- Email: [email protected]
Political geographers of the past V
POLITICAL
GEOGRAPHY
QUARTERLY, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 1987, 355-367
Political geographers of the past V
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder BRIAN W. BLOUET
Department of Geography, Texas A&M University, College Station TX 77843, USA
ABSTRACT. The political career of Halford Mackinder can be divided into three phases. In the first decade of the 20th century Mackinder evolved a broad imperial viewpoint and advocated the balanced development of a multi-ethnic empire within an economic system protected by tariffs. During the second phase, 1910-1922, Mackinder was a Conservative and Unionist Member of Parliament, but failed to gain office in government and, until the end of World War I, did not advance much politically. He was defeated in the 1922 election and did not attempt to get back into Parliament. In the third phase, 1922-1939, Sir Halford devoted himself to creating such mechanisms for imperial economic cooperation as the Imperial Shipping Committee. During World War II his ideas on geostrategy were rediscovered in the United States and widely discussed in journals, periodicals and newspapers. This writing helped educate the American public on the concept of containment.
Halford Mackinder is an enigmatic figure. His political views and alliances evolved throughout his life. He can be portrayed as a Liberal, a Liberal Imperialist (Limp), a Free Trader, a Tariff Reformer (protectionist), an advocate of Imperial Union, a Conservative, and an apostle of the commonwealth ideal. His views on social legislation and educational policy were Liberal. When it came to foreign policy, imperial affairs and tariff reform he was a Conservative and Unionist, and towards the right wing of the party. Many aspects of Mackinder’s multiple careers are well known. His famous lecture ‘On the Scope and Methods of Geography’, delivered at the Royal Geographical Society in January 1887, launched English academic geography, with RGS support, at Oxford and Cambridge. Within months of delivering the paper Mackinder was appointed to a readership in geography and went on to establish the Oxford School of Geography in 1899 (Gilbert, 1950; Keams, 1985). In the early years of the Oxford readership Mackinder delivered two lectures a week and devoted much of his time to teaching for Oxford University Extension, then under the leadership of Michael Sadler. In 1892 Sadler and Mackinder started a University Extension College at Reading and laid the foundations of the present university (Childs, 1933). Mackinder was the Principal at Reading from 1892 until 1903, leaving just after University College status was achieved and a place on the treasury grant list secured (Blouet, 1987). 0260-9827/87/04
0355-13
$03.00
0 1987 Butterworth
& Co (Publishers)
Ltd
The political career of Sir Haljord Mackinder
356
In the late 19th century university extension teaching was part of a crusade to raise educational standards. The London School of Economics, founded in 1895, grew out of the extension movement at Oxford and Cambridge. W. A. S. Hewins, an Oxford Extension lecturer, became the first director of the LSE. Mackinder, who taught at the School from the start, became the second director in 1903. He directed the LSE until 1908, and held teaching positions there up to his retirement from academia in 1925. In addition to substantial teaching and administrative loads, Mackinder published heavily (Gilbert, 1950). His work includes textbooks at all levels, writings on educational matters, professional papers and broad-ranging books like Democratic Ideals and Reality. The volume of work Mackinder achieved as a teacher, writer and educational administrator is stupendous. To have been a leading figure in the creation of a new academic disciplinegeography, a new university-Reading, and a new faculty at London Universityeconomics, are achievements that few academics have matched in the last century. Less well known than Mackinder’s academic achievements are the range of his political involvements (Semmel, 1960). As a student, Mackinder was active at the Oxford Union, occupying the positions of secretary, treasurer, and finally president in 1883. The Union had the reputation of being a training ground for debaters with political aspirations. However, it was not until the end of the century that Mackinder’s political involvement became overt. His connection with LSE may have been the catalyst. The School was established by a group which was interested in improving national efficiency and prompting the study of Britain’s role in the world. At the LSE, Mackinder offered courses, such as ‘British History From a Geographical Viewpoint’. He came into contact with people, for example the Webbs, who had excellent political connections. The main events in Mackinder’s political life are set out in Table 1. There are three major phases to the political career of Sir Halford Mackinder: 1 I Developing
an imperial view. In the first decade of the century Mackinder evolved an imperial philosophy and eventually created alliances with those promoting the cause of imperial unity. He contested Warwick and Leamington Spa in 1900 as a Liberal Imperialist (Limp), but in 1903 left all Liberal organizations and became a Conservative and Unionist. 2. Member of Parliament. From 1910 to 1922, as a Conservative and Unionist, Mackiider was a Member of Parliament. Prior to 1914 he spent much time establishing business interests and spoke infrequently in the House. With the start of World War I he began to make an impact. He spoke on economic policy and was a major instigator of war savings schemes for small investors. The House of Commons never liked his style as a speaker but came to appreciate his skill in developing solutions (Parker, 1982: 44-46). In the latter part of his parliamentary career he served on committees trying torationalize British railways and on Royal Commissions concerned with income tax, awards to inventors and food prices. 3. The Imperial Committees. After leaving Parliament in 1922 Mackinder did not wish to contest another election. He devoted himself to the cause of imperial unity and helped develop mechanisms such as the Imperial Shipping Committee that promoted economic cooperation between commonwealth countries.
