1897]

SOUTH AFRICA COMMITTEE

the guilt was with the latter, though he acknowledged that the white-washing of Cecil Rhodes by Mr. Chamberlain in the House of Commons formed a very unsatisfactory feature."

Two diary extracts may here be given :

1897, July 13. Finished report-so ends a matter which has, so far as Parliament goes, mainly occupied my thoughts during eight or nine months. I am well satisfied with the result.

July 26. A weary debate though struck with the personal kindness of those who differed strongly from my action on S.A. Committee. Harcourt good. Hicks-Beach very fine.

In regard to the future administration of the territories Ellis said to his constituents: "His view of the question was not determined by the side of the House on which he sat. In 1893, when Mr. Gladstone was in power, he lifted up his voice against the Matabele country being raided by Cecil Rhodes. What was now before them was the like endeavour to secure the prevalence of the principles of humanity and justice, as between man and man, of whatever race and colour. He held strongly that it was better for the good government of South Africa to pass on to the wisest arrangement for the future there than to waste time and patience in tracking the unseen diplomacies of Cecil Rhodes into their hiding places."

From the position here indicated he never swerved. In a letter of his dated November 7, 1897, the sentence occurs: "I feel quite satisfied that as time goes on and the merely sensational incidents fade away the work of that Committee will have its effect for good."

The following letter from Sir William Harcourt may

fitly close this episode:

Dear J. Ellis,

Malwood, Lyndhurst,

22nd October, '97.

I have read with much satisfaction your able exposition and defence of our much-abused Committee. Like yourself I have a perfectly easy conscience in the matter. I think we accomplished all that was possible in getting a unanimous and uncompromising condemnation of Rhodes.

If we had attempted anything more we should certainly have failed, and given Rhodes a Parliamentary triumph. It has been very difficult to drum into the stupid heads of some people that the telegrams could not have been obtained without the sacrifice of the Report.

Of course the Rhodesites and the personal enemies of Chamberlain were most anxious to drag us into this false scent. I must thank you very cordially for the manner in which you referred to my share in the business.

The mischief that has arisen has been mainly due to the wanton declaration of Chamberlain, that he found nothing dishonourable in the conduct of Rhodes.

When I come to speak on the subject I shall characterise this conduct of Chamberlain in the manner I think it deserves.

I am much amused at the wrath your speech has kindled in the Rhodesite Press, they feel that your shot has hit the mark.

I hope you have been of this week as we have done in our Forest.

enjoying the summer weather

Yours sincerely,

W. V. HARCOURT.

CHAPTER IX

INTERLUDES

SIR JOHN GORST's Education Bill (1896), which was intended to decentralise the administration of school grants by the Education Department and throw upon the County Councils the duty of administering the Parliamentary grant, excited much controversy. The proposal to give local aid to voluntary schools without giving at the same time "popular" control provoked strong opposition. A Nonconformist manifesto was issued against the Bill, which was finally withdrawn after no fewer than 1,238 amendments had been proposed. On the second reading, Ellis said :-" For himself he valued the representative principle so much that he would willingly exchange it for the CowperTemple clause, that is, if people of England and Wales were given the right of electing the members of the governing bodies of Voluntary Schools as well as Board Schools. . . He held that our standard of right and wrong was and must be based upon religion. He was satisfied from experience that if this subject was only approached with a spirit of our common Christianity underlying the proceedings and the matter was left to the good sense of the teachers, the religious difficulty need not exist. He was for much less inspec

tion, for a great simplification of the code, and for decentralisation in these matters. But he did not find this in the Bill, and he should go into the lobby against it."

From the strife of Parliament it is a relief to turn to his memoranda of two visits which he greatly enjoyed.

Of the first he says:

Travelled with Bishop Davidson1 down to Farnham. He began to talk about the House of Lords and its influence (or want of it) for good, and also of the change taking place in the matter of Sunday observance. Found the Bishop of Rochester 2 and Mrs. Talbot (a Lyttelton) there, also a brother of the Bishop and his wife. A wonderful place altogether, the fabric dating from Henri de Blois (brother of Stephen) and bearing marks of almost every generation, certainly of every century since. A great, wandering place of all sorts of architecture and all kinds of material with miles of passages. Bishop Morley's Tower (entrance) and the old keep, forty yards across, now turned into a beautiful garden. The great terrace with its rosecovered wall overlooks the town and district. English, stately, and yet home-like. The Park with its herd of fallow deer extremely beautiful, owing much to some magnificent trees planted by Bishop North (brother of Lord North) about 1760. Mrs. D. took M. and me up to the keep, a most glorious prospect, before dinner. This was in the great hall where sat Queens Mary and Elizabeth and Kings James and Charles. Now and again the talk became general. The ladies gone, the Bishops of Winchester and Rochester discussed Quakers. Bishop Talbot having been at Leeds, knew the Jowetts, Fords, and others. In the drawing-room we chatted of many things, religious and political, the latter chiefly,

1 Now Archbishop of Canterbury.

2 Dr. Talbot, now Bishop of Winchester.

1897]

CAMBRIDGE UNION

the Education Bill of the Government being in its

crisis.

.

Sunday, 21st. Longest day 1896. To Church. Parish Rector, Sumptington (his mother a Vaughan of Leicester), sermon on Church and State, very good in first part, then wandered from subject. I walked back with Mrs. Davidson through hop gardens, talked of the Communion Service at which M. and I had been present in the private chapel this morning. After lunch, the Bishop took me into his study with the Bishop of Rochester, and we discussed the Education Bill very frankly. It was pleasant to find after all on how much we could agree. Then a walk in the park with the Bishop of Winchester with much talk on forestry, deer (he is a stalker), the "unseen and its influence on public men, the Queen and Royal family. In the evening a charming stroll through the park with M. After supper more talk with the Bishop about various Bishops of Winchester. Up the keep with M., Mrs. Davidson, and her brother-in-law in moonlight, wonderful.

This was soon followed by a "delightful" visit to Dr. Hodgkin and his family at Bamborough.-“ On Sunday morning a Bible class on the sand dunes, in afternoon a very remarkable sermon from a market gardener in the Castle."

In the following year (1897) he was invited to attend the Cambridge Union and to open a discussion on the opium trade. At that time no popular breeze filled the sails of the would-be suppressors of the traffic. He represented himself in his address as a man of action. rather than of speech. His note of the occasion runs:"1897. 1897. Mar. 9th. . . A fine audience of undergraduates and others who gave reception and a hearty cheer at the end. heavy day but one to be thankful for.

me a warm Altogether a The result of