Mostrando 4259 resultados

(Mechanical copy of a typed original.)

Extract

EVELYN SHARP
by The Rt. Hon. Lord Pethick-Lawrence of Peaslake

Evelyn Sharp was a valiant suffragette, and a most lovable friend. She had great talents and devoted all of them to the woman’s movement willingly and without stint.

She was one of a distinguished family. Her brother, Cecil, will live in history as the compiler of old English songs and folk dances which he collected from remote parts of England and America. Another brother was head of the London Fire Brigade and originated the particular bell which the fire engines ring to clear the streets. She herself before the outbreak of the militant movement was a journalist and an author of children’s stories. She had an instinctive insight into a child’s mind and her books attained great popularity among the young.

Much of this work she had to abandon as she threw herself more and more into the activities of the votes-for-women cause. She spoke at meetings, she wrote articles for the press, she took part in illegal militancy, suffered imprisonment, and underwent the hunger strike. She never lost her sense of humour, she never became bitter, she never forsook her innate humility.

I well remember the occasion when in 1912 I called on her to make what I suppose was the greatest sacrifice of all for the cause—the abandonment of all her outside work in order to devote her whole time to editing the weekly organ—Votes for Women. I had long foreseen that one day I myself as editor of the paper might be arrested and I had turned over in my mind to whom I could entrust the position during my imprisonment. I could think of no one who could fill it half so well as Evelyn. But I realised that if I approached her before my arrest she was likely to offer all sorts of objections and I decided to wait until the event occurred when I felt sure her loyalty and devotion would sweep all hesitation aside.

But I had not counted upon my arrest being made late in the evening with the instruction my wife and me to prepare ourselves for immediate departure to the police station. The paper was only 24 hours away from going to the press. How was I going to communicate with Evelyn in time? At that moment our front door bell rang. A visitor was announced—Miss Evelyn Sharp! For no particular reason she had selected that evening for coming to see my wife and myself! We were allowed a few minutes’ conversation with her. I put my request. She accepted the onerous responsibility without demur.

Through the troublous months and years that followed until the vote was won she remained at her post either alone or in association with myself and my wife; and in her expert and courageous hands the continuity of the paper and its policy was maintained with dignity and determination.

The friendship between us was sealed by this sacrifice and we were fortunate in finding ourselves in agreement regarding many of the world issues which arose after the women’s victory was won. I was particularly pleased that she was able to make a second literary reputation. Her articles in the press had a pungency all her own without a trace of malice. Among her noteworthy books were a biography of Hertha Ayrton, “The London Child”, “The Child Grown Up” and an autobiography—“Unfinished Adventure”. She also wrote the libretto for Vaughan Williams’ musical comedy “The Poisoned Kiss”. It was an added happiness to my wife and myself when in 1933 she married our old friend Henry Nevinson.

As she passed into the eighties she came to need the care and attention which only a nursing home can provide and I frequently gave myself the pleasure of visiting her there. On these occasions, up till a little while before she died her face would light up with interest as we shared some reminiscence of the suffrage days.

Pethick Lawrence.

27 Stanley Gardens, London, W.11.—Her late aunt (Evelyn Sharp) wished Pethick-Lawrence to have one or two of her books, and, by an error, some have already been delivered to him. Asks if he would like any others.

23 Young Street, Kensington High Street, London, W.8.—They enclose a copy of H. W. Nevinson’s will (3/49), of which he is an executor, and ask him to confirm that he will act in connection with the estate.

(Carbon copy of a typed original.)

Office of the Leader of the Opposition, House of Representatives, Wellington, New Zealand.—Thanks him for his letter, and praises the address he gave at Lady Pethick-Lawrence's cremation.

28 Minster Road, Oxford.—Is researching the decade before the First World War, and wishes to contact the literary executors of Henry W. Nevinson.

28 Minster Road, Oxford.—Thanks him for answering his inquiry about the literary executors of Henry Nevinson (see 3/52-3).

Henry Nevinson’s literary executor, his widow Evelyn, is deceased, so he will contact her relatives in connection with Dorey’s inquiry (3/50).

The person who should be contacted about the literary rights of Henry Nevinson’s will is Miss Joan Sharp.

The New York Herald Tribune, Bush House, Aldwych, London, W.C.2.—Asks him to write an article on Anglo-American relationships, with particular reference to such gatherings as the forthcoming meeting of the Inter-Parliamentary Union at Washington.

The New York Herald Tribune, Bush House, Aldwych, London, W.C.2.—Asks to have Pethick-Lawrence’s article (see 3/58) by 11 Sept. It should be between 1,000 and 1,500 words.

The New York Herald Tribune, Bush House, Aldwych, London, W.C.2.—Thanks him for his article (see 3/59).

Pethick-Lawrence agrees to write the required article (see 3/55), and wishes further details of what is required.