Developing
an imperial
view
Around the beginning of the century Mackinder decided that Britain was in danger of becoming a second-class power likely to be overshadowed by emerging, continent-sized states. He wanted to create a league of commonwealth democracies which cooperated on
357
BRIAN W. BLOUET TABLE 1. Mackinder’s 1900
1902
1903
1904
1906 1908
1909
1910
General Election: contests Warwick and Learnington Spa as a Liberal Imperialist (Limp) Founder member of Co-Efficients Dining Club-the Co-Efficients were interested in promoting national efficiency; appointed to represent the Victoria League on the Colonial Office Visual Instruction Committee Abandons Limps, becomes a Chamberlainite, and joins the Conservative and Unionist party; joins Stafford House Group and the newly formed Tariff Reform League Founder member of The Compatriots, an organization promoting the broader patriotism of the British Empire General Election-Mackinder does not contest a seat Resigns as director of the LSE; joins Lord Mimer’s imperial unity group; visits Canada and delivers speeches on imperial unity Contests the Hawick Burghs byelection as a Conservative Unionist, and is defeated by Liberal candidate; in June, adopted as Conservative and Unionist candidate for Camlachie (Glasgow) January General Election: wins Camlachie, defeating a Liberal and a Labour candidate; December General Election: retains Camlachie by 26 votes
political career 1914 1917 1918
1919
1919
1920
1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1930 1939
Committee on war loans for the small investor Chairman of the Tariff Reform League General Election: retains Camlachie by a substantial majority, as Coalition Unionist British High Commissioner to South Russia (October 19 19 to February 1920) Royal Commission on Income Tax; Royal Commission on Awards to Inventors Knighted for Public and Parliamentary services; appointed chairman of the Imperial Shipping Committee Committee on Regionalization of British Railways General Election: lost Camlachie to Labour party candidate Refused invitation to contest Camlachie again Royal Commission on Food Prices Appointed chairman of the Imperial Economic Committee Sworn of the Privy Council Resigns chairmanship of the Imperial Economic Committee Resigns chairmanship of the Imperial Shipping Committee-due to war the resignation did not take effect until 1945
defence, foreign policy and economic matters. We can see these themes in the writings of the period. As Mackinder was defining his imperial mission, he wrote several broad-scale, speculative essays. These pieces include ‘The Great Trade Routes’, ‘Imperial Britain’, and ‘The Geographical Pivot of History’ (Mackinder, 1900, 1902, 1904). In these essays Mackinder’s ideas evolved rapidly as he developed the view that the end of the age of sea power was approaching and in the future great land powers would dominate world affairs. In ‘Trade Routes’ Mackinder argued that ‘the oneness of the ocean’ was the ‘basis of British power, whether that power he naval or commercial’ (Mackinder, 1900). But he saw a threat emerging and wondered whether sufficient attention had been: . . . given to the influence of railways on the development of German trading. Germany occupies a central position on the continent of Europe. It is possible for Germany to send goods, without breaking bulk, from the factory to any market on the continent which is accessible by railway (Mackinder, 1900: 153). In the essay on imperial Britain Mackinder indicated how intertwined British industry and banking were with the British Empire. He estimated that nearly half of British exports
358
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
