General Introduction from G K Chesterton at the Daily News: Literature, Liberalism and Revolution,...

7/29/2019 General Introduction from G K Chesterton at the Daily News: Literature, Liberalism and Revolution, 19011913

1/24

xv

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Tis edition o the contributions o Gilbert Keith Chesterton (18741936) to

the leading Liberal newspaper theDaily News1 between 1901 and 1913 has beenmade in response to a growing interest in Chestertons work among scholars andgeneral readers alike. It is the rst edition o its kind, comprising much o hisbest journalism on a range o subjects and interests. In responding to the issueso the day, he developed the ideas and belies that became central to his thought.It is inevitable that much o his journalism across three decades should bear themark o haste; but in the essays reprinted here his creative vitality was rarelycompromised by the pressure o deadlines. At the time they became collectorsitems; one albeit incomplete set is preserved in the British Library.2 Tis edi-tion complements the volumes o Chestertons contributions to theIllustrated

London News between 1905 and 1936, published by Ignatius Press in their Col-lected Works o G. K. Chesterton series. However, hisDaily News articles providegreater insights into his political and spiritual views at a ormative stage thanthe more lighthearted pieces he wrote or the Our Note Book column o the

Illustrated London News. Te contributions are also more varied, including bookreviews and letters to the editor as well as his regular columns. Te space devotedto readers letters in the Daily News provided Chesterton and his readers withopportunities to engage with one another that were not available in the Illus-trated London News.

Te ull run o the Daily News or the years in which Chesterton was asso-ciated with it is held by a small number o research libraries only. Te eight

volumes comprising this edition ensure that his contributions are more readilyaccessible. As well as obviating the need to search through microlm o oen

poor newspaper copy, the volumes bring together the entirety o his output orthe newspaper.3 Moreover, through cross-reerencing between articles in thenotes, the edition provides a perspective on Chestertons work or a prominentorgan o the Liberal press that emphasizes its unity. Tis is in contrast to theimpression o ragmentation made by reading individual essays.


2/24

xvi G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

Previous Publishing History

A number o these pieces have been reprinted beore in editions compiled byChesterton himsel while he was still with the paper, and by various editors aerhis death. Prominent among the latter was his last secretary, Dorothy Edith Col-lins (18951988). As Chestertons literary executrix, she edited ve collectionso his essays between 1949 and 1975; these were drawn rom his voluminous

work or other organs o the periodical and newspaper press as well as theDailyNews, and were organized around broad themes. But though valuable in makingChestertons work more widely available, the selections were made rom amongthe less contentious and what seemed the less dated parts o his output. Further-

more, those included were edited, sometimes substantially and always silently.Tis was not just to produce composite essays but also to remove all reerencesto the context in which they were written. Absent rom the Collins editionsare the articles in which Chesterton engaged with the manoeuvrings o the

political elite and with what he considered to be worrying trends in Edwardianpublic policy. Also absent are his numerous controversial pieces on inuentialcontemporary thinkers, writers and movements. In diferent ways, other editorso Chestertons work have pared away the original copy to produce what oenamounts to short extracts only.4

In contrast, the present edition reprints all Chestertons writing rom theDaily News, and rom the original text. In doing so, it emphasizes the richnessand intensity o public debate in Edwardian England, with which Chestertons

thought is tightly enmeshed.

Annotation

Te edition seeks to recover the context o the material and enhance under-standing o its meaning and signicance through extensive annotation. In thisrespect as in others it goes beyond existing collections o the essays that arereprinted as raw as well as expurgated text. Editorial notes are provided on anumber o ronts. First, they give details o the persons and events at the centreo the articles. As a conscientious reader o the press as well as a leading column-ist himsel, Chestertons articles are oen built around those who eatured in thenews, both public gures (usually in connection with a recent speech or address)

and ordinary citizens (usually in connection with a recent injustice that had beenvisited upon them). Second, the notes identiy the numerous literary, historical,and biblical quotations and resonances in his essays that Chesterton himsel leunreerenced. On the whole he could assume a level o general knowledge osuch things that the reader o today probably does not have.5 Tird, the notesidentiy the sources o the articles in newspapers and periodicals with whichhe engaged and elaborate on their contents as necessary. Fourth, as mentioned


3/24

General Introduction xvii

above, the notes identiy cross-currents between the various contributions. Fih,the notes identiy the various policies, Commissions, Bills and laws to which hereers. Finally, the notes give details o republication where the essays have beenreproduced in complete or nearly complete orm rather than in part.

extual Variants

In addition to the notes, the edition includes all textual variants as between theoriginal essays and those that were collected during the period in which Ches-terton was employed on the newspaper. Tese appear at the end o each piece.Tey illustrate the sometimes substantial revision in which he engaged prior to

republishing his work. For example, he enlarged a number o the literary essaysthat ormed the basis o welve ypes in 1902 and sharpened the already acute

polemical edge o some o the later political essays inA Miscellany o Men in 1912.Increasingly, he took pains to remove reerences to the articles, letters to the editorand reviews in theDaily News and other organs o the press that had promptedthe essays, no doubt in order to reduce their ephemeral appearance. However, asone reviewer oA Miscellany o Men noted, the missing context le some sentencesscarcely intelligible.6 For this reason and also the wider interest that the original as

well as the revised passages hold, both versions are reprinted here.Te textual variants that occur in the essays collected by Dorothy Collins

have mostly been summarized in the rst ootnote alongside details o the sourceo republication. In the ew instances where a more detailed approach is war-

ranted, the variants appear at the end o the piece.

Letters to the Editor

Chestertons numerous letters to the editor have never been reproduced inanthologies o his work; nor have they eatured in studies o his lie and thought.Yet the letters were oen equal in length to his columns, and show Chestertonat his most combative. Some were replies to critics on the correspondence page;others were responses to editorials in the newspaper or controversies on the let-ters page which others had initiated. Some o those with whom he engaged inthis way were ordinary readers o the newspaper; others were well-known writersand activists, or example George Bernard Shaw, R. B. Cunninghame Graham,

H. N. Brailsord, Henry Nevinson, Joseph McCabe, Henry Salt, Henry HirstHollowell and Cicely Hamilton. Te letters covered a wide range o topicsincluding the Fabian deence o empire (1901), the role o religion in stateeducation (1902, 1905), Christianity versus agnosticism (1903), vegetarianism(1907), the treatment o prisoners (1908), womens sufrage (1909), the Ferrercontroversy (1909), the Coronation Oath (1910), corporal punishment (1911),and the Italian invasion o Libya in 1911. In addition to Chestertons letters,


4/24

xviii G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

those o his correspondents are also included; these reect the concerns andopinions o some o the Liberal Partys ardent supporters. Te readership o thenewspaper was concentrated heavily in what has been aptly termed the amor-

phous suburban classes whose sel-regard and dedication to sel-improvementset the tone or the era.7 Oen, the letters rom readers emphasize Chestertonsdistance rom their religious and political views. He difered especially rom hisNonconormist readership, a readership whose convictions had been throwninto doubt by the same orces o unbelie that he had experienced in earlier

years, and whose uncertainty was exacerbated by signicant ideological changeswithin Liberalism itsel towards the end o the nineteenth century.8 But therewere also sympathetic letters rom those who ound his writing persuasive, andthese are o as much interest to historians o British Liberal thought as thoseexpressing disagreement.

Other Inclusions and Exclusions

In addition to Chestertons own work in the Daily News, the edition also con-tains two pieces about him written by colleagues on the paper: one by the

parliamentary correspondent, Philip Whitwell Wilson, in 1907 and the otherby the editor, A. G. Gardiner in the ollowing year. Tese two items illustrate theimpressions that Chesterton made on his contemporaries.

