December 3rd 2016


  Buy Issue 2986
Qty:

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY Anti-discrimination law validates Safe Schools

CANBERRA OBSERVED Triggs on the way out, but her weapon (18C) must go too

ANALYSIS What is possible to a Trump White House

EDITORIAL Trump portends the start of a new political era

EUTHANASIA Late-night reprieve in SA Parliament

EAST ASIAN AFFAIRS Taiwan and Japan look extinction in the face

SEXUAL POLITICS Victorian Liberals pledge to scrap Safe Schools

LAW AND SOCIETY No-fault divorce a tragedy of nuclear proportions

PARENTING Experts envisage lustrous future for infant graduates

POLITICAL HISTORY Folly with a touch of good sense: Colonel Sibthorp

ECONOMICS Trump as a symptom of the end of neoliberalism

MUSIC Vale Leonard: did we ever really understand you?

CINEMA Fantastical and beastly: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them

BOOK REVIEW A Life well spent

BOOK REVIEW Catholic revisals

LETTERS

FOREIGN AFFAIRS How the left whitewashed Fidel Castro

Books promotion page
FONT SIZE:

POLITICAL HISTORY
Folly with a touch of good sense: Colonel Sibthorp


by Hal G.P. Colebatch

News Weekly, December 3, 2016

Our trillion-dollar-spending, multiculture-obsessed political leaders might do worse than be reminded of the colourful British Victorian politician, Colonel Charles de Laet Waldo Sibthorp, Member for Lincoln from 1826 to 1855.

Sibthorp was probably the most passionate foe of government spending any parliament has ever produced. It was his fate that his political career should coincide with the first beginnings of the Welfare State and the restructuring of the so-called “rotten buroughs” through the great Reform Bill.

Sibthorp was a conservative of conservatives, a reactionary so far right as to be virtually in outer space.

Michael Wharton (“Peter Simple” of the old British Daily Telegraph), one of his admirers, once described him as having “the gift of speaking on any subject but always making the same speech”. That same speech was a passionate condemnation of anything that might be described as progress and also of government expansion. He was a lonely warrior for aboriginal Tory values.

The very real Colonel Sibthorp.

Of the Reform Bill, he claimed: “I oppose the bill, the whole bill and every part of the bill. I say it must go — go to the Devil. I believe it will give political power and electoral franchise to the very dregs of the community. If the bill does pass, then all I have to say is, God save my country; may God have mercy on it. May God protect it from revolution and may He preserve all proper respect for the aristocracy.”

Colonel Sibthorp (he had served in the Peninsular War and retained a militia commission) was a short, stocky man of military bearing, his face almost concealed by a wispy, straggling beard and a high stuck-up collar. He wore a bottle-green frock coat, Wellington boots, a tall white hat, a great deal of jewellery and stared at the changing world he detested through an antique quizzing-glass. One of his less orthodox parliamentary debating tactics was to crow like a rooster during his opponents’ speeches.

Defeated on the Reform Bill, he turned his guns on the new-fangled railways that were changing the face of the country: “I have always considered all railways public frauds and private robbery by gambling speculators. … It is my decided opinion that these nefarious scoundrels will ere long appear before the public in their true light and that all the railway companies will be bankrupt, and that the old and happy mode of travelling on turnpike roads, in chaises, carriages and stages, will be restored.”

The thing about this was, Sibthorp was partly correct. The great railway boom was followed by a collapse, ruining thousands of speculators.

When it was proposed to provide public libraries for the working classes in industrial towns, which he called sinkholes of cholera, he said he could not see why they wanted to read: “I myself always hated reading while at Oxford”. He believed the British Museum was a waste of money and that it would be much better to pull down the National Gallery than complete it.

Better not ask what would he have thought of the National Endowment for the Arts, and public broadcasting and television.

When a land survey was proposed, he ranted: “The idea of a gang of schoolmasters coming around upon your land and surveying its productive properties is one which I never expected to hear proposed. How can we know that these people may not actually invade a gentleman’s cellar and tilt his wine? Certainly we live in very extraordinary times when these dictatorial measures are made to invade the sacredness of private property.”

International trade fairs, in parti­cular the Great Exhibition at the Crystal Palace of 1851, summed up everything he hated — Progress, Industry, Democracy and International Understanding. It was “that obscene and insanitary structure which has been offered as a supreme insult to the people of England to the delectation of foreigners who are pouring over this unfortunate country in their thousands to debauch our daughters and swindle our trades-people”.

Income tax was “that odious and delusive mode of taxation”. It was speaking on income tax that Sibthorp uttered some immortal good sense.

Obama and his followers might take note: “The government who propose this tax call themselves Liberals. Liberals! There never was such a misnomer. Who, I would ask, have been more disposed to cut up the liberties of the people than those who call themselves Liberals, whom I call revolutionaries and levellers, men having no feeling for Church, King, State or people, or anything which has hitherto made England a great nation.”

Today Colonel Sibthorp is almost but not quite forgotten. The parliaments of the English-speaking world might benefit from having a few more such sworn and outspoken – if, one hopes, more economically literate, and perhaps generally more balanced – foes of political correctness and Big Government on their benches.

Michael Wharton wondered, in an essay in the Salisbury Review, how, if he came back to life today, the Colonel would have dealt with the liberal “thinkers” and “hypocritical jackanapes” of the modern media. Wharton thought he would have held his ground, and quoted one of the Colonel’s own favorite sayings: “Holdfast is a good dog.”

He might also have said, like Gilbert and Sullivan’s jester: “Winnow all my folly and you’ll find/A grain or two of truth among the chaff.”




























All you need to know about
the wider impact of transgenderism on society.
TRANSGENDER: one shade of grey, 353pp, $39.99


Join email list

Join e-newsletter list


Your cart has 0 items



Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers



Trending articles

EDITORIAL The state is separating children from families

CLIMATE CHANGE Hockey 1, hockey 2: Good science contradicts IPCC's two-degree alarmism

LIFE ISSUES Bowing to the goddess of abortion law reform: the pseudo-religion of radical feminism

CHINA Social Credit System gives complete control of every citizen

COVER STORY What religious freedoms does the Government propose removing?

VICTORIAN ELECTION The left gets ready to scream 'haters'

THE ECONOMY A shower of cold facts may counter coal phobia



























© Copyright NewsWeekly.com.au 2017
Last Modified:
April 4, 2018, 6:45 pm