and 60 per cent of the imports could be attributed to the empire (Mackinder, 1902: 348). The whole imperial structure with its overseas territories, merchant marine, telegraph system, exports and imports, and financial network was protected by the Royal Navy. If Britain lost the power to build an adequate fleet, then overseas markets might be lost (Mackinder, 1902: 350). But he hoped that the: . . . Old Britain, when unable to maintain from her own resources a navy equivalent to those of the United States and Russia, after they shall have developed their vast natural potentialities, may still find secure shelter behind the navy of the Britains (Mackinder, 1902: 35 1). These themes had been forcefully developed in his unsuccessful election campaign as a Limp at Warwick and Leamington Spa in 1900 (Mackinder, 1903). In 1903 political allegiances were disrupted by Joseph Chamberlain’s speech of 15 May calling for the abandonment of free trade and the creation of protectionist policies. Although Mackinder was a Liberal, Chamberlain’s ideas reinforced the analysis he had developed in ‘Trade Routes’ and ‘Imperial Britain’. Together with L. S. Amery, and a number of other Liberals, Mackinder wrote to The Times on 21 July endorsing aspects of Chamberlain’s policy and commenting that: Many of the British Colonies are beyond doubt great and undeveloped estates, the production of which might be multiplied many times over in the near future under the stimulus of an intelligently directed fiscal policy of the States comprising the British empire. Shortly after this Amery and Mackinder left the Liberal party and joined the Conservative and Unionist party. By 1903 Mackinder wanted to devote more time to his political career. He resigned as Principal of University College Reading. The School of Geography, Oxford was partially in the hands of Herbertson. Teaching at LSE, work for the Victoria League (Cantor, 1960) and the Colonial Office Visual Instruction Committee kept him much in London, close to political institutions. In the summer of 1903 it was decided to appoint a secretary to the newly formed Tariff Reform League. Mackinder, supported by Leo Amery and Steel-Maitland, was seen as the front-runner for the job. In the end the selectors favoured a rather staid lawyer for the position, and Mackinder found this route into the political arena blocked (Porter, 1976: 234). As fate would have it, he was appointed to another academic administrative post as a result of the tariff reform campaign, for Hewins resigned the directorship of the LSE to run Chamberlain’s Tariff Commission. Sidney Webb quickly appointed Mackinder in Hewins’s place. Whether or not Webb got any undertakings as to length of service is not known but Mackinder did not contest the 1906 general election and served as Director of the LSE for 5 years, resigning in 1908 to join Mimer’s Imperial Unity Group (Bodleian, 1908). When Mackinder gave up the directorship of the LSE he retained his readership in geography but otherwise devoted himself to advancing his political career. In July 1908 Mackinder left Britain on the battleship HMS Russell for Canada. The Dominion was celebrating the tercentenary of settlement on the St Lawrence, and many naval units and British public figures visited Canada during the summer including the Prince of Wales, Lord Roberts and Lord Milner. Efforts were being made to draw Britain and Canada closer together. Mackinder’s visit, and the speeches he made on imperial affairs, were a part of an attempt to bring together Canadians and Britons who favoured closer economic links between their countries. Mackinder travelled from the St Lawrence through Ontario, across
BRIANW. BLOUET
359
the Prairies, over the Rockies and visited Vancouver and Victoria. He gave a number of speeches, for example, in Winnipeg, where he was the guest of the grain dealers, he spoke on ‘The Sea Power of Great Britain’ (Manitoba Free Press, 11 September 1908a) and tried to convince his audience of the need for one imperial fleet. He stressed the idea that within the empire there should be ‘free and equal nations’. At the end of his tour Mackinder consulted with Lord Milner (Bodleian, 1908b) who had arrived in Canada to deliver speeches of his own. For example, Milner spoke to the Canadian Club in Vancouver about the growth of Canadian patriotism and his faith in an empire that could accommodate such independence (Milner, 1909). The Vancouver Daily World (9 October 1908) commented that the speech was the most ‘complete acknowledgement of the