IV, XII: Disraeli's Conservative Government, 1879-80
Joseph Chamberlain looked sullen through the windows of his new home, Highbury Hall in Birmingham. The 43-year-old had up until a few weeks ago had the world at his feet. Now he was an innocent bystander in the worst purgatory imaginable - opposition. His party's defeat in the 1878 Election had seen the Democratic Federation, a United Front he forged, at its weakest point and he wanted to find answers to revive them.
"Empire, loyalty, land and patriotism," said Chamberlain to the Democratic Premier of Mercia, Jesse Collings. "That is what the people want and need." Chamberlain had learned in the winter of 1878 that despite the security and loyalty of a number of members of Parliament, nothing could be guaranteed in the bearpit of electoral politics, especially with the new-found realities of an engaged population of voters. On this note and using his position as President of the Democratic Federation, he convened a special Democratic Congress in Birmingham to meet in July 1879 to discuss the way forward. Chamberlain had one goal in mind - to end the coalition between the Liberals, led once again by Gladstone in Parliament, and the Democrats and ensure that the next government of the Union would be solely controlled by the Federation. Chamberlain had blamed the defeat on Gladstone and believed that breaking the coalition would be the only way to ensure that the Democrats could form the next Government. He chose Birmingham as the centre of his political power and as the home of one of just two Democratic Federation controlled States - Collings had a strong majority in the Mercian Legislature and had continued his role as Premier of Mercia following his appointment as the Provisional Chairman of the Government, which alongside Thomas Farrer's Government in the Metropolis, were the only State Governments in the Federation's controlled, with most remaining non-political and aloof from the groupings of National politics.
Uniting the strands of Radical opinion had always been a goal for Chamberlain and his deputy, Charles Dilke, but the two had grown detached over the involvement of the Liberals in the Government. Chamberlain had wrongly believed that the Coalition would be moribund by the time of an election of the Union Parliament, which Chamberlain believed would deliver a Democratic majority. The election had revealed a more conservative rural working-class and a more radical industrial working-class, which the Democratic Federation firmly based in the latter but with few sympathies in the former. They also struggled with the answers to the religious question, with many believing that the Education Bill, designed to remove the church from matters of education, was a key driver to the unifying of opposition to the Union Government, as well as a further split between the Liberals and Democrats. The first session of Parliament provided more troubles for the grouping, as Disraeli's Home Secretary, Richard Cross, introduced the Employers and Workmen Bill & Conspiracy and Protection of Property Bill, introduced to continue the Conservative offensive on the working-class vote. These laws created, with the Trade Union Act, the legal framework for Trade Unions to exist, picket and made offences surrounding Trade Unionism a civil matter, rather than a criminal matter. Democrats flocked to support the act but Liberals, fearing the political ramifications for the fusing of Trade Unionism with Conservatism, opposed the measures. Equally, the new more bellicose jingoism surrounding the Ottoman Crisis, as the new Foreign Secretary, Senator Robert Cecil of the Salisbury Family, sought to posture more aggressively to stop the Russian threat to Constantinople. Receiving tacit support from Granville, Senator Cecil sought an audience with Chancellor Hänel in January 1879, soon after the election, to indicate that Britain was willing to deploy warships to prevent a takeover of the straits by the Russian Empire. A diplomatic cable to St Petersburg from the British made such a threat clear, and public opinion at this time was vociferous in its Russophobia, dealing further damage to the Liberals and Democrats, who favoured cooling of tensions between the two parties and supported the Bulgarian Nationalist cause. In truth, the Coalition seemed on the wrong side of public opinion on nearly every matter.
Benjamin Disraeli, the Prime Minister and Leader of the House was in very familiar, but very different surroundings. He had been in the House of Commons for many a year, had led the country and a party into power and had spoken at the dispatch box many times. This time, however, he did it as the Head of Government of a Federal, Parliamentary Republic. The week following the Grand Committee, which saw Senator Granville finally become President-Regent Leveson-Gower (known more commonly as President-Regent Granville), Disraeli chaired the first meeting of the 1st Union Council, the Executive Government of the new Union of Britain and began to prepare a programme of Government. Much of his focus had been similar to the Liberal party of Peel - that political reform was completed for now and the Government in the country would be better focused on alleviating concerns of the people. Now, with universal suffrage and the large constituency of working-class voters, this needed to concern the ordinary person, and it was in this sphere that Disraeli believed his Government could win support. "Housing, savings and labour relations", he proclaimed to the room of Secretaries of State, "This should be our concern and this should be the issue to resolve in this legislative session." Alongside the introduction of the Employers and Workmen Act and the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act, Cross also introduced the Friendly Societies Act, which encouraged and regulated the formation of Friendly Societies to aid in savings, life insurance and cooperative banking, which received warm support from the Cooperative Societies and the Cooperative Congress, it's decision-making body. He also bolstered Imperial Spirit within the Empire with the purchase of shares in the Suez Canal Company, to improve control on the British access to the sea and further protect themselves from Russian aggression in the Mediterranean.
