Originally posted by Johnny Canuck
I agree that the Parliamentary math for a Unionist government is not that easy. My opinion, though, is that a Unionist government would have received sufficient support for the war effort to allow it to survive for the short term, at least until an election or until a coalition government could be put in place. Many Liberals may have been willing to keep the Unionists in office to prevent an election. If they perceived the war to be popular, they may have feared that an election against the Unionists (the party of imperialism and defense) would be a catastrophic defeat for them.
There would also have been a remote possibility of Irish Nationalist support for the war effort. They did support the Liberals in the war effort, with their leader, John Redmond, making recruiting speeches and so forth. He was a constitutionalist (as opposed to a Fenian), & wanted to show that Ireland could be loyal in wartime. The Irish Nationalists may have supported the war effort without supporting the government (a delicate balance).
Either way, the Unionists would not have been able to do much on the domestic front, likely upsetting much of the Unionist backbench. Law would likely have had to find solace in a coalition within six months to a year.
I see all sorts of problems here. Firstly no British Government goes for an election during a major war. If Law was going to lead a minority administration into war in 1914 he would be stuck with it till 1918. The Liberals had a key advatage here, because tory values left the Unioinists with no choice but support the war effort. For the Liberal party this is not quite so clear. Infact I believe that Asquith needed the colalition in 1915 becuase he was running out of support in his own party. It would be the war that would split the liberals.
The nationalists would never back the Unionists. They would back the liberals in the hope that a Liberal party who was victorious in war could then pay off their loyal allies with home rule.
However let's say that Asquith government does fall and a Tory-Liberal coalition does form. This would of taken what about a week. This would of ment that the BEF would not of arrived in time to delay the Germans at Mons and Le Cateau. This would of given Klucker a much clear run into France. This leaves me in some doubt on the Government abilty to commit the BEF into central France an deven if they did would French have marched his command into Franc ebut left it gaurding the channel ports.
I don't think Law would have needed an election to go to war. An election was still almost a year and a half way in August 1914. I also don't think he would have felt a need to get a mandate from the people. The Liberals had brushed aside claims from the Unionists that they needed a mandate from the people for Irish Home Rule in the great Home Rule debates of 1912-14. Many Unionists would have felt it only fair that they would similarly have not needed an election to justify entering the war against the objections of some Liberals.
Originally posted by Johnny Canuck
I tend to think Law's position was weak. His hold over the party was never strong, & weakened considerably over the years after 1911. He agreed to a coalition government in May 1915 primarily out of fear of his backbenches getting out of control. Law himself was generally a moderate, but his backbenches pushed him to extreme positions over Ireland & other issues in the last years before the war. His primary rival was not Balfour (who was welcomed into the inner Liberal circle after August 1914), but Walter Long, who was not as moderate as Law & was supported by much of the Unionist backbench. If Law passed up an opportunity to form a Unionist government in August 1914, most Unionist MPs would have been outraged (they had been out of power for over eight years), & likely would have turned to Long. Law knew there was always a replacement in the wings.
The unioinists secrete weapon that allowed them to hold power for most of the 20th centuary was unity. The one thing that could damage the unioinists unity was tarrifs and by 1914 it was unimportant. You talk of Law as he was in 1911, a compromise candidate between Long and Chamberlian. However by 1914 he had cemented his posistion by being tough on Asquith in the Commons.
Considering that Law passed up the opertunity to fight and probably win an election in 1915. Refusing the opertunity in 1914 is nothing major. In fact a peace time election against a divided liberal party would of been Law's best chance to win. why woudl he pass up the opertunity?
Originally posted by Johnny Canuck
I also don't think Law would have been affected by the Jacks Case (Jack Law being Bonar Law's brother). This involved a Glasgow firm that Law had been a partner in until 1902. His brother Jack, though, remained as a partner. This firm unwittingly broke the embargo rules, as a shipment of iron ore to a German customer was still at sea when war was declared. Two of the partners (not Jack Law) were charged & convicted in June 1915 of trading with the enemy. It is too much to say they were helping Germany rearm. It seems to have been a one-time shipment. Also, the story did not break until the spring of 1915. It would have had no impact on the formation of a Unionist government in August 1914. Indeed, it had no impact on the formation of the coalition government in May 1915.
I thought the story broke in 1914, my appologises on that one.