nationhood of Canada that has ever been made by a statesman of the first rank’. Milner was developing a theme already tried out by Mackinder. In fact, Mackinder’s ideas on imperial economic reform, the need for an imperially financed navy, and equality among the various parts of the empire, echo in Milner’s speeches in Canada and elsewhere (Milner, 1907). Most of the ideas adopted by Milner’s imperial unity group, with the exception of tariff reform, had been aired out by Mackinder in the Warwick and Leamington campaign of 1900. Amery and Steel-Maitland, both key members of Milner’s group, held similar views. It would be wrong to suggest that Mackinder generated all the ideas in Milner’s group but certainly he was a powerful contributor, more than capable of holding his own with leading politicians of the day (Amery, 1953: 228-229). Mackinder’s visit to Canada was an important part of the work of Milner’s imperial unity campaign in 1908. Amery, as he had in 1903 when he persuaded Mackinder to leave the Liberals, played a major role in getting Mackinder to resign from the directorship of LSE and join Milner (Blouet, 1975: 29-30). Mackinder was paid a salary and the first task assigned to him was to visit Canada to study the geography, people, resources, politics and relations with the United States. This Mackinder did with care, and on his return delivered three lectures on Canada in London, at Caxton Hall, under the auspices of The Compatriots, a group which encouraged ‘the wider patriotism of the Commonwealth’ (Amery, 1953: 265). In the first lecture, ‘The Canadian Nation’ (The Times, 1 December 1908), Mackinder described the geography of Canada. He pointed out the difficulties of creating a unified state in a country where the natural divisions tended to run north and south but economic activity was conducted east and west. In spite of the environmental problems, and the difficulties of trying to remain independent of the United States, a Canadian nation had emerged. In a leader, The Times commented (2 December 1908) on Mackinder’s lecture and was generally favourable to the idea of promoting more trade between Britain and Canada, particularly as the United States was interested in establishing free trade with Canada for some commodities. In the second lecture, ‘Canada and the Empire’ (The Times, 15 December 1908), Mackinder argued that Canada was marked by nationalism, and independence from the United States, but had a partially critical attitude towards the United Kingdom. Canada was perfectly capable of steering her own course in the world but: Canada was essential to the Empire. If all North America were a single power Britain would be . . dwarfed. That great North American power would, of necessity, take from us command of the ocean . . If Canada parted from the Empire the Empire ended. Mackinder closed by urging an immediate tariff preference for Canadian wheat as a start to encouraging more trade between the United Kingdom and Canada, within a system of
360
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
imperial preference. For Mackinder, and Milner, if the empire were to survive it had to offer economic advantages to the members. The Times may have approved of these ideas, but other journals like The Economist (23 May 1908) rejected any form of imperial preference as suggested by Milner’s group. Of course, nothing came of Mackinder’s proposals for favourable treatment of Canadian wheat at the time. The Canadian episode, however, was not to be wasted time. When Mackinder chaired the Imperial Shipping Committee, after World War I, a great part of the committee’s work was taken up with Canadian questions which Mackinder handled with knowledge and skill (Burley, 1975: 349). While in Canada Mackinder was able to advance projects of the Colonial Office’s Visual Instruction Committee. The VIC was engaged in producing slides and books for use in schools throughout the empire in order to inform schoolchildren of imperial possessions. Mackinder had been involved in the scheme from the start and took a leading role in writing materials (Blouet, 1975: 23-25). In