Disraeli was interested in one piece of political reform and summoned Sir Michael Hicks-Beach and Senator Thomas Hare to commission a Report on electoral boundaries and the electoral system. Disraeli was concerned about the growing numbers of his supporters in the cities and in Ireland, where often the single non-transferable vote would ensure a clean sweep of victories for the Democratic Federation and Irish National Party respectively. Disraeli asked for Hare and Hicks-Beach to conduct a comparison of voting machinery, with Senator Hare being a popular choice with Liberals and Radicals due to his association with John Stuart Mill and Mill's advocacy of his designed system, known as the Hare System. Richard Cross also was keen on the idea of an electoral system that allowed for the representation of minorities in two cohorts that all happened to be in favour of a Conservative Government - Moderate Royalist Anglicans in Major Cities (Villa Tories) and Unionists in Ireland, both of whom were crowded out by prevailing constituencies. Hicks-Beach proposed an extension of the 'limited vote', which was used in several constituencies at the State and County level, where the voter would have one less vote than the seats available. Radicals, however, believed that single-seat districts should be the preferred method of reapportionment. Liberals believed that they also served to gain from multi-member constituencies, as they often were able to work with Radicals (now Democrats) and force uncontested three-seat constituencies of one Democrat, one Tory and one Liberal. A mathematician called H.R Droop gave evidence that in single-winner systems, two parties tend to appear, but with essentially three parties (plus the Irish Nationalists), the system was due to lead to large scale apathy with the electoral process and urged the Commission to adopt a system that would ensure total minority representation. Hare's system gained prevalence and Hicks-Beach indicated that he would prefer a trial run of the system. A Senator for London, Senator John Lubbock and a Senator for Cornwall, Senator Leonard Henry Courtney, issued testimony supporting the Hare scheme and its extension to all multi-member constituencies and prepared a Senate Motion in support of the Hare Scheme for the Commons multi-member seats.
Charles Dilke, who favoured equal districts, decried the attempt from the Upper House to impose a new electoral system on the Lower House and said that the scheme "was certain to prevail a dominance of the Conservative Party in the House of Commons." Hicks-Beach recommended that the limited vote be used for all multi-member constituencies at the next General Election with plurality for all single-member districts, but the House would restore University Constituencies, which would be elected by the Hare System. John Lubbock formed the Proportional Representation Society during the debates on the Act and around 90 MPs and 25 Senators had joined the Society, split equally between Democrats, Liberals and Conservatives, with Conservative Lewis Carroll forming the Conservative Committee for Proportional Representation soon after and C.P Scott, editor of the Manchester Guardian affiliating the Democratic Representation League with the Democratic Federation not long after that. The two groups rallied against the Hicks-Beach proposal, which also had cross-party support, and lobbied for the Hare System to be rolled out nationwide. Lubbock and Carroll were able to convince Disraeli of the utility of the Hare Scheme through the advocacy of Richard Cross, and in the Senate, amendments to introduce personal representation (Hare’s official term for his system) were brought onto the Order Paper. The amendment proposed a scheme for all multi-member districts to use the Hare Scheme for one election, with a Commission convened to analyse and evaluate the results, chaired by Sir Michael Hicks-Beach. After a fierce debate in the Senate, the measure was passed by 56 votes to 51, bringing the amendment to the Commons. In the Commons debates, low turnout on the side of the anti-reformers and low turnout from the rank and file of the Democratic Federation saw 91 votes for, and 89 against, passing the act. Lubbock continued his campaign at the State level, with supporters of the Proportional Representation Society gaining similar victories in Ireland and Northumbria, where the prospect of control of Education brought more out in favour, as religious interests across denominations were desired. This was yet another defeat for the leadership of the Democrats, as Dilke and Chamberlain were against the proposals, with their desire for equal apportionment of constituencies and single-member districts.
Losing further ground to the reforming zeal of the Conservatives, Chamberlain needed a rallying cry and a unifying policy, and continued his drift towards the Agrarian wing of his party, believing that the wooing of rural voters would harm the Conservatives and offset the gains they were making within the working-class. Most importantly, this was a policy that Chamberlain believed could gain a greater foothold in Ireland. In October, during the Hundred Days, a meeting of tenant farmers in Mayo produced a manifesto, reported in the Connaught Telegraph, that was produced by members of the Irish National Party, then associated with the Democratic Federation, for land reform in Ireland to be included as part of the legislative programme of the Provisional Parliament in its final session. This document, entitled The Land of Ireland for the people of Ireland, was the precursor to a national campaign for Land Reform. In the spring, the first of many 'monster meetings' were held in Mayo in support of Land Reform for Ireland, attracting 10,000 people to Castlebar, backed enthusiastically by the leader of the Fenian Party, Charles Stuart Parnell. Groups protesting excessive rents from absentee landlords popped up throughout the countryside, with much support from elements of the Irish National Party, but faced stern opposition from Conservatives in the Union Parliament. After a poor 1878 harvest due to wet weather and nosediving agricultural prices had left many to be unable to pay their rent as a result of the economic downturn, meaning an acute crisis was emerging in the Irish tenancies. In April 1879, the Irish Land League was formed. Chamberlain understood that the fusing of the Radical elements between Ireland, Wales, Scotland and Northern and Central England produced the pathway to victory, as had happened in the electoral victories in the 1830s, 1840s and the 1871 election. With political reform now subsiding as a unifying aim and most of the original aims of the Chartists achieved (only equal constituencies and the end to plural voting remained), Chamberlain and many of the Democratic Federation believed that the next fight would be over Land and believed that this was a fight that the Tories, with their citadel of support centring in the landlords, would not be able to muster an army to fight. The presence of this Irish dispute over land would provide the perfect spark for the powder keg. Dividing the Irish National Party, which had prevented the Liberal-Democratic Coalition from retaining its majority, would be a key aim and would prevent the Conservatives from holding onto their grip on power.
