when birmingham was a town it had a national reputation for liberalism. at present i prefer to call myself a "townsman" rather than a "citizen." the old pride of owning to being a birmingham man is merged into the admission of being born in warwickshire. some of the political scenes in its town days may be instructive to its present-day citizens.
the famous birmingham political union of 1832 was "hung up like a clean gun" on g. f. muntz's suggestion and never taken down. many years later a new union was projected. mr. joseph chamberlain was in the chair. i was on the platform, and the only person present who was a member of the former union. i had no opportunity of speaking—nor indeed had anybody, save movers and seconders of motions. there was nothing radical about the proceedings. nobody's opinion was asked. no opportunity of discussion was given. the meeting was a mere instrument for registering the business of the chair. the impression that afternoon made upon me has never left me. nothing afterwards surprised me in the performances of the "quick-change artiste" of the parliamentary music-hall.
mr. john morley wrote an article in the fortnightly on mr. chamberlain, which first gave him a position before the public. not even in birmingham could any one see adequate justification for it. but mr. morley proved right, and had discerned a capacity which had not then unfolded itself.
about that time mr. chamberlain made some remark on mr. disraeli in the birmingham town council, which did not amount to much. mr. disraeli did the municipal speaker the honour to call him to account. had any one in like case called mr. disraeli to account he would have said in his airy and evasive way: "every public speaker is liable to the misconstruction of unheeding and ill-hearing reporters, and he could not be expected to answer for them." mr. chamberlain gave no sign of any such adroitness which was ready to his hand, but wrote what read like an abject apology. he did not dare to say to mr. disraeli "what i have said i have said."
mr. jesse collings was one of the minor merchants of birmingham. he came originally from exeter, and was held in great respect for his earnest liberalism, and for promoting the education of the people—though he was himself a sectarian pure and simple, with little, if any, secularity in him. when he came to be mayor, the tories of birmingham—who had not then and never had any man of mark or genius among them—were capable of outrage. it was the only art they knew. when mr. collings presided one day at a public meeting in the town hall, they drew an ass's head on a large sheet of pasteboard, and hung it over the clock in front of the chair labelled—the "portrait of the mayor." for two hours they made all business impossible by shouting "mr. mayor, look at your portrait." at length the mayor took courage and ordered the chief constable—major bond—to remove the picture placard and the ringleader of the disturbance. this was construed as an insult, which mr. kynersley, the principal tory magistrate, supported. i was one who urged mr. collings to apply to the bench for a case, that it might be determined in the higher courts whether a mayor had legal power to preserve order at a public meeting. the case was refused by mr. kynersley. this was the treatment of the right honourable jesse collings for being a liberal. is there a stranger sight in england than seeing this liberal mayor dressed in tory livery, fetching and carrying in parliament for the intolerant party which treated him with such ostentatious indignity? what must be his sense of humiliation under his new convictions? equally tragic and unforeseen must be the humiliation of the tory party in parliament who used to boast of their pride, their dignity, and self-respect at having to accept as a leader the great "caucus-monger," as they called mr. chamberlain, who was the object of their epithets and hatred during so many sessions. the tragedy of political convictions can no further go. far be it from me to deny that mr. collings and mr. chamberlain have not honest reasons for their strange professions, though i do not understand them. like gravitation, i admit the fact, though its cause is inscrutable. in politics motives are as though they were not. they cannot be taken into account. if alleged, they admit of no proof. resentment rages among the partisans of the accused and the tendency of their principles, which it is alone instructive to discuss, is lost sight of. it is common for partisans to disparage those who have left their ranks—forgetting that conviction depends upon evidence. those who leave a party may be as honest as those who remain. whoever has rendered aid to liberty and gone over to the other side should be honoured for what he has done. he who has once stood upon the side of humanity deserves more respectful treatment than he who never took the part of the right. mr. collings and mr. chamberlain rendered important service to the cause of public progress, and their abandonment of it was a loss. for the rest, the career of joseph chamberlain, like that of joseph cowen, has its explanation in the passion for paramountcy.