Encloses his article (see 3/60b), and asks to have a copy of the newspaper in which it appears. Sir Arthur Shirley-Benn replacing Sir Robert Horne on the Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Office of the Leader of the Opposition, House of Representatives, Wellington, New Zealand.—Commends Pethick-Lawrence’s book Fate Has Been Kind, and asks about the present state of the British Labour movement.

—————

Transcript

Office of the Leader of the Opposition,
House of Representatives,
Wellington, N.Z.
13 June 1955

The Right Hon. Lord Pethick-Lawrence, P.C.,
House of Lords,
London,
ENGLAND.

Dear Pethick-Lawrence,

May I send this note to say that whilst many years have passed since you wrote the book “Fate Has Been Kind”, two of the readers have been good enough to send to me a copy of the book with instructions that I should specially examine your reference to finance on page 123 {1}, but for myself I have read the whole of the text and enjoyed the historical references, the description of the splendid fight that you and your late wife and the Pankhursts put up to enable womankind to exercise the franchise.

Unfortunately the memory of the public is very short and it is generally dulled with prosperity, else you with your colleagues in Britain would still be in the Government. Despite the set-back of the recent election {2}, I am hoping that the work of the Labour movement will be continued by some of our younger people with the same fervour and determination as characterized yourself and others in the earlier years. Personally, I believe from a material point of view the last half century has shown a greater proportionate progress than any other similar period about which I have been privileged to read in history.

I am anxious to obtain as full a description as I can of the present position in our own movement in Britain and if you could refer me to any source that would enable me to know the position regarding Bevan, Gaitskell, Clem Attlee, Herbert Morrison and any other personalities on whose judgment we could place reliance, I would be happy.

Again, congratulations on the delightful text of your book, and with kind personal regards,

I am,
Yours sincerely
W Nash

—————

{1} The passage in question concerns Pethick-Lawrence’s examination before a Parliamentary Select Committee on Finance in April 1920, when he expressed his support for a capital levy.

{2} The election of 26 May 1955 was won by the Conservative Party.

(Text substantially as 3/60b.)

(Carbon copy of a typed original.)

—————

Transcript

Sept. 1925.

30 Nations to Meet
By F. W. Pethick-Lawrence, M.P.

To the average Englishman who hasn’t travelled America is a unitary abstraction. The country, the people, the government are all one. He groups Americans all together for approval or condemnation. He may say “I like Americans, in business they come straight to the point and in private life they are warmhearted and generous”; or he may take an opposite standpoint.

The same Englishman never regards his own countrymen in the same way. He does not say he likes or dislikes English people; he likes Smith and disapproves of Brown. He defends the British Government if it belongs to his own party and condemns its every act if it is not. Pretty much the same difference in outlook will be found I imagine in the untravelled man or woman in every country.

This crude illusion about foreign peoples is accentuated by the fact that the most widely advertised intercourse between nations is conducted by their Governments. “Britain takes such and such a view” say the American papers; “America thinks this” say the British. If those views are in disaccord there will be friction and possibly even strife, while all the time innumerable links could be forged between individual Americans and English people of every diverse shade of opinion.

A big step forward, however, in dispelling this illusion should result from the great international gathering which is taking place during the early part of October in Washington. By the courteous Hospitality of the United States Government the Inter-Parliamentary Union is holding there in the Capitol its 23rd conference. Over 40 British Members of Parliament are crossing the ocean specially for the occasion, and in addition deputies from some thirty other nations are expected to take part.

The essential feature of this Union is that membership of it is open to any man or woman who is a member of any self-governing Parliament in any part of the world. While therefore at the assemblies of the League of Nations and the Pan American Union the delegates represent Governments only (that is to say the majority party in each country) and their pronouncements are necessarily official, at this gathering will come together men and women of all parties direct—representatives of the peoples, who will speak for themselves and their constituents.

The gain will be enormous. In the public sessions where questions of public importance will be openly discussed there will be the opportunity of appreciating the general accord, and of hearing points of view expressed which are quite unknown outside the country in which they are held. There is no need to stress here the subjects which have been selected for discussion. International law, tariffs, national minorities, dangerous drugs, armaments, the parliamentary system etc. are all to be debated and provide ample ground for divergent views.

Still more important in my opinion will be the social gatherings and the little private parties where in the genial atmosphere of a meal and a bottle—of water—protagonists of definite opinions will find common ground with similar thinkers in other lands. These will be of special service in uniting the different parts of the English-speaking world, for with no barrier of language to divide us we ought to have no difficulty in reaching a clear and sympathetic understanding of one another’s point of view.

We shall I hope discuss informally not only such external questions as debts, immigration, tariffs etc. but also some of the internal problems which are absorbing attention at home—the changes in industrial outlook and in the relationship of the classes to one another, the tragedy of unemployment and the burdens of taxation. Some of us will remember the wise words uttered by our British Prime Minister Sir Henry Campbell Bannerman to the Union when it met in London in 1906:—

“This gathering is unofficial. In addressing you I feel that I am not so much speaking to the representatives of divers States of Europe and America as to the exponents of principles and hopes that are common to us all and without which our life on earth would be a life without horizon or prospect.”