The Irish National Party, seen nearly as a ubiquitous force in Irish politics, was not as ubiquitous as it quite seemed. Held together by the unifying presence of the Premier of Ireland, Isaac Butt, the party had survived being affiliated to, but not included in, the Democratic Federation and having achieved its aim of Home Government, Butt felt a degree of loyalty to Gladstone, but none to Chamberlain. The party was liberal in the O'Connellite sense: a party of Christian Liberalism that espoused free worship and freedom for Ireland within the context of a federal state. With this achieved, the INP suffered a drift from focus, and Butt's health provided yet more fuel for the fire of discussion between the varying wings of Irish Nationalism as to the correct course for the State of Ireland and its future within the Union. Adherents of Butt founded their doctrine in the need for the Irish Legislature to build the economy of Ireland and modernise the country without land reform.
The 1878 State Election in Ireland was a crowning glory for Isaac Butt and his campaign with English Radicals for Home Government for All. The Irish National Party had romped to victory under Butt's leadership. The election had been contested between the National Party, the small Liberal Party in Ireland, Fenians who advocated for an Independent Irish Republic outside of the Union and the Loyal & Patriotic Union, a haphazard grouping of those opposed to Home Government who would abstain from the sittings of the State Legislature. Orangemen, on the defensive after the Orangist Coup attempt, had been forced into retreat or were jailed at the time of the election, meaning that Loyalism was represented in its most moderate form. The victory of 121 of the LPU candidates meant that the Irish National Party in effect had a supermajority in the Lower House, which was elected by universal suffrage in equal constituencies, and the Legislative Council, which was elected in four equally sized Provincial constituencies. Butt was provided with the majority he craved and the mandate to form the first Irish State Council and was reappointed by Governor Fortescue on May 7th 1878. He retained several important Irish traditions in the political process, most notably declining the role of Leader of the Legislative Assembly, instead asking he be appointed to the role of Deputy Leader of the Legislative Assembly in honour of the eternal leader of the Irish Parliament, Daniel O'Connell and he attempted to continue to build a cross-party Government to strengthen his position, appointing Charles Stuart Parnell of the Fenians and Sir Rowland Blennerhassett, an Irish Liberal Catholic, to the State Council responsible for Education. Bringing together the 'Grand Coalition' of the forces within the Irish Legislature allowed Butt to build the 'usual channels' - a forum for the managed democratic conversion of Ireland into a functioning state. The Irish Legislature was opened by President-Regent Granville on January 2nd 1879, with the Parliament meeting at the Royal College of Science for Ireland, and the meeting was greeted with a candle-lit vigil in all major cities in Ireland and several major cities in England with Irish populations. This phenomenon was repeated as State Legislatures were opened in the heartlands of Provincialism, with the largest of such vigils attracting 30,000 in Leeds to celebrate the opening of the Greater Yorkshire State Legislature.
1st Irish State Legislature, 1878-1881
Irish Legislative Assembly
Irish National Party 216
Loyal & Patriotic Union 121
Liberal 39
Fenian 20
Independent 4
Irish Legislative Council
Irish National Party 19
Loyal & Patriotic Union 10
Fenian 5
Liberal 3
Independent 2
The inclusion of parties in an ad-hoc extra-Parliamentary cabinet formed part of what Butt called the 'New Departure' - a policy of coalition and co-option of the spectrum of Irish Politics. Butt, a Nationalist also met with the leaders of the Loyalist factions, Augustus Stewart of the Loyal & Patriotic Union, who promoted cooperation between the Whig and Tory loyalists, and Thomas Bateson, who led the exclusively Conservative organisation, the Loyal Irish Union, both of which boycotted both the Union Parliament and the State Legislature - to garner opinions on the running of the state. While Bateson was usually uncooperative, Stewart and Butt retained a friendship until his death. An impromptu council, meeting officially in secret, was formed between Butt, Parnell, Blennerhasset and Stewart, known as "The Four", to oversee the successful first State Ministry. This was centred on the principle that "the only thing we agree is that we all agree", and helped to hammer out a compromise between the Unionists, Republicans and Nationalists and between the Anglo-Irish Protestant minority and the Catholic majority. Its first challenge was a cross-denominational Education Bill to increase access to education and create a single Ireland State University. This would involve merging the former Queens University of Ireland and the Catholic University of Ireland into one federated unit, including Trinity College. There was fierce opposition within Unionists against State Control of the Queen’s University of Belfast and Trinity and after much debate between the Irish Legislature and the usual channels, State Councillor for Education Sir Rowland Blennerhassett made an amendment allowing the two institutions to be exempt - a move which angered Irish Nationalist MLAs who saw the single, state-funded university as a key aim of nation-building and those who believed that the Protestant educational facilities were being improved at Catholic ratepayers expense. These legislators formed a committee within the Irish National Party called the General League of Catholic Associations, led by James Daly and supported by Archbishop Thomas Croke, a leading Irish Nationalist and land reformer as well as around 30 of the INPs Assembly Party. The Nation’s readers decried the exemption on its letters page, one submission describing the Act as “an attempt to build a state within a state in Ireland, outside the legal confines to protect noncompliance with our Constitution.”