For reasons o space, it has not been possible to include here another meas-ure o Chestertons reception in Daily News circles: reviews o the many books

he wrote during the period o his employment. However, a list o the reviews isprovided as an appendix at the end o Volume 8.

Editorial Principles

Te material is reproduced in the orm in which it rst appeared. Tis includesperiod spelling o words such as or ever, worth while, any one, to-day, ul-ness, dulness, medieaval, ecstacies, and the hyphenation o road names, orexample, Stanley-road; also variable spelling o civilization. Included as wellare the headings and subheadings o the original articles, together with the linesand asterisks that divided them into sections. Te edition reprints Chestertonsearlier orms o authentication once he had ceased to write unsigned articles

rst as G. K. C. rom 21 March9 to 31 May 1901 and then as G. K. Chestertonat the oot o each article. Te byline (By G. K. Chesterton) appeared below thetitle(s) o his essays and reviews rom 9 September 1901 onwards. In this editionhis name is omitted rom the essays that appear aer that date.

Details o books under review are reproduced as they appeared in the literaryessays. In the early reviews such details were printed at the oot o the article, assignalled by an asterisk beside its main heading. In later reviews, bibliographic


5/24

General Introduction xix

details appeared directly under the nal subheading. In some instances it hasbeen necessary to provide ull details in a new note; in others, missing detailshave been inserted in the original ormat through the use o square brackets.

Some silent editing o obvious typographical errors has been undertaken;also, occasional suggestions o alternative ormulations in square brackets oran endnote have been provided where the sense has been lost either through a

printers error or Chestertons own thoughts running ahead o his pen.

Chestertons Association with theDaily News

Chesterton began writing or theDaily News in January 1901 ollowing six years

as an assistant in various publishing o ces.10 In the previous year he had madesporadic contributions to the Speaker, a weekly newspaper that had been cap-tured by the orces o pro-Boer opinion in Liberal journalism in 1899. owardsthe end o 1900, the Daily Newswent the same way; it was bought by GeorgeCadbury and another wealthy Liberal businessman, Franklin Tomasson, at theinstigation o David Lloyd George, and a new editor R. C. Lehmann wasduly installed. Lehmann appointed Chestertons riend Archibald Marshallas literary editor, and in turn Marshall appointed Chesterton as a regular although not, as yet, a weekly contributor. Tis brought to the staf o the

paper a writer who had experienced during the preceding decade the isolationto which many modern currents o thought led.11 Over much disparate terri-tory political, religious and literary he sought to revitalize the tradition o

Radicalism by directing it against these currents.Te stages by which Chesterton came to occupy a regular Saturday position

are markedly compressed in his Autobiography, and his biographers have ol-lowed suit;12 or a variety o reasons, it took two years beore he was to assumethat position. His rst reviews were unsigned, as was common at the time. Tis

poses a major obstacle to discerning a regular pattern in the appearance o hisearly work or the newspaper, i indeed there was one. Also, Chesterton was stillexperimenting with style, thus compounding the di culty o identiying his

work. Nevertheless, there are good grounds or believing that the unsigned arti-cles included at the start o this edition are the work o his pen, as will becomeclear presently. Tere was a considerable gap between the rst review on 16

January 1901 and the more requent although still irregular contributions thatowed rom 11 February. An obvious explanation or this is that his dbut wasinterrupted by the illness, death and uneral o Queen Victoria ; extensive report-ing o the events associated with the Queens passing meant that the literary andother recreational columns were substantially curtailed. Aerwards, Chester-tons contributions appeared requently though at irregular intervals until theend o February 1902, when there was a ve-month hiatus; during this period


6/24

xx G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

the newspaper settled down under its new editor, A. G. Gardiner, aer severalchanges o editor and disagreements within the new management concerningthe direction o Liberal Party policy.13 As a regular eature o the paper theyresumed again in July, although in January and February o 1903 they becamemore intermittent, presumably as he was completing his book on Browning.14Teir requency increased in March and rom April they occupied a regularSaturday spot his Saturday pulpit as he called it.15 From February 1904 hiscolumn moved to the editorial page o the Saturday edition where it remained with occasional absences until he le the paper in February 1913. While hecontributed a mass o articles to a range o other newspapers and periodicals inthese years, the highest concentration o his output by ar was in theDaily News.Tis was during a period when sales o the paper rose substantially rom a dailycirculation o 80,000 ollowing the Boer War to 151,000 in 1907 and 400,000 in1909 with the simultaneous publication o a Manchester edition.16

Unsigned Articles

Fieen unsigned articles have been considered suitable or inclusion here, owhich one was republished by Chesterton and two by Dorothy Collins.17 Ches-terton moved rapidly to end the anonymity in which his association with thenewspaper had begun. Tis was in keeping with his denunciation o secrecy inBritish public lie, o which he regarded anonymous journalism and reviewing as

part and parcel, along with the censorship o plays.18 However, he used his brie

apprenticeship as an anonymous reviewer to develop a style and critical per-spective that was unique to him. Te presence o his personality is not quite soobvious in the rst reviews, some o which are o a high scholarly calibre and lackthe literary swagger that was soon to become his trademark. Te grounds orsuggesting that they are his will thereore repay consideration; this will also serveto introduce some prominent eatures o Chestertons writing or the newspaperbeore a more extended treatment later in the introduction.

Te article identied here as his rst contribution, A History o ChineseLiterature, was published on 16 January 1901 (pp. 15). Te attention to datesin the review is unusual or Chesterton; however, the themes in the study thatthe reviewer chose to highlight were those close to his heart. One such themeis disorderly behaviour in the tradition o popular theatregoing in China; 19another is the obscurity o Chinese poets whom he elt justied in labellingthe Chinese Brownings aer the English poet whose oeuvre he championedunceasingly, against his admirers as much as his critics.20 Te phrase happento in the opening line o the review is one he used oen,21 and the declarationo ignorance in the sentence in which it occurs is also in character. Further evi-dence that the reviewer was Chesterton lies in the bibliography compiled by a


7/24

General Introduction xxi

Chesterton scholar John Sullivan in close association with Dorothy Collins.He cites the rst article as appearing on 6 January 1901. Tis was obviously amisprint since the 6 January 1901 was a Sunday when the newspaper was not

published. 22

Te next unsigned article, Ideals in Ireland (pp. 610) corresponds closelyto Chestertons interest in Irish literature as a vehicle o Irish nationalism, andalso his sympathy with the writers rom the middle o the nineteenth century

who sought to shi the ocus o change away rom the Anglo-Irish ascendancyto the Irish people themselves.23

Te review o a book on Swinburne that ollows employs paradox in a waythat suggests ew other candidates or authorship (pp. 1116). Te reviewerupbraided the poet or his pessimism; pessimism, however, that in certain placesturns out to be optimism in disguise; this is a amiliar eature o Chestertonscriticism.24 Furthermore, in questioning the books emphasis on Swinburne as agreat revolutionist when he was really an arch conservative, the reviewer soundeda note that can be heard in Chestertons approach to other radical thinkers.25

Te next review, o a book on Alred the Great, is more problematic in termso author identity (pp. 1721). It lacks thejoie de vivre that is a eature o Ches-tertons style; also, it is markedly erudite, in contrast to many o his essays andreviews subsequently. Nevertheless, the topic was one he never made light o. Tereview highlights the crucial role o Alred in saving Christian civilization romthe resurgence o paganism in Europe; this is the leitmotio Chestertons epic

poem Te Ballad o the White Horse published in 1911. Te reviewers sugges-tion o a possible holiday excursion over the tracks o Alreds battles westwardsrom White Horse Hill in Berkshire is also signicant; or it was a journey thatChesterton himsel was to make prior to the writing o Te Ballad in 1910.26Other aspects o the review accord with his later essays on Alred, including theone he wrote the ollowing autumn in response to the unveiling o the statue oAlred in Winchester by Lord Rosebery as part o the Alred Millenary; boththere and in an essay o 1933, he insisted that Alred was diametrically oppositein spirit to the conqueror and the imperialist o the modern age, echoing a pointthat was made in the unsigned review.27 Finally, a passing reerence to the Nornsin an essay on Kipling a week later (p. 30) adds weight to the case or his author-ship, as does the use o the word utterance, a avourite o Chestertons.

