Estates Gazette, October 3, 1908.

45. Earl of Dunraven, Past Times and Pastimes (London, 1922), II, 9Google Scholar.

46. Christ Church Library, Oxford, 5th Earl of Ranfurly to 3rd Marquess of Salisbury, Jan. 30, 1893, Salisbury Papers, Class E.

47. Elizabeth, Countess of Fingall, Seventy Years Young, Memories (London, 1937), p. 150Google Scholar.

48. Times, March 14, 1932.

49. Stewart, A. T. Q., The Ulster Crisis (London, 1967), pp. 93, 103Google Scholar.

50. The National Union of Conservative and Constitutional Associations Annual Conference Program, 1911.

51. Amery, Julian, Joseph Chamberlain and the Tariff Reform Campaign, The Life of Joseph Chamberlain, Volume Six, 1903-1968 (London, 1969), 579–90Google Scholar.

52. Liberal Unionist Association, Memoranda, New Series, Vol. VI, No. 3 (March, 1909), 98Google Scholar.

53. See Strutt, Robert John, 4th Baron Rayleigh, Life of John William Strutt, Third Baron Rayleigh (London, 1924)Google Scholar.

54. See uncatalogired Papers of the 7th Earl and Countess Bathurst, Cirencester Park, Cirencester.

55. See Harrison, Michael, Lord of London (London, 1966)Google Scholar, and Huxley, Gervas, Victorian Duke, The Life of Hugh Lupus Grosvenor, First Duke of Westminster (London, 1967)Google Scholar.