1st Irish State Council 1878
Premier, Chief Secretary of the State Council, Deputy Leader of the Legislative Assembly - Isaac Butt, Irish National Party
Treasurer, Keeper of the Great Seal of Ireland - Michael Davitt, Irish National Party
President of the State Council, Leader of the Legislative Council, State Councillor for Internal Affairs - Councillor Charles Gavan Duffy, Independent
State Councillor for Trade, President of the Irish Board of Trade - John O'Shanassy, Independent
State Councillor for Relief & Public Health, President of the Poor Law Board - James Daly, Irish National Party
State Councillor for Education - Sir Rowland Blennerhassett, Liberal
State Councillor for Public Works & Lands - Charles Stuart Parnell, Fenians
Agent-General of the Irish State Council - Senator John O'Connor Power, Irish National Party (ex-officio)
Attorney General - Hugh Law SC, Independent
Paymaster General - John Ferguson, Irish National Party
Butt's consociationalism was encouraged by Governor Fortescue, who wanted to ensure that the delicate ethnoreligious tensions didn't spill over into violent conflict. So far, an uneasy peace had remained with the help of ad-hoc deals struck with the LPU had stabilised matters such as the Education Act. Stewart had established himself as a conduit for the Loyalist Community, although his moderation did nothing to further his reputation with the heavy Conservative Unionists concentrated in the North West of the State around Belfast. Stewart had privately confided to Butt that he had hoped that the Loyal & Patriotic Union could transform into a party that was Patriotic but fought inside the Legislature to protect the interests of Unionists in Ireland. In the latter days of his Premiership, Butt had developed new proposals to improve harmony in Ireland through limited social welfare and a commission to study new Poor Law policies and Public Health initiatives, hoping to quell resentment of land reform. Butt, however, felt that Land Reform would almost certainly be vetoed or heavily amended by the Parliament in the mainland if it was passed, and sought to avoid a constitutional crisis by refraining from introducing any law with a Conservative Union Council that would surely be thrown out by President-Regent Granville at the behest of Disraeli. Debate within the Irish National Party was split on the approach that should be taken to the Land Question, with one half, led by Charles Stuart Parnell and Irish Senator, John O'Connor Power, demanding immediate action as their right as a state, and Isaac Butt and the moderates who believed the process should be slower and more restrained. Looking for a way in, Chamberlain believed that the public clamour within Ireland for Land Reform might outstrip the desire for a Catholic Education system.
Butt’s health continued to decline throughout April but managed to introduce the first major pieces of legislation into the Irish Legislature in his severely ill state. Meetings with “The Four” revealed a great desire to introduce Land Reform legislation, with support across denominational lines. The most hostile opposition was in the landowners, however, who sought to protect property rights, and these were represented heartily in the LPU. Augustus Stewart was in opposition and urged Butt to prevent a Bills presentation in the Irish Legislature. Conservatives spoke early about their desire to veto any Bill brought forward, with Sir Michael Hicks-Beach stating at the State Government Board that any attempt at bringing forward fixed rents in Ireland would be heavily discouraged in any discussions between the Union Council and the Presidential-Regency. As the Irish Nationalists were relied on by the Tories for their majority, Butt was urged in his final meeting of the Irish National Party on April 30th to threaten Disraeli with a no-confidence vote unless the threat of veto was withdrawn, and Hicks-Beach removed from the Union Council. Butt couldn’t finish the meeting, however, and was rushed home to Dublin to recover. In his absence the next day in the Irish Legislature, Davitt, his Treasurer and a land reformer stepped in to deputise the Deputy Leader of the Assembly and proposed to the Speaker of the House to debate a motion on land reform, which enraged Butt so much, he asked his friend AM O’Sullivan to make a note of his final thoughts, where he said that he did not understand the desire to rush a complicated issue. “I have been swept aside. Alas, that is how the wind blows” he wrote on May 2nd. Four days later, he would be dead.