From my knowledge of the British contingent I should say that it may be taken as fairly representative of British thought with perhaps a slight exaggeration of conservative opinion. There are imperialists and pacifists, protectionists and free traders, right and left wing Conservatives, Liberals, Labourmen, and one Communist. Some of the extremists at either end hold views which are abhorrent to another, and in some cases even to the moderate men in the middle. But that is all to the good if America wants to have a true cross section of English thought. How far each of our group will find kindred spirits among his American colleagues or in those of other lands, time alone can show.

The question is sometimes asked whether any definite concrete results are likely to emerge from the conference. This is impossible to answer for one never knows in advance what important use may be made of the Union’s Activities. In past years more than one valuable international convention has been taken over from a draft which a Committee of the Union had originally prepared.

Equally is it impossible to forecast the ultimate form which the Union itself will take. When Simon de Montfort caused the first assembly of barons knights and burgesses of England to take place in Leicester, the city which I represent in the British Parliament, he could not foresee that his institution would survive in England for centuries and be copied all over the world. In the same way we cannot tell to-day how far our Inter-Parliamentary Union may be the germ out of which a real international Parliament may spring.

What we do know with certainty is that the various nations of the world have crying need of one another. They need to reason together with sympathetic understanding if war is really to be outlawed. For behind the accords of Governments must lie the friendships of the peoples. But above and beyond this they need to pool their ideas and spiritual resources if the common problems which beset humanity are to be solved, and mankind is to be guided along a road which leads to a brighter day.

Old Hall, Ramsden, Charlbury.—Wishes to discuss with him the War Office's reaction to his efforts to introduce proper accounting.

—————

Transcript

Old Hall, Ramsden, Charlbury
7th Nov 1925

My dear Lawrence

I hope you are back and refreshed. During your absence I have been agitating against this reactionary move of the W.O. against proper accounting: and have so far succeeded in getting the P.A.C. to hear Sr C. Harris and Sr H. Lawrence on the other side, which I understand they will do tomorrow. I hope you will be there. I should much like to have a word with you on the matter at issue if you can spare me half an hour tomorrow, Tuesday, morning, after the Party meeting, at which I shall be. You might look at what I said, and Haldane, in the H. L. on Wednesday the 25th Nov. I am afraid Graham is completely hypnotised by Ramsay (the Aud Genl) whose view is limited, and who is a perfectly orthodox Treasury Principal Clerk. He thinks the aim of Accounts is to help him in his Audit, and that the whole W.O. new System is valueless (as it may be from that point of view) because the Military Director at the W.O. in reply to his queries, alleges “policy” in general terms as a sufficient defence of anything.

But the purpose of these proper accounts is not to render possible what is impossible, viz the enforcement of economy through queries of the Aud Genl—but to bring home to administrative officers (what they dont always want to know) what what they are doing is actually costing.

Hoping to see you

Yours sincerely
Olivier

House of Lords Library.—Has verified a fact about the Officer of the Commands. Encloses a copy of lectures by Sir Charles Harris.

33 Elmtree Road, St John’s Wood, N.W.—Queries the War Office’s claim that only 8 or 9 per cent of Army expenditure may be controlled by accounting.

Pardigon, France.—Thanks him for his memorandum about India. Is convalescing after an attack of influenza.

Old Hall, Ramsden, Charlbury.—Commends Pethick-Lawrence’s memorandum on the conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Union. Gives his impressions of the factories and villages of Switzerland, which he visited recently.

King’s College, Cambridge.—Suggests sources of information on the subsidising of railways (cf. 2/198, 2/230).

—————

Transcript

King’s College | Cambridge
Feb 10

Dear Lawrence,

I’m afraid I don’t know of anything about subsidies to railways in a systematic form. There might be bits about it in the ordinary railway books, and there’s a book about cheap fares in Belgium, Mahaim’s Les abonnements d’ouvriers pour les lignes de chemin de fer (Misch & Thron, Brussels) {1}: also in Rowntree’s Life and Labour in Belgium {2} and other such names {3}. But I can’t think of anything about England

Yours
A C Pigou

—————

Pigou’s handwriting is indistinct. Someone—perhaps Pethick-Lawrence himself—has attempted a transcription of it in pencil, interlined below the corresponding text, but the transcription appears to be wrong in some cases, and there are, forgivably, some gaps. The year is not indicated, but the letter was clearly written at about the same time as 2/230.

{1} Ernest Mahaim, Les Abonnements d’ouvriers sur les lignes de chemins de fer Belges et leurs effets sociaux (1910).

{2} R. S. Rowntree, Land and Labour: Lessons from Belgium (1911).

{3} ‘and other such names’: reading uncertain.