In a review the ollowing day Te English Character (pp. 224) theexuberance that is more characteristic o Chestertons early writing is apparentin reerences to the chie glories o English literature and the hundred andone things that bring the inhabitants o English villages together.28 Te wordthither is one o which he was ond, as were invocations o the penny dread-ul.29 Finally, the reviews protest against the prevailing images o the English as


8/24

xxii G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

a cold and di dent nation that the book reinorced strikes many Chestertonianchords.

Immediately below this review appeared an unsigned review o a recent booko poems by Richard Le Gallienne (pp. 258). Te reviewer delivered riendlybut wounding blows at what he regarded as the inerior kind o literary dandy-ism represented by this poet o the Decadence relative to that o other literaryepochs. Chestertons distinctive preoccupation with the damaging efects o the

fn de sicle on literary and national culture suggests strongly that he was theauthor o the review.

In a review o a recent anthology o Kiplings work the ollowing week, thereviewer emphasized the crudity o the imperialist ethos in the writers recent

work; this, he maintained, contrasted with Kiplings sensitivity to the primitiveelements o human lie in his earlier writings inspired by empire. Chestertonsown extolling o such elements will be considered presently. He would soonbecome one o Kiplings stoutest contemporary critics (pp. 2931).

Below this review appeared another, o a book about the natural world inArica intended to spark the imaginations o boys (pp. 323). Te enthusiasm othe reviewer suggests Chestertons love o such genres; o course, this was by nomeans exclusive to him, any more than was the exception the reviewer took tothe authors dislike o the Boers. But the biblical quotation in the rst sentenceis one o his avourite literary tricks. His use o the same quotation in two later

pieces points urther to his authorship (p. 33, n. 2), overriding the care that the

reviewer took over page reerencing, which might suggest otherwise.Tere can be little doubt that the remaining unsigned reviews are the work oChesterton. A democratic sensibility closely akin to his pervades a critique o theuniversity extension lecturer Churton Collins; this centred on Collinss plea orthe proessionalization o the study o literature (pp. 3440). In a similar spirit,a review the next day upheld the right o the minor poet to exist against thedisdain shown towards this gure by the literary elite (pp. 413).

Te subsequent review shared the same main heading as the Churton Col-lins review, Te Wars o Literature (pp. 447). It centred on contemporarymovements in poetry that were ounded upon a rejection o the world the culto Omar Khayym, especially. Te reviewer emphasized the error o importingEastern atalism into English culture undamentally a Christian culture, an

aspect o Chestertons thought to which we shall return; this made him thinktwice about his earlier dismissal o Collinss case or introducing greater rigourinto literary criticism. Once again, the snares o pessimism as embraced by anadvanced literary culture were impressed upon Daily News readers. It was tobecome a amiliar eature o Chestertons reviewing in the months ahead, orexample, in his unavourable review o an edition o Schopenhauers work; 30


9/24

General Introduction xxiii

also, his review o a collection o the best work o one o the ew Americanauthors who identied with the Decadent movement, Edgar Saltus.31

A nal unsigned article o the early months o 1901 that has been attributedto Chesterton here is a review o a book on the preoccupation with virtue ineighteenth-century literature (pp. 637). Tis was a period which Chestertonoen compared avourably to his own age.32 Te reviewer concurred with theconception o the good man as lying at the heart o this period; but he con-cluded on a note o irony and with illustrations that suggest ew others besideChesterton as possible authors.

Subsequent ArticlesTe unsigned articles set the pattern o Chestertons contributions subsequently.He was chiey employed on the literary page or the remainder o 1901. In this

year and or the remainder o his time at the Daily News he engaged closelywith the vibrant new inuences in literature and thought, those associated withNietzsche, Ibsen, Maeterlinck, Shaw, Kipling, Whitman, olstoy and Wells, orexample. It was with perspectives shaped by these encounters that he revieweda stream o new editions, biographies, and memoirs pertaining to the literature,

poetry and art o the previous two centuries: Scott, Tackeray, Wilde, Byron,Moore, Dickens, Shelley, ennyson, Whistler, Mary Wollstonecra, Macaulay,revelyan, Robert Browning and Elizabeth Barrett Browning are among the manysubjects o his literary reviews included in this edition. As he moved to a position

o general columnist rom 1902 onwards, his reviewing activity decreased; it wasespecially noticeable or its absence when he was engaged in writing a book him-sel. owards the end o his employment with the newspaper it almost ceasedentirely; presumably, this was as much due to his strained relations with the edi-tor and general disenchantment with the Liberal press as other calls on his time.Nevertheless, the continuity between his reviews and his more general columnsis striking; indeed, it was during the initial phase o his journalistic career as areviewer and literary essayist that the political and religious perspectives that wereto inorm his later work crystallized. Some o these have been touched on alreadyin connection with the unsigned articles attributed to him here. A uller account

will provide a more thorough preparation or the material that ollows.

Te Common Temes o ChestertonsDaily News Essays

i. Democracy

All the essays that appear in this edition are inspired by the ideal o democ-racy. Chesterton did not deend democracy in a narrow political sense but


10/24

xxiv G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

more broadly as that which belonged to, or dened, the people. He invokedthe democratic ideal in relation to common tastes, belies, instincts, emotions,interests and preerences, by which he generally meant those o the poor. Hedid so as much against the cultural and intellectual as the political elite; also,those urther down the social scale who maintained the invasive machinery o abureaucratic state that seemed to rival that o China in its indiference to humansufering.33 Foremost among the threats to democracy were mass education andde-Christianization, two processes which he regarded as tightly intertwined but

whose adverse efect on democracy could also be seen at separate levels.34 Heunderlined the threat o mass education to democracy in an early essay on Shel-ley. Tis was a review o a new school primer on the poet that in Chestertons

view was symptomatic o the trend towards drilling in education and an insultto the poetic impulse in those or whom it was intended. He underlined thethreat o anti-Christian invective to democracy in the same essay and in lateressays; he upbraided Shelley or mounting a crusade against priests and kings onthe unounded assumption that throughout history they had been held in uni-

versal contempt by mankind. Not only was this claim alse, argued Chesterton,it obscured what would probably be the rst target o popular revolt in modernsociety: reormers and philanthropists.35

In much the same vein, Chesterton used his columns to highlight what heregarded as the narrowness and superciliousness o the educated classes in their

pursuit o cultural improvement. Tis was expressed in a range o ways, or exam-

ple in the aristocratic spirit o modern mysticism that looked to the religions othe East or inspiration. It did so, he maintained, in conscious reaction againstthe democracy o Christianity that emphasized the equality o souls in the aceo one all-embracing mystery, as well as a spirit o contempt or all things nearerto home.36

Chestertons account o a visit to the inaugural meeting o the Eg ypt Societyo Bayswater in 1901 provides another illustration o what he regarded as thelimited imagination o those in the vanguard o cultural change. Te suggestiono a certain element o pretentiousness in the high seriousness o the venture wasapparent in his article; more damaging, however, were the doubts he expressedas to the authenticity o the play being perormed or the occasion, despite theearnest attempts to create such an efect by well-known gures on the London

stage. Missing were those vital eatures o democracy that would have been asmuch present in Egyptian Society as they were in the early twentieth century,or instance ashion and slang and the presence o comedy to make tragedy

pathetic.37 Tis was echoed in Chestertons other pieces on the contemporarytheatre, or example when he aligned himsel with critics such as Clement Scottin protesting against the heaviness and pessimism o the modern, Realist dramaunder the inuence o among others Ibsen and, more recently, Arthur Wing