A hastily convened meeting of the Irish National Party’s Legislators selected William Shaw, a Protestant Nationalist who had served outside the State Council but had attended several meetings of the Four as a notetaker, and was well-liked by Sir Rowland Blennerhassett and Stewart, but had a much frostier relationship with Parnell. These cracks in the Great Coalition would weaken the Conservative Government in Westminster, as the unity of the INP, who were wary of supporting the Government anyhow, would deny Disraeli a majority if they were to split.
Shaw held the Great Coalition together as best he could, but Land Reform was becoming the most pressing issue, and several in the State Council were becoming willing to break with Shaw over bringing immediate Land Reform and backing it with the threat of bringing down the Government. Charles Stuart Parnell, the Fenian Minister who, along with Michael Davitt and Charles Gavan Duffy, the most prominent land reformer, resigned from the State Council on June 18th 1879, stating that he could not work in a Government that would not make Land Reform a pressing issue. Duffy and Davitt followed and the Irish National Party’s grip on the Assembly weakened ever so slightly. The presence of returning Republicans from the United States in the aftermath of the Political Associations Act also bolstered the electoral support and the finances of the Fenians, but they were limited by their extremely Radical image. General Leaguers were opposed to the Fenians on moral grounds due to their connection with terrorist cells in America, Canada and the Union, and Parnell thought Fenians were not seen as a credible party of Government at the State or Union level. Parnell had only sat in the Irish Legislature and did not seek election to the Union Parliament stating the Irish Legislature was the only Authority, and only swore an oath to the Union to serve after a series of attempts to have it removed. He had joined the Government to promote an active United Front, but his small group had its allies devoured by the Irish National Party. With land reform, he felt the ability to harness popular feeling for Land Reform into an electoral coalition to take power in Ireland but felt the Fenian Electoral Organisation lagged way behind the fee-paying subscription of the National Party. There were crossovers in the INP, and sections of the party were ideologically close to the Fenians and their desire for total independence. Davitt believed the existence of British influence in Irish land decisions was an example of why the ‘compromise’ of Home Government was only a temporary step on the road to full independence, for example. Duffy used The Nation to promote the cause of the “Three Fs” of Fair Rent, Fair Tenancy and Fair Tenure and outside of the State Council, had more time to devote to the printed media and poured scorn on an Irish Government that did not promote land reform.
Parnell believed a new party, dedicated to land reform could succeed with the mass of rural momentum for reform. He believed that shaking off some of the Republican policies, most notably Abstentionism at the Union level, would allow for maximum exposure to the cause of land reform, and he wanted to present an opposition voice to the INP-Conservative Government, which delayed it. He met with a returning Republican from the United States, John Devoy, who proposed that the American fraternal organisation for Irish Republicans, the Clan na Gael, establish a Parliamentary and Legislative Committee within Ireland, and sponsor candidates for election. Clan na Gael in Ireland would achieve three things; the promotion of the Irish way of life, the extermination of rack-rents and the introduction of land reform and redistribution and the promotion of Irish Nationalism and Independence. Parnell jumped at the chance and established an ‘exploratory committee for an Irish Nationalist Alliance for Land Reform’ with himself as Chairman and Davitt, Devoy and Duffy as Vice Chairman. Soon this became the Clan Na Gael Legislative Committee and took 78 MLAs, from the Independents, Fenians and INP with them. Parnell was elected Chairman and after his speech declared an interest in working within the Union Parliament structures and advocating that the Political Associations Act allowed for the advocation of both Irish Separatism and Land Reform peacefully, 6 members of the House broke relations with the INP and joined Clan na Gael, reducing the minority government’s already small workable majority. A minority group led by the Revolutionary Nationalists led by Matt Harris and Thomas Brennan rejected the calls to work within the Union and a rump Fenian Party remained in the Legislature as an independent force.
1st Irish State Legislature, July 1879-1881
Irish Legislative Assembly
Irish National Party 151
Loyal & Patriotic Union 121
Clan na Gael 78
Liberal 39
Fenians 11
Independent 2
Irish Legislative Council
Irish National Party 14
Loyal & Patriotic Union 10
Clan na Gael 9
Liberal 3
Independent 2
It is right about now that Joe Chamberlain decided to pounce. With the Democratic Congress approaching, he sought to pass a resolution that advocated for a wide-ranging agrarian revolution, using the endowment from the disestablishment of the remaining established churches and selling unused land to fund plots for grazing for agricultural workers. The moderates in his party were not in favour, preferring the libertarian, individualistic model of economy, like Henry Fawcett who also favoured continued coalition with the Liberals. Even Dilke was concerned, likening it to the Governments proposal to give State Public Works Departments and County Authorities the right to purchase slum dwellings, which the majority of Radicals were opposed to. Chamberlain urged the Radical Republican wing of the Party to support measures to address the agricultural question to “do as we have done for the Industrial Class - win their freedom and respect.” The Congress opened on July 18th 1879 in Birmingham, and before proceedings could begin, the Congress as a whole, with one delegate from each of the organisations affiliated with the federation present, were presented with a series of reforms to the Congress’ administration drafted by Francis Schnadhorst.
