Customer Reviews

The Queen Has Been Pleased: The British Honours System at Work

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

One advantage that a nation with an established aristocracy may have over one that doesn't recognize inherited titles is that the former can always offer rewards to its citizens that cost it almost nothing to give -- the grant of a knighthood or a peerage. Americans may not be aware that more than half the inherited titles presently held in the UK are actually only a couple of generations old, and that only something like one-third predate the reign of Victoria. The average Briton is perfectly aware that titles have been for sale for a very long time, and also that lesser honors -- knighthoods, CVOs, and so on -- are extremely class-conscious. This book began as an article written for Labour Research, which may tell you where the author is coming from, but he makes a more explicit accusation in his Preface, noting that "I have been particularly obstructed in my endeavours by officials from the Conservative Party Central Office, to whom I offer no thanks." He begins with an excellent chapter summarizing the structure of the English peerage and the labyrinthine ins and outs of the present honors system, paying special attention to the ways in which awards are given to the theoretically deserving based not so much on their accomplishments as on their existing social status. "No matter how wonderful you are as a youth-club leader, the most you can hope for is an MBE." An administrative time-server on some vague national committee, on the other hand, can expect a CBE for minimal services rendered.

Then he gets down to it. The modern sale of titles -- and there's simply no other word for it -- began with the ascent of James I in 1603. He raised hundreds of thousands of pounds by creating new baronies for those willing to pay, doubling in a couple of decades the number that had existed for five hundred years. Nor was the commerce restricted to creating barons. As an example, the widow of Sir Moyle Finch, Bart., was made a viscountess for the sum of £12,000 and a nice set of tapestries; her present-day descendant still holds the title Earl of Winchilsea. In 1611, King James invented the new rank of baronet, midway between knights and barons, which he sold in order to raise funds for the suppression of the Irish. The Hanoverians were less ostentatious about the commerce in titles, especially in the effective restriction of new dukedoms to members of the royal family, with only rare exceptions, and none at all since 1874. Instead, the various King Georges granted peerages in return for political favors. As the position of Prime Minister developed, these politically-inspired creations became controlled by whichever party was in power. The early Victorians, especially Peel, were considerably more restrained, but Gladstone rediscovered title-creation as a means to redressing the political balance of the House of Lords. Nor was it a matter only of politics. Lloyd George is often derided for his wholesale creation of new titles in return for generous contributions to the party in power, but he merely streamlined the longstanding system. Harold Macmillan made heavy use of knighthoods in exchange for political support but, in more recent times, it was Harold Wilson's honors list of 1970 (including a barony for his personal secretary and a baronetcy for his personal physician) that brought widespread condemnation and a reactive flurry of reform legislation. These included the near ending of hereditary new honors and a reduction in the number of honors for civil servants -- especially those who managed the honors system itself . No surprise: All such reforms were immediately reversed upon taking office by Margaret Thatcher. Coming up to the present (1986, that is), Walker demonstrates convincingly that the great majority of new peerages continue to go to those individuals who, either individually or funneled through the corporations they control, make lavish donations to the party in power, which at that time was the Conservative Party. It would be interesting to see a sequel study on the past twenty-five years, especially on the age of Tony Blair and the curtailment of the power of the House of Lords.