11/24

General Introduction xxv

Pinero.38 In doing so, Chesterton stood apart rom the theatre critic o theDailyNews, Edward Algernon Baughan, who requently berated the conservatismo theatregoers and the response o theatre-managers in supplying an endlessstream o melodramas.39 Chesterton analysed this stance in the same terms assupport or noise abatement initiatives in cities. He emphasized that both streetnoise and the powerul sentiments that melodrama embodied were expressionso joy at being the sons o God, to which their opponents were dea. 40

Chesterton emphasized that democracy was rooted in the elemental andeternal orces o human lie, the raw emotions and dispositions o humanitythat embraced ear as well as delight, shyness as well as boisterousness, love as

well as hate. In this he echoed those who had sided with the romantic revivalin literature o the 1880s and 90s, or example the critic George Saintsbury and

writers such as R. L. Stevenson, Andrew Lang, Rider Haggard and Hall Caine.Tey responded to new readerships which yearned or antasy, adventure andidealism in ction ollowing the success o the penny dreadul; this was againstthe realist vogue o the lie novel in the European literature o the nineteenthcentury, with all its cynicism, despair and dull introspectiveness.41 For Chester-ton, the spirit o democracy that the New Romance embraced was well capturedin the work o Walt Whitman and Charlotte Bronte.42 Te inuence o Whit-man, in particular, ensured that hisace was set against an alternative conceptiono democracy, that which was rooted in the rational and the modern, detachedrom the past.43 In this guise, democracy was simply an instrument o control and

manipulation rather than liberty. On the one hand, it underpinned the visions othe uture projected by a new breed o sociologist; typically, these visions weremodelled upon the undiferentiated, instinct-driven lie o insects rather thanthe mammalian world o love and comradeship.44 On the other, it had uelledthe scientic perspectives o intellectual Liberalism in the nineteenth century,or example, that o Goldwin Smith. Smiths love o liberty did not extend toliberty or the Irish people, Chesterton maintained. Tis was because he had noconception o the earthiness o democracy that ound ull expression in ruralIreland, only democracy as mere voting.45

ii. Liberty

Chestertons deence o democracy was closely related to the premium he set on

personal liberty. Tis was in accordance with his belie in the capacity o humanbeings to exercise agency, reecting the will bestowed upon them by their Crea-tor. Tis second theme o ChestertonsDaily News contributions is particularlyapparent in his attack on the vogue that utopias enjoyed in Edwardian Britain.He believed that satire was the only efective response to their atuousness; notleast their attention to detail concerning uture models o society. However, heregarded their worst eature as the communal protection they aforded individu-


12/24

xxvi G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

als; in doing so they denied the expansiveness innate in humanity.46 A conceptiono the adventurous spirit o mankind as a peculiar eature o western societiesis evident across a large number o the pieces in this edition. It was inormed,Chesterton believed, by the promise o immortality held out by Christianity,and the liberation rom circumstances tribe, environment, heredity thismade possible.47 For Chesterton, the energy inherent in Christianity was turnedoutwards rather than inwards into sel-contemplation, and was the orce behindits survival in desperate times such as the eenth century.48 Te level o Chris-tian conviction at work here was a product o his engagement with a atalismthat was becoming widespread in his society, either among those who sought torevive paganism or who had become converts to Eastern religions through theTeosophist and other spiritual movements. It was also a product o his con-troversy with Secularists and atheists such as the socialist writer and journalistRobert Blatchord.49 Finally, Chestertons emphasis on personal liberty was areaction against what he regarded as its betrayal by contemporary Liberalism,the third theme o his writing or theDaily News discussed here.

iii. Liberalism

Chesterton outlined what he regarded as the ormative ideals o Liberalism inan essay o 1905. Liberalism did not consist, he maintained, as some appear toimagine, in a preerence or broad mindedness, progress and thinking as onelikes; it consists in a belie in certain doctrines, which are neither universal nor

sel-evident: the equality o man, the sel-governing State, and among othersthis o religious liberty.50 Te theme o equality and the sel-governing state

will be discussed presently. urning rst to his emphasis on religious liberty, thecontinuity it represents with classical Liberalism especially the concern orreedom o belie in the writings o John Stuart Mill is marked. Chestertonalso remained close to that tradition in the importance he attached to engag-ing with the grounds on which diferent belies were held; to dismiss a personsbelies in terms other than their wrongness was the mark o bigotry, not perse-cution, a label he reserved or reasoned intolerance. Bigotry, however, was thecurse o the modern world, and Liberals, he believed, were ast becoming itschie proponents. Certainly this seemed true o Nonconormist Liberals, whoexercised much inuence over the Liberal Party in the early twentieth century.51

In resisting the provision in the Conservative Governments Education Bill o1902 or state support o denominational education, this powerul lobby soughtnot only to enshrine its own belies in state schools in the orm o undenomi-nationalism; it also sought to discredit its opponents as servants o Rome andenemies o good citizenship at home. Te cry o No Popery raised by the lead-ing Baptist and Liberal activist John Cliford especially drew Chestertons ire.He attacked Clifords sectarianism masquerading as the public interest; but he


13/24

General Introduction xxvii

also denounced the ocus o his opposition to the Bill on these ancillary matters,matters, moreover, o questionable validity. Clifords campaign, he believed,could only redound to the disadvantage o Liberalism, clearly Chestertons prin-cipal concern at this time.52

Tat Liberalism was his principal concern in the education debate o 1902says much about the looseness o Chestertons Anglican commitment in the early

years o the twentieth century.53 Te stance he took with Cliford also empha-sizes his distance rom many, although not all readers o theDaily News,54 whoseNonconormist identity was touched on earlier. His intervention in 1902 set the

pattern or his contributions to the continuing debate on the role o religion ineducation: in 1905 just beore the Liberals returned to o ce on a commitmentto repeal the 1902 Act and in 1906 and 1908 as the new Government struggledto win support in Parliament or a replacement Act. Te essence o his position

was a plea or the secular solution to an issue on which, in his view, there was noother basis or agreement. Tat solution entailed the exclusion o religion romeducation altogether as serving the best interests o both.55

Tis concern separated Chesterton clearly rom Secularist advocates o thesecular solution to the educational impasse; in his view, secularism in education

was the basis or strengthening Christian orces in readiness or the great spiritualbattle that lay ahead.56 Secularism in education was also the key to maintainingreedom o religious belie. His conception o the interdependence o Christian-ity and Liberalism is most evident here. On a wider ront, Chesterton used his

Daily News columns to counteract the legacy o the Secularist movement in thenineteenth century, and the rationalism and materialism on which it had ed.57He was sensitive to the vehement opposition to Christianity that had uelledboth that movement and its ofshoot, the Humanist movement;58 but, as withNonconormity, he was also concerned about their claims on Liberalism and theradicalism integral to that political creed. Tis was especially as the connectionsthat had been orged between Secularism and Socialism in the 1880s began tobreak apart.59 One o his tactics in addressing what he believed to be the anti-Liberal as well as anti-Christian orces within Secularism was to emphasize itsineriority to Christianity with regard to what it called reethought, and henceChristianitys greater proximity to the Liberal tradition. Unlike their Secularistoes, Christians continually doubted their creed and questioned its assumptions,

which, he claimed, were all the more secure as result.60

Moreover, he made mucho the parochial criteria that Secularists used when studying and invariably

judging other societies in history; the Victorian anthropologists, imbuedwith rationalism, were cases in point.61 He maintained that Secularists werealso unwilling to speculate on the place o their own epoch in the wider span ohuman history, past and uture. By contrast, genuine ree thought took posses-sion o all human history and in a spirit o wonder rather than scepticism and