He proposed that the Congress elect an Executive Committee of fifty members would have the sole right of procedural and administrative initiative, as well as the sole right to propose motions to the Congress, then the Congress would be expanded to include affiliated organisations proportionately to their size who could question, approve or reject the motions or procedural amendments. Schnadhorst presented these changes as more Democratic and more streamlined and the measures were adopted, with further delegates, most of whom were already present, ballooning the Congress to over 4,500 delegates. The Committee of Fifty had, however, reserved 10 seats for the Parliamentary Committee, 10 for the General Federation of Trade Unions and 5 for the Trade Union Congress. This meant the Executive Committee was only half elected, and Chamberlain, Dilke and Shipton had control over the majority of seats. The three were in vague agreement about the primary cause of the Congress - ditching the Liberals - but differed on their views on many policies. Chamberlain convinced them that their goals could be achieved by Land Reform; attacking the Conservatives on the state of the agricultural economy (which had been in decline due to free trade flooding the market with cheap grain throughout the Union’s existence), uniting the Irish and English Radical movement again (which was seen as a key indicator of success for Radicalism) and securing loyalty to the Union for agricultural workers that could advance the cooperative movement and potentially creating a movement big enough to compete against the Conservatives and Liberals, securing a Democratic Majority. Chamberlain painted the picture of a fiercely patriotic party of the Union, underpinned by the commitment to social and labour reform and land reform - securing the loyalty of the Industrial and agricultural workers across all the British Isles with a land reform plan seeing plots to, paid for with the breaking up of church endowments and lands, as well as the Crown Lands. This proposal was radical and a departure from the radical doctrine of old. Motions in support of the disestablishment of the Church, the sale of Crown Lands and universal secular education were all passed, but the land reform sections were proposed but rejected by the Democratic Congress. As Chairman of the Executive Committee, Chamberlain proposed a second debate, but it was quashed again. Chamberlain, it was said, had prepared Davitt and Parnell to join the Congress as guest speakers once the motion had passed, but told them to ‘bide their time’. Dilke and Shipton, as Vice Chairman, were unconvinced for now of the utility of land reform as a major issue being urban and industrial but elsewhere, a Scottish Legislator and member of the Democratic Federation, Charles Fraser-Mackintosh, would be demanding the same changes for another group, the Crofters of the Highlands & Islands, who wanted similar land reform rights and in doing so, formed the Scottish Land League. Chamberlain could see the potential to bring a large coalition together against the Conservatives on the issue of land.
Discontent in the Democratic Congress was centred on the issue of centralisation by the Executive Committee. The Federation was called as such because it was an umbrella for different causes in favour of the Constitutional Laws, and political difference swayed between the Opportunists who believed that following Chamberlain was the only way to achieve functioning popular government and the more Radical Republicans in the group. The Democratic Federation was made up of a number of different parties and leagues that wanted to further radical reform of the political system and most were still functioning independently as well as within the group. These included the Northumbrian and Mercian Radicals, Commonwealth League, the Radical-Labour Group, Trade Unions and Artisans Organisations, the Irish Nationalists and the Progressives, the Liberal-Labour Group led by Thomas Farrer in London. While the Opportunists, spread across all the parties and alliances, tended to be more pro-Union than pro-Republic, but also more pro-Union than pro-Crown, Radical Republics concentrated in the Trade Unions and Radical-Labour Group contained many who were in favour of radical solutions to the emerging social question and land question, and also clashed with the Liberal coalition in contrast to the moderates in his party who favoured continued coalition, most notably Fawcett. Having drifted from them during his time in Government, Chamberlain now leaned to combine his efforts with the Radical Republicans and Irish Republicans, believing an energetic campaign of land reform could invigorate the two and unite the Radical elements in Parliament once again. To do this, he believed the Democratic Federation should become a Party with a much more organised structure and aims, which ran against the elites of the various parties that made up the Democratic Federation, organised in various movements usually confined to a state or series of states. These, along with those who wanted to steer the movement away from Land Reform and towards more niche causes (or fads) were termed the ‘faddists’ by Chamberlain, and they were opposed to radical land redistribution as espoused by Chamberlain. For now, they would be joined in their opposition by the Trade Unions, who were still opposed to redistribution of land. Chamberlain found favour within the Cooperative Congress, however, as they believed the redistribution of land should be conducted in the endeavour of creating a new base of cooperatively held farmland, giving control of the land to the people themselves.