Ottawa Mackinder worked with A. Hugh Fisher (The Globe, 7 August 1908) who had been commissioned by the VIC to travel around the world to produce illustrations of empire scenes. Later Mackinder contacted the governor, General Earl Grey, enlisting his support for lecture tours by VIC lecturers in the provinces of Canada (Durham, 1909). In February 1909 Mackinder was adopted as the Unionist candidate for Hawick Burghs on a tariff reform platform (Glasgow Herald, 9 February 1909). The prospects of victory were poor. In 1906 Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had fought the constituency for the Unionists and lost. Mackinder was defeated too, but he made an impact on Scottish politics. After the defeat, the Unionists in Selkirk formed a ‘Mackinder League’ to promote union of the empire and fiscal reform. The Galasheils’ Unionists had a dinner for the defeated candidate to mark Mackinder’s ‘magnificent effort . . . and force of character’ (Glasgow Herald, 3 April 1909). A few days later he addressed the annual meeting of the Scottish Tariff Reform League and outlined his broad view of tariff reform: . . . a change in our fiscal system is necessary for increasing our revenue, for safeguarding our home industries, for negotiating with foreign countries and for unity and developing the Empire by commercial union with our colonies (Glasgow Herald, 5 April 1909). In the same speech he took the opportunity to warn of the dangers to Britain resulting from Germany’s rise as a naval and industrial power. The next day he spoke to the West of Scotland Liberal Unionists in Glasgow and suggested that Britain and her major overseas possessions ‘should be a group of nations, the Britains, with one fleet on the ocean . . . and one foreign policy’ (Glasgow Herald, 6 April 1909). Mackinder had been expounding this theme since the Warwick and Leamington campaign in 1900. Later in April he addressed the Aberdeen Unionist Association and argued once more for tariff reform: If there were no differences of nationality, if we were one great human universal brotherhood, it would not matter with whom we traded. That was the great ideal of Cobden and Bright . . . That was what seemed possible for 20 or 30 years, but then the nations of the world declared by tariffs that they meant to maintain nationalities, and however grand our ideals might be we were powerless to play our game on the face of the earth if other people would not play with us (Glasgow Herald, 27 April 1909). Mackinder possessed a ‘capacity for oratory and strong picturesque statement’ (Webb, 1902). In the spring of 1909 these powers were given full voice in support of a visionary view of imperial development. Not surprisingly, Conservative and Unionist associations took
BRIAN W. BLOUET
361
notice of Mackinder’s
potential as a candidate, for the Parliament elected early in 1906 was nearing the end of its effective life. In April he talked with representatives of three Glasgow constituencies: St Rollox, Tradeston and Camlachie (Camlachie, 1909). Returning to Glasgow in mid-May he had further talks with St Rollox and Camlachie before deciding on the latter. He was adopted by the constituency association in June. In his adoption speech at the Conservative Institute Mackinder returned to familiar themes: ‘he stood for “sane imperialism”, a strong navy, tariff reform, industrial revitalization, and warned of the German threat to British industry and Britain’s position in world affairs’ (Glasgow Herald, 8 June 1909). Glasgow Unionists were delighted to have secured what they perceived to be a very strong candidate and the Unionist Glasgow Herald (8 June 1909) declared in an editorial that: Mr Mackinder commends himself to Camlachie by the staunchness of his Unionist principles and the clarity of his Imperial Vision. It is not a question of present importance whether all his views are realizable. It is sufficient that at a period when the strength of the Imperial sentiment is making itself manifest as it has never done before he approaches Imperial problems in a spirit of sympathy with the cause of unity and consolidation.