14/24

xxviii G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

condemnation; it was prepared to question things that had never been ques-tioned beore rather than continually questioning the same ew old doctrines inthe manner o modern reethought.62

Te Christian subtext here is evident; but it is even more apparent in anotherimaginative piece written in 1907. Tis was cast in the orm o a able with astrong apocalyptic ring, one o his avourite modes o cultural and political criti-cism in his time at theDaily News. Te able concerned the obsession o a smallboy with uprooting a plant in the garden, an act orbidden by his elders but orno good reason. He was determined to uproot it nevertheless. Yet although aerrepeated attempts he was unsuccessul, he caused untold harm and damage,

plunging humanity into the marsh and the abyss.63Tis was an allegory on the present predicament o Christianity, heavily

under siege by Secularist thinkers and movements. Te allegory has a amiliarBurkean ring with its emphasis on the dangers o setting men to trade on theirown private stock o reason rather than availing themselves o the general bankand capital o nations, and o ages.64 Chesterton shared Burkes sensitivity tothe pessimism and nihilism as well as the moral relativism connected with suchtendencies in thought. Tis he chose to portray through dystopian antasy. Hisaccount in 1907 o a nightmare world centred on the reconstruction o St PaulsCathedral by architects who were ree thinkers in the narrowest sense o theterm provided a graphic illustration o his worst ears.65

However, against Burke, Chesterton regarded the intellectual currents o the

modern age as a sharp deviation rom, rather than the ullment o the Liberalideal. He set the date o this ominous turn o events at 1870, the year that Dick-ens died and Paris ell to the might o Prussia. Dickenss vision o the English

people as the masters o England had ailed in the ace o a ar more limited con-cern to ameliorate the conditions o the poor;66 Liberty became a legend in theace o Bismarck; aith crumbled under the weight o Darwinism; and enthusi-asm or a cause o any kind was at a large discount. Te last gasp o Liberalism

proper in Britain was the crusade or Home Rule beore it too was abandonedin 1886. Te all-encompassing void thereaer was lled by a master o levity ona grand scale: Oscar Wilde.67

Chestertons critical view o thefn de sicle to which Wilde was centraland the large role he believed it had played in the death o Liberalism inspired

many o the essays here. In his reviews and other columns he trained his sightson the writers and artists associated with the Decadence: Aubrey Beardsley,George Moore and Max Beerbohm as well as Wilde, and other contributors tothe inamous Yellow Book. Te Decadence injected a new reshness into the

fn de sicle movement aer the earlier phase o Aestheticism began to ag. othe emphasis o Aesthetes such as Walter Pater on beauty as its own end, theDecadents explored new elds o sensual and sexual variation.68 What most con-


15/24

General Introduction xxix

cerned Chesterton about the Decadence was the morbidity that underpinnedits taste or sexual experiment. He believed that this reected wider trends inthe spiritual lie o modern society that inoculated individuals against terror andear, normally the counterpart o joy.69 Tis was linked in turn to the ragmenta-tion o human interests as metaphysics and psychology, art and ethics becamedivorced rom a wider creed and were cultivated or their own sakes.70 Gone wasthat architectonic view o public lie and morals that Chesterton believed hadinormed the doctrine o the Rights o Man in the French Revolution and wasthe legacy o religion. It was a point he made in 1903 in connection with therecent deaths o the Impressionist artist James Abbot McNeil Whistler and the

poet William Ernest Henley. Both led the movement o revolt o which the Dec-adence was the public ace, severing the ties between art and delight in existence,on the one hand, and morals and ear, on the other.71 Subjectivism and solip-sism were the natural concomitants o this process in art, literature and thought.Te loss o the wider perspectives o philosophy and religion in human activityimpacted heavily on politics as well. Although the result o what Chestertontermed a ory revival in culture mirroring the oligarchic turn in national lie,72Liberalism was also afected. Tis can be seen in the ourth area that Chester-tonsDaily News articles cover: the transormation o the Liberal Party rom anagent o liberty to that o regulation.

iv. Te Liberal Party

In his 1905 essay Bigotry versus Intolerance, Chesterton identied equalityand the sel-governing state as the dening ideals o Liberalism, alongside thato religious liberty. Equality was not to be conused with a static and inexiblesociety, as a previous generation o university Liberals, or example J. S. Mill,had assumed. It was instead the condition o creative energy among individu-als, energy channelled by military discipline that was nonetheless able to bend

yet spring back into place when required. Tis conception o equality was sug-gested to Chesterton in 1910 in contemplating the not-quite-straight but arrom ormless urrows that rippled across a wide landscape.73 In his view theyenhanced rather than detracted rom its appearance; they were an allegory othe rules that were central to Liberalism in guarding against the development osecret power on which oligarchies thrived and practised arbitrary government,

power that endangered sel-government in turn. Tis was a point that Chester-ton levelled against contemporaries such as Edward Carpenter who sought toground political democracy in the spiritual lawlessness o Eastern religions.74For Chesterton, the maintenance o general rules by a democracy o equalcitizens should have been the inorming ideal o Liberal Party policy once itreturned to power in 1906. However, it was an ideal that it seemed determinedto ignore.


16/24


17/24

General Introduction xxxi

in a ear or England, a ear that was central to his patriotism, the h and naltheme o his writing to be considered here.

v. Patriotism and England

Across Chestertons writing or theDaily News lay the imprint o his patriotism, apatriotism ocused intensely but not narrowly upon England. His English patri-otism, like his consciousness o what it was to be English, was ancestral in origin,as he made clear in hisAutobiography.88 However, it was sharpened and vitalizedby his reaction against the Boer War and the legacy o distrust o governmentthat the War bequeathed. Many o the essays here ofer alternative perspectives

on patriotism to the imperialistic version that dominated the Conservativepress, perspectives with England at their heart. Some essays engage with promi-nent imperialist writers and politicians such as Rudyard Kipling , W. E. Henley,

Joseph Chamberlain and Cecil Rhodes; other essays launch attacks on the pro-motion o the cause o empire at a popular level, the celebration o Empire Day,or example, which Chesterton loathed.89 Te England that he elevated in placeo the Empire and Britain was located in the imagination rather than in terri-tory; it was above all a loyalty, and one grounded in a sense o peril rather thana racial or an expansionist imperative.90 As emphasized already, he supportednational independence or the small nations that Britain had oppressed, theBoers and the Irish especially; this extended to a sympathy or nations at thesharp end o other imperialist states, not least urkey. Chesterton used his col-

umns to berate the European powers or ailing to aid the Balkan nations inexpelling the urk rom Europe in 1912, a urther indication, he believed, othe decline o Liberalism.91 But he was not only concerned to pitch patriotismagainst imperialism; he also used it to undermine cosmopolitan thinkers such asNorman Angell in his earlier guise as Ralph Lane and the Manx writer turnedcosmopolitan campaigner Hall Caine.92 Against them he argued that true citi-zens o the world remained wedded to their localities; it was only through suchmeans that sympathy with humanity could be nurtured.

Chesterton explored English sensibilities in literature and culture in a largenumber o hisDaily News essays; he ound the contrast between Irish and Eng-lish spirituality particularly revealing.93 Most o all, however, he used humourand satire to dispel any notion that the English were given to imperialism. Teir

entanglement in empire, he maintained, owed more to oreign than native inu-ences.94 Te anti-Semitic overtones that became increasingly present in his

writing are evident in some o theDaily News essays in which he attacked impe-rialism. Tose concerning individuals connected with the mining industry inSouth Arica, or example Alred Beit and George Albu, are particularly relevanthere.95 On the other hand, his opposition to imperialism was not limited to anti-


18/24

xxxii G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

Semitism, as can be seen in his denunciations o Cecil Rhodes as a master o theart o deception.96

Te End o Chestertons association with theDaily News.

