travel books: question of what is the source of Tory funds can best be dealt with by stating some facts and asking some questions. Those who genuinely believe in the Conservative principles are likely to be no less ready than Socialists to express their loyalty by taking their share of the burden, but they can much better afford to make their contributions weighty ones. Reference to the wealth represented in the Commons and Lords has already been made. If Labour could raise 9,000 pounds in this way the Conservatives should be able to find very much more than that sum. The honours list has always been one of the acknowledged methods of evoking and rewarding political service, and financial help one of the ways of performing it. The Royal Commission on Honours of 1922 and the debates in the Lords of 1917 and 1922(1) adequately proved that a serious traffic in honours went on. Safeguards were established. A Privy Council committee was set up in 1923 to advise the Prime Minister by examining each case and giving him a report. It is probable that the action then taken and the publicity given has prevented the direct sale and purchase of honours, if indeed that ever took place. But the real traffic is much more subtle and this is inseparable from the granting of titles at all. A glance at any recent honours list with its file of wealthy nonentities is evidence enough. Besides, the view of such eminent Conservatives as the late Lord Curzon and Queen Victoria that the ownership and gift of wealth provide a case for a title corresponds to a genuine present attitude. When a man gives generously to hospitals he is often offered a title; if in addition he is constantly giving to party funds it will be still more difficult not to remember him when the time comes for distributing "recognition." 1 See W. I. Jennings, Cabinet Government, 1937, pp. 352-60. books

Books > Old Books > The British Constitution (1938)

Page 149

THE PARTIES

question of what is the source of Tory funds can best be dealt with by stating some facts and asking some questions. Those who genuinely believe in the Conservative principles are likely to be no less ready than Socialists to express their loyalty by taking their share of the burden, but they can much better afford to make their contributions weighty ones. Reference to the wealth represented in the Commons and Lords has already been made. If Labour could raise 9,000 pounds in this way the Conservatives should be able to find very much more than that sum.
The honours list has always been one of the acknowledged methods of evoking and rewarding political service, and financial help one of the ways of performing it. The Royal Commission on Honours of 1922 and the debates in the Lords of 1917 and 1922(1) adequately proved that a serious traffic in honours went on. Safeguards were established. A Privy Council committee was set up in 1923 to advise the Prime Minister by examining each case and giving him a report. It is probable that the action then taken and the publicity given has prevented the direct sale and purchase of honours, if indeed that ever took place. But the real traffic is much more subtle and this is inseparable from the granting of titles at all. A glance at any recent honours list with its file of wealthy nonentities is evidence enough. Besides, the view of such eminent Conservatives as the late Lord Curzon and Queen Victoria that the ownership and gift of wealth provide a case for a title corresponds to a genuine present attitude. When a man gives generously to hospitals he is often offered a title; if in addition he is constantly giving to party funds it will be still more difficult not to remember him when the time comes for distributing "recognition."

1 See W. I. Jennings, Cabinet Government, 1937, pp. 352-60.