Mackinder’s view of imperial union encompassed an empire bound together by common ideals in an economic system that would benefit all parts (Mackinder, 1907). To many Glasgow Unionists imperial unity meant no dabbling with Home Rule for Ireland. Mackinder was against Home Rule for Ireland in 1909, but his views changed over time and the Irish issue helped defeat him in 1922. By the summer of 1909 Mackinder had a parliamentary seat to contest. As a general election had to come within 18 months he worked in Camlachie to make his ideas better known. He held meetings in June, July, September (3), October (4), November (3), and by December was campaigning hard. What were the main themes of Mackinder’s speeches in the run-up to the 1910 election? Above all else shone the idea that Britain could halt its relative decline in the world if tariff reform were used to create an empire common market within which imperial union could be fostered. Tariff reform would generate revenue, encourage investment in Britain and her overseas territories, and provide greater resources for the navy. Specific suggestions included the use of tariffs to favour products from Australia and Canada (Glasgow Herald, 23 September 1909). In terms of wheat-growing, Britain, Australia, Canada and India should be treated as one country (Glasgow Herald, 26 November 1909). The new tariffs would encourage foreign manufacturers to establish factories in Britain (Glasgow Herald, 29 October 1909). By encouraging investment at home tariff reform would provide more job opportunities, cut unemployment, and reduce the emigration which was draining the country of talent (Glasgow Herald, 23 September and 24 December 1909). The imperial themes were linked to a programme of social reform, partially financed with revenues generated by tariff reform. Mackinder made reference in his speeches to the ‘abuse of wealth’, ‘undeserved poverty’ (Glasgow Herald, 23 September 1909), and ‘the unwholesome conditions of life in Camlachie’, and declared that ‘it was the business of politics to get rid of conditions which were a disgrace to civilization’. He was concerned too about unemployment forcing people to emigrate (Glasgow Herald, 18 November 1909). These statements were not political window-dressing. Mackinder had taken on the working-class Camlachie constituency because he wanted to tackle the problems of industrial Britain. He still subscribed to the reform ideas he had supported at Warwick and Leamington in 1900 (Semmel, 1960: 165). The crusading fervour that Michael Sadler and he had displayed on
362
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
educational matters was still a part of his make-up. If he had wanted a safer seat he could probably have had one. Just before the January 19 10 election the Glasgow Herald expressed the view that in ‘political knowledge and speaking power’ Mackinder could ‘hold his own with any Unionist now before the Scottish constituencies’ (Glasgow Herald, 14 December 1909). Mackinder’s power as an orator was certainly considerable, but the campaign had revealed that he lacked the ability to deal easily with hecklers (Glasgow Herald, 5 January 1910) and could be snared by the words of opposing politicians. When attempting to deal with Lloyd George’s jibe that ‘a fully equipped duke cost as much to keep up as two Dreadnoughts’ Mackinder fell into a trap, arguing that dukes created employment (Glasgow Herald, 13 October 1909) and then declared, to deserved laughter and shouts of ‘ridiculous! ’ , that ‘a duke was merely a saving machine’ (Glasgow Herald, 16 October 1909).
Member
of Parliament
In January 1910, Mackinder defeated the incumbent Liberal at Camlachie by 434 votes, and he retained the seat in the second election of 19 10 by 26 votes. On 1 February 19 10, in the debate on the King’s speech, Mackinder gave his first address to the House of Commons. He spoke of the low rates of investment in Britain, as compared with some European countries, and suggested that tariff reform was a way to develop more productive capacity and cut out migration. His maiden speech attracted the attention of influential Conservatives at Westminster (Chamberlain, 1937: 204). But having made a promising start he tended to disappear from sight. The reason for this was straightfoward. When Mackinder gave up the directorship of LSE and joined Milner’s group he was provided with E850 a year for 4 years. The money ran out in 1911 or early 1912 (Bodleian, 1908a). Mackinder, with his London University readership and modest income from books, did not have the resources to promote a promising political career. To overcome the problem he started several business interests, the most important of which was Electra-Bleach in the Cheshire salt industry. The company made some money during World War I, when it was switched to the wartime production of chlorine gas, and Mackinder was able to devote most of his time to politics. During World War I Mackinder was primarily concerned with two issues: first, the form of the postwar boundary settlements and, second, the extent of centralized government power. In Mackinder’s mind the issues were linked. As early as January 1915 he contributed an article to the Glasgow Herald entitled ‘The New Map’, in which he discussed the future of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and made the following statement: Has the day of great Kaiserdoms passed? May it be that when the war comes to be measured in historical perspective its chief ‘decision’ will be held to have been as between imperial centralization and clustered nationalities? In other words, will the terrestrial globe in the future reflect the celestial globe and exhibit only constellations of minor nationalities? If so, one of these constellations will be in the South-East of Europe, as another is already the British Empire (Glasgow Herald, 30 January 1915).