Chestertons relationship with the readership, the editor and the owner o theDaily News deteriorated rom around 1907. At issue was his sense that increas-ingly, the Liberal Party was betraying Liberalism in becoming part o the

plutocracy that now dominated British politics.97 Tis perception coloured hispolitical attitudes and lent a petulance to some o his opinions certainly asexpressed in the correspondence columns o which his readers grew weary. His

rst conrontation with the editor occurred in 1907 when he deended a back-bench Liberal MP, Hugh Lea, or questioning the integrity o the prime minster,Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, in allegedly selling honours to boost partyunds. Te conrontation with Gardiner recurred in December 1911 over hisopposition to the National Insurance Act. In both instances his regular column

was censored.98 Te silencing o Chesterton over the Act opened the way or hisdeparture rom the newspaper just over a year later. Te trigger was a satirical

poem entitled A Song o Strange Drinks that he published in the New Witness,a journal associated with his brother, Cecil Chesterton, and Hilaire Belloc, anddedicated to the exposure o hypocrisy, sanctimoniousness and corruption in

public lie. It included a reerence to the caddishness o Cocoa, an obvious snubto the proprietor o the Daily News, George Cadbury. Invited by Gardiner to

correct any misleading impressions to which the poem had given rise, Ches-terton reused and le a newspaper he had served or twelve years. 99 His ewremaining contributions were ad hoc pieces bearing on particular controversies.Tey include a letter to the editor on the Marconi Scandal in June 1913, criticiz-ing the newspapers endorsement o the report o the Parliamentary Committeeo Inquiry into the afair.100 Had there not been a breach between Gardiner andChesterton earlier in the year over the Song o Strange Drinks, it is unlikely thatChestertons position on the Daily News could have survived their diferencesover Marconi.

Conclusion

Any assessment o Chestertons signicance as a contributor to theDaily Newsmust take account o the context o cultural, political and intellectual change in

which he wrote. His columns were a response primarily to the proound unset-tling o belie at all levels, a general uncertainty that ound a particular resonancein the newspaper. He was disturbed especially by what he considered to be theconservative implications o the attack on Christianity at the centre o thisupheaval in thought. In coupling orthodoxy in religion with revolution in poli-


19/24

General Introduction xxxiii

tics, Chesterton struck a distinctive note in Britain in the years leading up to theFirst World War. It was one that sought to restore what he considered to be thedemocratic heart o Liberalism with its basis in Christianity.101 Among otherthings, this was against the reshaping o Liberal thought and practice in thenineteenth century by a new proessional elite.102 However, while a distinctive

presence in literature and journalism, he made common cause with a numbero public gures o his own and recent times, or example, Lord Russell o Kil-lowen, Sir William Butler, George Wyndham, and Josiah Wedgwood.

o what extent might Chesterton be considered successul as a Daily Newsjournalist? On the debit side, he clearly ailed in his attempt to goad his com-patriots into revolt against the plutocratic order that, in his view, threatened toengul England in the years leading up to the First World War. On the debit sidetoo are the tensions in the various positions he adopted and the problematicnature o some o those positions or Liberalism. For example, his opposition tothe enranchisement o women raised charges o a glaring inconsistency in hisconcern or liberty in modern society, to which he responded unconvincingly.103He was prone to questioning the outrage expressed by his contemporaries atthe inhumane practices o autocratic countries when the practices o their owncountry were less than perect; although a detestation o smugness with regardto England was basic to his patriotism, this tendency raised questions about his

judgement at times.104 He could sometimes miss the irony in statements by hisopponents;105 or he could read into their remarks more than was warranted.106

In general, the more he was criticized, the more entrenched his position became.Nevertheless, through his columns at the Daily News Chesterton main-tained the pressure on the Liberal Party both in and out o o ce to uphold the

principles o liberty and democracy. Tis applied also to the assorted Secular-ists, radicals and Liberal progressives who vied or space on the paper and inother organs o the press. As both a columnist and reviewer, he did much toenrich Liberal thought at the beginning o the twentieth century, orcing someo its leading exponents onto the deensive. He pointed to the illusory Englandinhabited by many o his compatriots, condent o its strengths and blind to its

weaknesses.107 Generally, his interventions were in tune with a wider movemento unease at the new authority enjoyed by experts.108 His concern to personal-ize politics, especially in the ace o the draconian law o libel and a misplaced

spirit o charity in British public lie, exposed the special interests which oenenjoyed their protection.109 Above all, Chestertons strategy in his Daily News

years was to amuse his readers while at the same time impressing on them theambiguities o the progress that Edwardian writers and thinkers celebrated. Hisessays rom this period have retained their power both to entertain and chal-lenge the shibboleths that remain integral to modern society.


20/24

xxxiv G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

Notes1. Aer 13 May 1912, it became theDaily News and Leader.2. ChestertonsDaily News regular columns rom 19047 collected by James Denys Orpen

is at Add. Mss. 7344073441 o the Chesterton Papers; another volume o cuttingsrepresenting Chestertons reviews or the paper, 19017, is missing rom the collection.See Te British Library Catalogue o Additions to the Manuscripts: Te G. K. Chesterton

Papers (London: British Museum, 2001), p. 151.3. Several o his essays included in other collections cite theDaily News as the original

source o publication. However, these have not been ound. Tey are Historical Novels(1901), Sherlock Holmes (1901), and Te Spirit o Place inHA; Lunacy and Letters(1901), Te Poetry o Cities (1901), Te Library o the Nursery (1901), and TeSins o the Russian Princes (1906) inLL; and Books or Boys (date unknown), in CM.

4. See A. L. Maycock (ed.), Te Man Who Was Orthodox: A Selection om the UncollectedWritings o G. K. Chesterton (London: Dennis Dobson, 1963); and B. Hillier (ed.), TeWit and Wisdom o G. K. Chesterton (London: Continuum, 2010).

5. Tis level o knowledge was a result o the strenuous autodidactic culture o the secondhal o the nineteenth century that was both strengthened and eclipsed by the 1870 Edu-cation Act. It was a culture that centred on a conservative canon o literature, althoughone that could still provide the stimulus to radical thought: see J. Rose, Te Intellectual

Lie o the British Working Classes (New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2001),esp. pp. 12830.

6. [Anon.], Mr. Chestertons Wrath,DN, 28 November 1912, p. 8.7. S. Koss,Fleet Street R adical: A. G. Gardiner and the Daily News (London: Allen Lane,

1973), p. 66.8. J. Coates, Chesterton and the Edwardian Cultural Crisis (Hull: Hull University Press,

1984), pp. 678, and see the remainder o ch. 3 or a perceptive discussion o Ches-

tertons interaction with his readers. For the disturbances in European thought thatunderpinned the shi rom old to new Liberalism centred on state intervention, seeG. Gerson,Margins o Disorder: New Liberalism and the Crisis o European Consciousness(New York: State University o New York Press, 2004).

9. A nal unsigned review appeared on 22 March, which, as a longer essay, had probablybeen held over rom an earlier submission.

10. See Reading the Riddle, 20 April 1907, Volume 4, pp. 2058, n. 2. (Here and hence-orth in this Introduction, all articles by Chesterton reer to those that appeared in the

Daily News and are reproduced in the eight volumes o this edition.)11. For Chestertons early intellectual development, see W. Oddie, Chesterton and the

Romance o Orthodoxy: Te Making o GKC, 18741908(Oxord: Oxord UniversityPress, 2008), ch. 3.

12. Chesterton, Autobiography, CW, 16, p. 119; I. Ker, G. K. Chesterton: A Biography(Oxord: Oxord University Press, 2011), p. 74.

