Note 11 — SOME MATERIALS AND A POSSIBILITY.
Reading edition
A good illustration of this may be obtained by comparing the two by-elections which have taken place since the present parliament was elected, in North-East Lanarkshire. In both cases a typical orthodox Unionist and a typical orthodox Labourite were in the field. But the Liberal candidates were of a very different type in the two cases. In September 1901 (while the South African War was still in progress) the Liberal candidate was Mr. Cecil Harmsworth, of the “Daily Mail,” an Imperialist of so pronounced a kind that all the organs of the Anti-Imperialist press and many of the Leaders of Anti-Imperialist Liberalism advised the electors to vote for the Labour candidate. This year on the other hand the Liberal candidate was a strictly orthodox Liberal who succeeded in uniting all sections of the party. I give the figures for both elections.
By-election 26/9/01. Sir W. Rattigan (U) 5673 Mr. C. Harmsworth (L) 4769 Mr. R. Smillie (Lab) 2900 By-election 10/5/04. Mr. Finlay (L) 5619 Mr. Touch (U) 4677 Mr. Robertson (Lab) 3984
The noticeable thing about these figures is the enormous increase in the Labour poll. It may reasonably be supposed that the fulminations of a large section of representative Liberal opinion against Mr. Harmsworth produced some effect on the voting, and one may therefore take it that a fair number of electors, who voted for Mr. Smillie in 1901, voted for Mr. Finlay in 1904. Yet Mr. Robertson’s gain is far greater than Mr. Finlay’s. This can only mean that a large number of working men, who, in time of war voted for the Tory Imperialist candidate, voted for the Labour candidate in time of peace.