As he was to spell out, in Democratic Ideals and Reality (Mackinder, 1919), one of Mackinder’s great fears was that power would be highly centralized and subject to misuse. The breakup of European power blocs was to be welcomed as it would lead to more provincial control. The Glasgow Herald staement of January 1915 makes it clear that
BRIANW. BLOUET
363
Mackinder’s ‘league of democracies’, and ‘group of nations the Britains’ was a commonwealth with local control, except in the areas of defence and foreign policy. He had already suggested that imperial affairs should be taken out of the hands of Westminster (Glasgow Herald, 7 October 1911) and had supported the devolution of the government of Scotland (Glasgow Herald, 24 November 1911). The idea of curtailing the power of ‘Kaiserdoms’ (particularly Germany), and developing more provincial control, dominated Mackinder’s political thinking during the war and in the immediate postwar years. With regard to the Kaiserdoms he joined the New Europe group led by Seton-Watson (Seton-Watson and Seton-Watson, 1981) and Tomas Masaryk to work for the emancipation of the subject people of East Europe, and by his lectures, speeches and writings helped to bring the issues to early public view. Mackinder’s commitment to less central control by government and more popular involvement grew partially out of his provincial background, and partially from his experiences in Parliament, where there was great concern with running things from the top. When Parliament debated financing the war the topic was dominated by consideration of how to get major financial institutions to buy government bonds. Mackinder thought this the wrong approach. There was a need to involve everyone, and he proposed a war savings scheme for the small investor (The Times, 16 October 1915). The end-product was the creation of the Montague Committee, on which Mackinder served, and the issuance of war savings stamps, as suggested by Mackinder. When the Coalition Government was formed (May 1915) Mackinder became disturbed at power being exercised by an inner ruling elite. He spoke forcefully in the House of Commons of the need to bring MPs and the country more into the running of affairs (Mackinder, 1915). During World War I Mackinder did not make much progress towards office and was probably regarded as a maverick MP. He did not fear to criticize ministers when the need arose. For example, he gave a powerful riposte to the First Lord of the Admiralty who had blamed the shipbuilding industry for delays in finishing warships. The MP from Clydeside told the First Lord that if the Admiralty would stick to designs there would be fewer hold-ups (Glasgow Herald, 13 March 1918). In the light of the above perhaps it is not surprising that Mackinder failed to advance much politically in the war years. As hostilities ended, and boundaries were about to be redrawn, Mackinder hoped to be brought to the centre of things. He wrote a strong article for the Glasgow Herald on the ‘End of an Empire: The Break-Up of Austria-Hungary’ (3 1 October 1918), and worked at the script of Democratic Ideals and Reality, which he completed late in 19 18. Still he was not given office nor a role in the process of making the postwar boundaries. These matters were a disappointment to him (Bodleian, 1916). Democratic Ideals and Reality, published early in 19 19, was almost ignored at the time. Most of the reviews were tepid. In fact, in two major areas the book correctly prophesied the course of events. First, it warned of a resurgent Germany taking over the new states of East Europe and thrusting deep into the Heartland of Eurasia. Germany dismembered Czechoslovakia in 1938, united with Austria in the same year, invaded Poland in 1939, brought Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria under control in 1940, and attacked Russia in 1941. Second, Mackinder discerned trends in social, political and economic organization which he thought likely to result in the emergence of dictatorships. Unfortunately, he did not produce a vivid phrase to improve the visibility of this idea, and his fear that centralized government would come to be controlled by ‘materialistic organizers’ (Mackinder, 1919: 205) did not reach a wide audience. The theme of centralized government controlling populations was developed in lectures
364
The political career of Sir Harford Mackinder