The Cooperative Congress at this stage only nominated a small number of candidates to the Union Parliament and held an arm's length relationship with the Democratic Federation as they had adopted a position of political neutrality, but Chamberlain wanted to grow this number to bolster the Parliamentary presence in favour of his reform. The opportunity arose when Lewis Majendie, MP for St Augustine's in Kent, resigned in August 1879. Chamberlain convinced the local Democratic Club to support John Thomas Whitehead Mitchell, the President of the Cooperative Congress, to stand as their candidate. Mitchell campaigned in the rural areas of the seat on a campaign of reform of ownership of land and establishing rural cooperatives. Chamberlain went to campaign in the seat and for the first time went public with his demands for land reform and found keen ears in Scotland, Ireland and the North of England, the key radical strongholds. He also attracted the attention of the Agricultural Union leader, Joseph Arch, a member of the Democratic Federation as the President of the National Agricultural Labour Union and hailing from his area, in Birmingham. While Mitchell narrowly lost the seat to the favoured Conservative candidate, the Democratic candidate was well received and Mitchell was later elected in the same Vice-County for the State Legislature. Arch approached Chamberlain along with Parnell, Macintosh and Davitt after the by-election to discuss the formation of a United Front for Land Reform either within or outside of the Democratic Federation and a coalition between the Irish and Scottish Land Leagues and English Radicals. All were warm to this idea, and the five met in late August to discuss a common front, with Arch claiming 30 Members and 16 Senators were willing to join such a group.
In September 1879, the public discourse once again pivoted to Anglo-Russian Relations, this time with the crisis in Afghanistan. Afghanistan was the frontier of British India and well within the British sphere of influence, but at the time and since the Union, Russian influence had been growing in the Emirate. Since Granville's tour of the Colonies, India had been governed by a Council of High Commissioners, and Gladstone had failed to make an appointment that could appease both sides of his coalition after the dismissal of Baring, who was favoured by Chamberlain to continue his role. Disraeli, in June, had reorganised Colonial Administration to remove inconsistencies occurring from the absence of Monarchy in the British Colonial Empire. The role of Viceroy of India was abolished, and all functions were placed in the Governor-General, who was appointed by the President-Regent. On Disraeli's recommendation, Granville appointed Robert Bulwer-Lytton as the Governor-General of India and had tasked him with countering the worsening state of control of the Emirate and the increasing influence of the Russians in Afghanistan. Before his election, in the cacophony of noise surrounding the worsening Anglo-Russian relations, the current Emir, Shīr ʿAlī Khan, had admitted a Russian Envoy into Kabul for a second time, after the first arrival in 1875 soon after the discussions that formed the reason for Thomas Baring's dismissal as Viceroy. The British Indian Army represented by its Commander in Chief, Frederick Paul Haines, demanded that an envoy be accepted by the British, which was refused, further antagonising the British. They sent Neville Bowles Chamberlain, a distinguished military officer to negotiate with the Emir, who refused his entry to Kabul in November 1878. On the 21st November, during the Lustration Crisis in a story that was lost on most in Britain, British Indian Armies were sent to invade Afghanistan and quickly occupied Kabul. Shīr ʿAlī fled and died early in 1879 and his son, Yaʿqūb Khan, was raised as Emir promising suzerainty in the Treaty of Gandamak in May 1879.
This triumph was short-lived, as on September 3rd 1879, Sir Louis Cavagnari, the British Indian envoy to Afghanistan, faced a revolt from inside the country. Neither the new Emir nor the Treaty, were popular in the country and Afghan soldiers from Herat demanded back-pay from the British. Cavagnari refused the request, and with the help of a riotous Kabul population, they attacked the British Residency in the City, killing 200 occupants. Yaʿqūb Khan refused to intervene. In the context of heightened tensions, and with the Bulgarian Crisis still ongoing, this was perceived as an Act of War and Disraeli & Lytton decided to reoccupy the Emirate in October 1879. The brilliant military general, Sir Frederick Roberts, a veteran of the first campaign, was recalled to identify the killers, place them on trial and if needed, execute them. Despite Yaʿqūb Khan's presence amongst the military personnel for the British, the Afghan Army resisted the invasion and a battle was fought at Charasiab. Roberts won the battle and reoccupied Kabul, but resistance from the Afghan Army and opponents of the British, funded by the Russians, continued to resist and several Afghan armies marched on Kabul leading up to Christmas, leading to the British Army retreating to the more defensible position. While they retook Kabul on Christmas Eve, Yaʿqūb Khan was considered complicit and forced to abdicate. Without a ruler, Afghanistan remained under British & Indian military occupation, with no civilian authority whatsoever as the new decade arrived and the British occupation was harsh, with firing squads and hanging reported as the insurgency had brought the belief amongst Roberts and his leadership that all were complicit in the anti-British violence. William Gladstone made a speech to the House of Commons echoing Liberal opinion in Britain decrying the savage treatment of the locals - "By what right, in public law or moral justice, do we now affect to treat the conquered people as rebels, hang their generals and their priests, each of whom led them to defend their country?" Gladstone continued to advocate for the Afghans: "Remember the rights of the savages, as we call him. Remember that the sanctity of human life in the hill villages of Afghanistan among the winter snows, is as inviolable in the eye of Almighty God as can be your own." Roberts maintained he used appropriate force to pacify the Afghans and maintain law and order and curbed the "natural fanaticism" of the Afghan people, but Liberals and Radical alike argued for the maintenance of law and the protection of the ethnic sensibilities in the region. The campaign was also enormously costly and had dragged the British Indian Army into a military conflict that had sunk any chance of Lytton (and Baring before him)'s primary concern - much needed Economic Reform of India.
