Henry Campbell-Bannerman Quotes

In general, we, who are in favour of compulsory education, are told that it is impracticable...because it is opposed by the general feeling of Scotland. Now, I can assure the House that that is not the case. As far as my experience goes, I believe our countrymen in the North are far too shrewd to be misled by any fear of the horrors attendant on compulsory education, and the interference which it is supposed to create with the liberty of the subject.

We are not extreme revolutionaries, although we do not shrink from formidable changes... We are not foes of property, but we are anxious to see property more righteously apportioned. If that is effected, property will be safer than it is.

I confess that the thing which concerns me most is to find that Chamberlainism pays with our Country men. They worship a forcible man and a clever man, and if his methods are vulgar, dishonourable, unfair, they only smile and approve. The lowering of the standard of public life is a far worse evil, because more permanent, than toryism, jingoism, or any other heresy; panem et circenses: money spent in the country, flags to wave, bluster to shout for—that is the object: let right and honour and freedom go and be hanged! The commencement de siècle morals, apparently!

Now, everybody was a "pro-Boer" who did not agree to everything Mr. Chamberlain did, and who said "Here is a people fighting gallantly for the independence of their own country; for goodness sake do not attribute every sort of evil to them while you are fighting them; when you have got them down, treat them with the respect and honour that such a people ought to receive—a people who, though they may be mistaken and entirely wrong, are conscientiously fighting for the independence of their own land." For taking this view he was called a pro-Boer. That again was a gross slander and falsehood, and that newspapers and politicians should stoop to a mean artifice of that kind was a scandal and a disgrace to the political life of to-day.

The right hon. gentleman is like the Bourbons. He has learned nothing. He comes back to this new House of Commons with the same airy graces – the same subtle dialectics – and the same light and frivolous way of dealing with great questions. He little knows the temper of the new House of Commons if he thinks those methods will prevail here. The right hon. gentleman has...asked certain questions which he seemed to think were posers. ...I have no direct answer to give to them. They are utterly futile, nonsensical and misleading. They are invented by the right hon. gentleman for the purpose of occupying time in this debate. I say, enough of this foolery. … Move your amendments and let us get to business.

If people should say of me that I tried always to go straight there is perhaps no credit to me in that. It may have been mere indolence. The straight road always seemed to me the easiest.

There would be, in fact, in Scotland, when this Bill received its full development, a purely and entirely denominational system of education. There was only one solution of the difficulty, and that was this—the State should cease to undertake the religious education of children. The Scottish people were, perhaps, more than any other imbued with the spirit of religion; there was no country where religious and moral training was more highly prized... In that country it would, therefore, be perfectly safe to leave religious instruction to voluntary effort... If they had, instead of adopting a course of compromise, adhered to their own principles, and thrown themselves on the loyal support of their own party, they would not only have carried their Bill, but—what was of far more importance—they would have laid down sound lines upon which, by common consent, might have been built a national system of education for each of the three divisions of the kingdom.

If an Imperialist means a man who would maintain at the highest pitch the power by land and sea of the Empire, who would secure perfect safety for these islands from hostile attack, but who is not content to confine his view to these islands; who would preserve the territorial integrity and interests of the Empire; who would guard our rights of trade either within the Empire or beyond its bounds; and who would strengthen by every means in his power the ties that bind us to our kinsmen in every quarter of the globe—if that is to be an Imperialist, then, ladies and gentlemen, there is not a man here, there is not a man in this great Liberal meeting, who is not as unflinching an Imperialist as those who have the word always on their lips. We are not afraid of the responsibilities of Empire, we are proud to be the guardians of the heritage handed down by our fathers, nay, we do not shrink from adding to it if duty or honour compels us; but we abjure the vulgar and bastard Imperialism of irritation, and provocation, and aggression, of clever tricks and manoeuvres against neighbours, and of grabbing everything even if we have no use for it ourselves.