13. Koss,Fleet Street Radical, pp. 427.14. See J. Stapleton, Christianity, Patriotism, and Nationhood: Te England o G. K. Chester-

ton (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2009), p. 49, n. 26.15. Chesterton,Autobiography, CW, 16, p. 119.16. Koss,Fleet Street Radical, p. 66.17. Te anonymous essay republished by Chesterton is Te Mistake about Stevenson, 14

March 1901, pp. 527, below. Te two pieces that were republished in a collectionedited by Dorothy Collins appeared as editorials later in 1901; they are Walking ours,


21/24

General Introduction xxxv

23 September 1901, pp. 197200, and Elizabeth Barrett Browning, 24 September1901, pp. 2014, below.

18. For his dislike o anonymous reviewing and journalism, see Anonymity and FurtherCounsels, All Tings Considered(London: Methuen, 1908), pp. 1638; also Pseudo-nyms,DN, 4 December 1909, Volume 6, below. For his contribution in theDaily Newsto the controversy over censorship occasioned by Edward Garnetts play Te Breaking

Point(1907), see Te Return o the yrant, 12 October 1907, Volume 4, pp. 3215. Forhis advocacy o peoples juries as the solution to the problem o censorship, see Staple-ton, Christianity, Patriotism, and Nationhood, p. 136.

19. Compare with Mrs Craigie and the Crowds, 19 November 1904, Volume 2, pp. 3203.

20. See or example, Browning and his Ideal, 19 August 1901, pp. 16771, below; Te

Philosophy o Robert Buchanan, 28 October 1901, pp. 2458 below; and RobertBrowning, 7 May 1912, Volume 8.21. See, or example, Te Mistake about Stevenson,DN, 14 March 1901, p. 55below.22. J. Sullivan, G. K. Chesterton: A Bibliography (London: University o London Press,

1958), p. 125.23. Although in Te Poetry o Race, 10 July 1901, pp. 1204, he cautions against an alter-

native tendency among Irish poets to condemn all modern Irish nationalists such asDaniel OConnell and Charles Stewart Parnell as an inerior breed o Irishmen com-

pared with their remote ancestors. See also A Book o the Day: Mr. Stephen Gwynn onMoore, 19 January 1905, Volume 3, pp. 1114; and Te Pathos o Belast, 20 January1912, Volume 8.

24. For other instances, see Te Optimism o Byron, 2 December 1901, pp. 2827 below;also Te Advantages o Having One Leg, 25 August 1906, Volume 4, pp. 413.

25. For example, Charles Bradlaugh; see Iconoclast, 1 August 1906, Volume 4, pp. 215.

26. He led several Daily News items in the weeks that ollowed on the basis o his trip:see Ethandune, 27 August 1910; Te High Plains, DN, 24 September 1910; and ARomance o the Marshes, 1 October 1910, all in Volume 7.

27. See Te Alred Millenary, Speaker, 28 September 1901, pp. 71415, reprinted as Alredthe Great, Varied ypes (New York; Dodd, Mead & Co., 1905); and Alred the Great,in M. Ward (ed.), Te English Way: Studies in English Sanctity om St. Bede to Newman(London: Sheed & Ward, 1933), pp. 623.

28. He uses the phrase chie glories in Penda and the Pantheists, 29 October 1910, Volume 7.29. See, respectively, A Wild Reconstruction, 13 December 1901, p. 292; and Te Eulogy

o Robin Hood, 6 June 1903, Volume 2, p. 74.30. Te Great Pessimist, 7 June 1901, pp. 948 below.31. Te Philosophy o Hair Dressers, 13 June 1903, Volume 2, pp. 7881.32. See, or example, A Glimpse o My Country, 9 March 1907, Volume 4, pp. 1747; and

Te Radicalism o Dr. Johnson, 18 September 1909, Volume 6.

33. See Te Insane Quiet, 18 February 1911, Volume 7.34. O his many articles and letters on the role o religion in education, see especially On

Dogma in Education, 20 May 1905, Volume 3, pp. 1069. Tis makes the point thatreligious education as currently conceived merely maintains the secular nature o mod-ern society.

35. See A Grammar o Shelley,DN, 12 September 1901, pp. 1859 below and see Sanityin the Slums, 3 June 1905, Volume 3, pp. 11922; or the inclusion o Swinburne and


22/24

xxxvi G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

Byron in his critique o Shelleys overestimation o the efect o rationalism in liberatinghumanity rom tyranny, see Te Soldier o Freedom, 28 November 1912, Volume 8.

36. Te Mystery o the Mystics, 30 August 1901, pp. 1725. See also his strictures on thecontemporary poet Aleister Crowley, a type o the converted decadent, or succumbingto the lure o the East: Te Conversion o the Poets, 16 June 1901, pp. 1048 below.

37. Egypt in Bayswater, 20 November 1901, pp. 2747 below.38. Te Meaning o the Teatre, 8 January 1902, pp. 3047; and Te Meaning o the Tea-

tre: Some Further Reections, 17 January 1902, pp. 30811 below.39. Doubt and the Drama, 26 September 1908, Volume 5.40. Te Beauty o Noise, 18 August 1906, Volume 4, pp. 3840.41. For the clash between romance and realism in late Victorian literary circles and the

inuence o the anthropological theory o primitive survivals in civilization that inu-

enced those connected with the romantic revival see A. Vaninskaya, William Morrisand the Idea o Community: Romance, History and Propaganda, 18801914(Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press, 2010), ch. 1.

42. See Is Tere a School o Walt Whitman, 13 November 1901, pp. 25862; and TeWild Governess, 5 December 1901, pp. 28891, below.

43. For what Chesterton regarded as the death o Radicalism in seeking to construct theuture in abstraction rom the past, see Te Fear o the Past, 7 December 1907, Volume4, pp. 3669.

44. Te Worship o the Insect, 7 March 1903, Volume 2, pp. 1821.45. Te ree o Liberty, 18 June 1910, Volume 6. See also his critical review o the recently

republished verses o Sir George revelyan composed at Oxord against the backgroundo political reorm in the mid-nineteenth century: College Fireworks, 5 October 1905,

Volume 3, pp. 2048.46. Te Impropriety o Umbrella Stands, 7 March 1908, Volume 5. Expansiveness o spirit

went hand in hand with limitation o the society o others; see In the rack o theComet, 6 October 1906, Volume 4, pp. 636.

47. See, or example, Te God o the ribe, 14 April 1906, Volume 3, pp. 3446; and OnMaking the World Small, 4 April 1903, Volume 2, pp. 412.

48. See Morality and the Clown, 28 December 1907, Volume 4, pp. 38790.49. See On Calling a Spade a Spade, 11 July 1903, Volume 2, pp. 938; Loveliness and

Electric rams, 8 April 1905, Volume 3, pp. 736.50. Bigotry Versus Intolerance, 18 February 1905, Volume 3, pp. 3840.51. However, this inuence did not translate into power aer the Party returned to o ce in

1906; see C. Bineld, So Down to Prayers: Studies in English Nonconormity, 17801920(London: J. M. Dent, 1977), pp. 2078. Te ailure o the Education Bill in 1906 andthe Licensing Bill in 1908 are indicative here.

52. See Chestertons letters to the editor Lord Haliax and Dr. Cliford, 20 September1902; Dr. Cliford and the No Popery Cry, 24 September 1902; Dr. Cliford and

the No Popery Cry, 27 September 1902; Te Cliford-Chesterton Controversy, 4October 1902, Volume 1, pp. 3848, 3914,41014below respectively.

53. For that looseness, see S. Gilley, A New Chesterton Biography, Chesterton Review, 35(Spring/Summer 2009), pp. 6976. For his identity as an Anglican, see Te Secularityo England, 24 November 1906, Volume 4, p. 100.