Discussions on the future of the Emirate raged in Britain in the context of a new concept being touted by Joseph Chamberlain - Federalisation. Federalisation was first mentioned in regards to the Union's relationship with Australia. Sir Henry Parkes, the Premier of New South Wales and the most high profile politician in the Australian subcontinent, believed that the best way to ensure stability in the Empire was to create larger, federated units that would take on a greater degree of autonomy and would coordinate with the Mother Country on matters of Imperial Defence and Free Trade, a more cost-effective strategy than the current situation of provisions being made available from Britain and reliance from the mother country. Parkes envisioned a stronger, more autonomous colony in Australia on the same lines as the first Federated Colony, Canada. With Federalism being introduced to the British Isles in 1875, obsession with Federalisation became fervent among a new breed of Democratic Imperialists within the Radical cause, and united Charles Dilke and Joseph Chamberlain on their colonial policy. Knowing that a failure to develop a coherent Foreign Policy had cost the Democratic Federation dearly during the election, he commissioned a series of pamphlets in The Beehive, published by a collection of Democratic Imperialists, such as John Morley and the relatively unknown Albert Milner, in favour of the "natural continuation of the Union process to encapsulate all the Anglo-Saxon Colonies". They argued that larger units combined several colonies outside of the Anglo-Saxon Colonies on a regional basis in a semi-autonomous state. Chamberlain utilised this argument in his column on Afghanistan to argue that the breakup of Afghanistan and its absorption into British India as a series of ethnic Presidencies; Pashtunistan, Balochistan (merged with the British Indian Agency in the North West of British India) and Badakhshan, co-opting regional leaders that could gradually transform into a political Union like the Union of Britain. This process could be completed elsewhere in the Union, with Australia, Southern Africa and Canada forming the basis of a worldwide "Union of Unions", securing British interests with a watch-tower on every corner of the globe. Further "Unionisation" could occur in the colonies to bring the British system of Government around the world. The debate had one noticeable absentee - Disraeli, who throughout 1879 had been privately suffering from ill-health that brought others, most significantly Stafford Northcote, to the forefront of the party once again. Disraeli, a keen advocate of the intervention, did not partake in any debate on the matter from November 1879, and many within the Tory benches considered a Senatorial role perhaps more suitable for Disraeli, with the less frequent sittings and less exposure to public scrutiny.
Political Authority for Roberts eroded as the new year beckoned, with the news that Abdur Rahman Khan, son of a previous Emir, had fostered an Army in the North of the country to fight the British. Sir Lepel Henry Griffin, a senior diplomat, was sent by Lytton to act as a 'Political Chief of Staff' to supplement Roberts' military authority and attempt to bring peace. Gathorne Hardy, the Colonial Secretary, sent a communique to Lytton, Roberts and Lepel Griffin to resolve the situation "to the full extent of the Union's interests in Central Asia" - which Roberts took to mean the military pursuit of Abdur Rahman, Lytton took to mean the annexation and division of Afghanistan into ethnic territories with British India and Griffin took to mean the de-escalation of tensions. In the end, none would occur during the life of the Conservative Union Council. Roberts was nuzzled out of the decision-making, due to his antagonising of the native population, by Lytton and Griffin, who believed a peaceful solution could be achieved with Rahman. The two negotiated, a settlement to make Rahman the Emir of Kabul, an independent Emirate under British influence, with occupation continuing in the ethnically diverse regions of Pashtunistan and Balochistan - but while suzerainty would be continued, local leaders would be responsible for domestic affairs, similar to some of the Indian States. This concept was generated by the reality on the ground - Kandahar continued to be relatively quiet, but the North of the country was descending into civil war, and Lytton, Griffin and Hardy believed one of the warring parties would accept British hegemony in the future. Sher Ali, the cousin of the deposed Emir, was declared the Emir of both of the Southern States and was given his own army with a British Garrison for support. Northcote stated to the House in place of Disraeli describing the situation, which by now had become notorious in the British public's eyes as a costly, derisory failure. Chamberlain turned the political knife, supporting the measure but decrying "the lack of evidence to support the reality of the myth of the Leader of the House" in late January 1880. Three days later, a game of musical chairs occurred: Richard Cross resigned from the Senate to fight a by-election in Southwark on the 13th February, which he won, beating the favoured Progressive in the seat, and a Senate seat arose in the Metropolis, which James McGarel Hogg was requested to appoint Disraeli to. Hogg considered resisting but Gladstone recommended he take the request seriously - "it'll deny them their only hand outstretched to the working man, and leave them with the derision of Northcote, Mr Mayor. They'll be gone within the year."
He was pretty accurate about that.