[T]here is and has been this popular feeling in Ireland extending gradually and steadily against our rule; and it is this spirit which constitutes the difficulty of government in Ireland. Let not the House think that it has anything whatever to do with crime and disorder... [N]o strengthening of legal powers, no exercise of law, whether exceptional or ordinary, can operate in check of a growing national feeling such as this. If you try to check it you will probably do nothing but exasperate it and make it stronger. And when, in addition to all this, on looking closely into what the object of this national sentiment is, we find that there is nothing in it mischievous or unreasonable, and that the object it has in view—which is the self-government of Ireland—is one which is in conformity with equity, reason, and common sense, I say we are called upon to go a step further, and, when we find our difficulty arising from this source, we ought to try whether by yielding to the wishes of the Irish people we may not take the shortest way to bring quiet and good government to that country.

There are many who croak that the decadence of the Empire has commenced. I am no believer in anything of that sort. If the glory of this country is founded on foreign aggression, if it is supported by military force, if it be dependent on our power of extorting unwilling allegiance from members of our race in distant quarters of the globe—if all this is to be glory that is to attach to a Christian nation like this—if this is the glory, I rejoice that it is passing away. I am not sneering at all at the past history of our country, I am aware that in the past we have acted according to the spirit of the age and we have shown ourselves equal to any other nation. But let us not revert to that state of things; let us not go back instead of forward. Let us rather show other nations a more excellent way; let us set ourselves to encourage a brotherly, friendly, generous spirit among the nations, and at home let us apply ourselves to the reduction of that jealousy and distrust which at present exist, and to the promotion of a more friendly spirit among all classes; and let us above all attack the tremendous task that we have before us in the conquering of the monster of ignorance and vice which exists amongst us.

Is there any man in the House who would think of sending an Army Corps on the Continent to engage in a Continental war with one of the great European nations? Such a possibility I dismiss from my mind altogether. What we want our Army for is to garrison India and the Colonies, to defend the shores of this country, and to supply those small special expeditions which are from time to time sent out to the small wars, in which, unfortunately, we are often engaged.

I am well aware—no one is better aware—that I am poorly equipped for the duties of that position in comparison with some distinguished men who have gone before me; but there is one thing in which I will yield to none of them—namely, in my devotion to the Liberal party and my faithful adherence to Liberal principles.

I hold that the growth of armaments is a great danger to the peace of the world. A policy of huge armaments keeps alive and stimulates and feeds the belief that force is the best, if not the only, solution of international differences. It is a policy that tends to inflame old sores and to create new sores. And I submit to you that as the principles of peaceful arbitration gains ground it becomes one of the highest tasks of a statesman to adjust those armaments to the newer and happier condition of things. (Cheers.) What nobler role could this great country assume than at the fitting moment to place itself at the head of a league of peace, through whose instrumentality this great work could be effected? (Cheers.)

[T]he concentration of human beings in towns...is contrary to nature, and...this abnormal existence is bound to issue in suffering, deterioration, and gradual destruction to the mass of the population...countless thousands of our fellow-men, and still a larger number of children...are starved of air and space and sunshine. ... This view of city life, which is gradually coming home to the heart and understanding and the conscience of our people, is so terrible that it cannot be put away. What is all our wealth and learning and the fine flower of our civilisation and our Constitution and our political theories – what are all these but dust and ashes, if the men and women, on whose labour the whole social fabric is maintained, are doomed to live and die in darkness and misery in the recesses of our great cities? We may undertake expeditions on behalf of oppressed tribes and races, we may conduct foreign missions, we may sympathise with the cause of unfortunate nationalities; but it is our own people, surely, who have the first claim upon us. ... [T]he air must be purified...the sunshine must be allowed to stream in, the water and the food must be kept pure and unadulterated, the streets light and clean. ... [T]he measure of your success in bringing these things to pass will be the measure of the arresting of the terrible powers of race degeneration which is going on in the countless sunless streets.

For ten years they [the Conservative Party] have been supported by an immense majority in the House of Commons. ... The period over which we are looking back presents itself to me, I confess, as a well-nigh unbroken expanse of mismanagement; of legislation conducted for the benefit of privileged classes and powerful interests; of wars and adventures abroad hastily embarked upon and recklessly pursued. The legacy which they have bequeathed to their successors...is in the main a legacy of embarrassment, an accumulation of public mischief appalling in its extent and ramifications.