54. For the support that Chesterton received, see letter to the editor by W. Hicks, Fight orthe Schools, 26 September 1902, pp. 399401, below.

55. Something to Avoid, 28 April 1906, Volume 3, pp. 3547.


23/24

General Introduction xxxvii

56. Te Secular Solution, letter to the editor, 12 May 1905, Volume 3, pp. 98101. Tesame argument applied to his opposition to the Blasphemy laws: see Anybody, 11

January 1908, Volume 5, below. For the Secularist opposition to religious educationin schools ollowing the 1902 Act, see E. Royle, Radicals, Secularists and Republicans:

Popular Freethought in Britain, 18661915 (Manchester: Manchester University Press,1980), pp. 31516.

57. For the momentum that rationalism and materialism gained in European thought in thenineteenth century, see J. W. Burrow, Te Crisis o European Tought, 18481914(NewHaven, C and London: Yale University Press, 2000), esp. ch. 1.

58. For Chestertons engagement with some o the assumptions underlying the Humanistmovement, see Shelley, Mr. Salt, and Humanity, 4 February 1902, pp. 3203; and TeLogic o Cannibalism, 10 April 1906, Volume 3, pp. 3403.

59. Royle,Radicals, Secularists and Republicans, pp. 23241.60. See A Glimpse o Paganism, 17 March 1906, Volume 3, pp. 3246; also Te Iconoclast,1 August 1906, Volume 4, pp. 215.

61. See Lo, the Poor Indian, Whose Untutored Mind, 13 February 1904, Volume 2, pp.1957; Te Myth o Myths, 2 July 1910, Volume 6; Something, 9 July 1910, Volume 6;and Te Sun o Easter, 15 April 1911, Volume 7.

62. On Tinking or Onesel , 30 September 1905, Volume 3, pp. 2003.63. Te Roots o the World, 17 August 1907, Volume 4, pp. 2868.64. E. Burke, Reections on the Revolution in France (1790; Harmondsworth: Penguin

Books, 1978), p. 183.65. A Nightmare, 21 September 1907, Volume 4, pp. 31113.66. Dickens and England, 7 February 1912, Volume 8.67. Te Evil Day, 26 June 1909, Volume 5.68. D. Denisof, Decadence and Aestheticism, in G. Marshall (ed.), Te Cambridge Com-

panion to the Fin de Sicle (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), p. 39.69. See Te Red Angel, 21 December 1907, Volume 4, pp. 3836; on the centrality o mor-

bidity to the Decadence, see Burrow, Te Crisis o Reason, pp. 1834.70. On Fragments, 31 March 1906, Volume 3, pp. 3346; the development o ethical soci-

eties was a case in point.71. wo Great ories, 1 August 1903, Volume 2, pp. 1037.72. A Study in Oligarchy, 20 February 1903, Volume 2, pp. 913.73. Te Furrows, 25 June 1910, Volume 6.74. Te Rule o the Raid, 28 September 1907, Volume 4, pp. 31417.75. An Open Letter to the Liberal Party, 24 August 1912, Volume 8.76. Te Horrors o Victory, 14 January 1905, Volume 3, pp. 810.77. See note 55above.78. A Teory o yrants, 13 June 1908, Volume 5; see also one o his nest spoo pieces, A

Dialogue on Justice, 4 February 1911, Volume 7.

79. Liberty, 21 August 1909, Volume 6.80. See Te Charter, 25 May 1912, Volume 8, or his initial attack on this Bill and several

other recent Statutes that were inused with the same spirit o invasiveness and control.81. Te Witch-Smellers, 20 July 1912, Volume 8.82. A Non-Party Issue, 14 December 1912, Volume 8.83. See or example, Te Kind o Man, 26 August 1911, Volume 7.84. Te Resurrection o a Common Radical, 14 August 1909; and Dukes, 30 October

1909, both Volume 6.


24/24

xxxviii G. K. Chesterton at the Daily News, Volume 1

85. Te Peril o Conerences, 26 November 1910, Volume 7; and Te Sham Fight, 14 Sep-tember 1912, Volume 8.

86. Te Case or Revolution, 15 July 1911, Volume 7.87. See Te April Fool, 8 April 1911; Te Shy own, 29 April 1911; Te Marching ow-

ers, 13 May 1911; Te wo Fires, 1 July 1911; and Te Love o Lead, 16 September1911, all Volume 7.

88. Autobiography, CW, 16, pp. 23, 48.89. What is It?, 29 May 1909, Volume 5.90. Te Peril o a People, 28 February 1903, Volume 2, pp. 1417.91. See Impotence, 19 October 1912; and Te Soldier o Freedom, 28 September 1912,

Volume 8.92. See respectively Patriotism under Tree Flags, 27 June 1903, Volume 2, pp. 858; and

Literature and an Island, 30 July 1904, Volume 2, pp. 2657.93. See Te Conservatism o Dickens, 5 March 1904, Volume 2, pp. 2046.94. On Mr. Kipling, 21 March 1908, Volume 5.95. wo ales rom Oxord, 3 December 1904, Volume 2, pp. 3358 below; Te Fountain

o Honour, 13 January 1912, Volume 8.96. Te Rich Man, 21 July 1906, Volume 4, pp. 913.97. On the plutocratic nature o the Edwardian political elite, including the Liberal elite, see

G. R. Searle,A New England? Peace and War, 18861914 (Oxord: Oxord UniversityPress, 2004), pp. 4368.

98. See respectively Peers and Privileges, letter to the editor, 15 July 1907, Volume 4, pp.2513; and Te Mad Millionaire, 18 December 1911, Volume 7, n. 1.

99. See Stapleton, Christianity, Patriotism, and Nationhood, pp. 11213.100. Te Honour o Politics, 19 June 1913, Volume 8.101. For his illustrations o the wrong turn that Liberalism had taken, see the essays reerred

to in n. 45, above.102. See W. C. Lubenow,Liberal Intellectuals and Public Culture in Modern Britain, 1815

1914: Making Words Flesh (Woodbridge: Boydell Press, 2010).103. See A Final Word, 17 September 1909, Volume 6.104. See the controversies he entered into regarding ogging in Russian prisons (letters enti-

tled Te Sin o orture), AugustSeptember 1908; also the judicial murder o FranciscoFerrer (letters entitled Spanish Horror and English Humbug and Te Spanish Crime),OctoberNovember 1909; Volumes 5 and 6 respectively.

105. See Te Doors o Evil, 19 March 1910, n. 5; and Te Renunciations o an Optimist, 9April 1910, Volume 6.

106. Te Hunting o Error, 17 July 1909; letter by K.D.F., 20 July 1909, and Chestertonsresponse, 21 July 1909; and Nature and Other Nonsense, 11 September 1909, all in

Volume 6.107. See A Plea or Political Unreason, 24 June 1905, Volume 3, pp. 1348.

108. His role in the Stinie Morrison case o 1911 and the Eugenics controversy the ollowingyear are cases in point: see Te Morrison Mystery, letter to the editor, 11 April 1911,Volume 7; and Te Euphemists, 6 July 1912, Volume 8. See also De Auctoritate, 4 May1912, Volume 8, or the misuse o the concept o authority when applied to experts.

109. See Te Need o Personalities in Politics, 22 July 1905, Volume 3, pp. 1513; Te Lieo the Photograph, 7 January 1911, Volume 7; Te End o Parody, 18 March 1911,

Volume 7; and Charity: A Dream, 5 August 1905, Volume 3, pp. 15760.

General Introduction from G K Chesterton at the Daily News: Literature, Liberalism and Revolution,...

Documents

Transcript of General Introduction from G K Chesterton at the Daily News: Literature, Liberalism and Revolution,...