Mackinder gave after World War I. He feared the ‘retailing of personality’ which mass communication allowed and wondered if economic interests could come to dominate national government, for the power would exist ‘to bias news, suggest ideas, and control thoughts’ (Glasgow HeraM, 24 November 1921). Mackinder’s political career did start to advance after the world war. He retained Camlachie handsomely, in the Khaki election of 1918, as a Coalition Unionist. He came into demand as a member of parliamentary committees and Royal Commissions (see Table 1) and late in 1919 was appointed by Lord Curzon to be British High Commissioner to South Russia (Blouet, 1976). In 1920 he was knighted for public and parliamentary services and emerged as a leader amongthe Scottish Members of Parliament. In 1921 he took a hand in developing plans to reorganize the railways regionally in Britain (Mackinder, 1921). In his 60th year and with a moderate reputation Mackinder was poised for office in government (Barnes and Nicholson, 1980: 300-301). The following year, 1922, the Coalition broke up and the Conservatives were returned to power. The party made considerable gains nationally but in Glasgow there was a strong swing towards Labour and away from the Conservative and Unionists (Middlemas, 1965). In 1918, of the MPs elected in Glasgow only one was from the Labour party; in 1922, 10 of the 15 MPs sent to Westminster represented Labour. The underlying causes for this were better Labour organization, high unemployment after the war and the continuance of deplorable housing conditions in Glasgow. The city had become increasingly left-wing and was sometimes referred to as ‘Red Clydeside’ (McClean, 1983). Mackinder’s Russian involvement had not endeared him to the far left, particularly as he had proposed an antiBolshevik alliance and the creation of new independent states like White Russia, Ukraine and South Russia which were to be carved out of the USSR (Blouet, 1976: 234). The plan had been kept secret but Mackinder was publicly a strong anti-Bolshevik. Mackinder’s support for Home Rule for Ireland also lost him votes. After the loss of Carnlachie Mackinder did not try to get back into Parliament (Glasgow Herald, 14 November 1923). He told the constituency that he did not want to contest the seat again and indicated to safer seats like Glasgow Central (where he could probably have succeeded Bonar Law in 1923) and Selkirk that he was not interested in selection. As there were elections in 1923 and 1924 Mackinder would certainly have had an excellent chance of being returned to Parliament had he so wished. We must conclude that he was tired of party politics and thought other matters more important. In a revealing letter to Lord Milner, Mackinder explained his position. He felt he had done little to advance the cause of empire during the time Milner had supported him and during the war years in Parliament when he had to undertake some uncongenial tasks. Now fate seemed, at least, to have placed him in complete harmony with what was intended in 1908 when Milner helped him to enter politics. As chairman of the Imperial Shipping Committee and the prospective chair of the new Imperial Economic Committee he had work that gave him real scope at last (Bodleian, 1923). An enclosed copy of a letter to the Camlachie Unionists indicated that, as Chairman of the ISC, he had to be above politics and would not contest another parliamentary seat. In a sense leaving party politics involved going back to another phase in his life in which he had built institutions-the School of Geography, Oxford, University College Reading, and the LSE. Now he wanted to build commonwealth institutions and mechanisms for cooperation between the countries of the empire.
BRIAN W. BLOUET
The Imperial
365
Committees
The Imperial Shipping Committee was established by Lloyd George in June 1920 with Mackinder as chairman. After he left Parliament, Mackinder received a substantial salary as chairman of the committee, and its work was to absorb him for over 20 years. The job of the committee was to promote better shipping links between imperial territories. It represented the type of institution needed if the empire were to become a more integrated economic unit. The work was often detailed and painstaking, requiring persuasive skills, for the committee had no power to subpoena witnesses, and its findings were recommendations to shipping lines, colonial administrations and producers of commodities. The ISC produced numerous reports and, in the view of The Times (8 March 1947), Mackinder wrote most of them. Much of the achievement of the committee was due to ‘Mackinder’s tireless energy . . . his meticulous attention to detail, and his visionary dedication to the imperial ideal’ (Burley, 1974: 212). The Imperial Economic Committee was established by Sydney Webb, as President of the Board of Trade, in 1925. Mackinder was appointed chairman and served until 193 1. The committee produced 18 reports during this time and examined the prospects of importing more meat, fruit, tobacco, timber and other commodities into Britain from commonwealth sources. The imperial committees involved Mackinder in detailed work designed to promote the economic interdependence of the empire. It was essential work for those committed to the concept of a multicultural commonwealth with strong economic ties. Today, perhaps, the effort seems irrelevant, but who, in the 192Os, would have predicted that Britain would relinquish an imperial role in favour of a continental common market? In the aftermath of World War II Britain chose Europe and the value of Mackinder’s commonwealth work looks less important than it might have done. Lost causes have the habit of appearing hopeless (Symonds, 1986: 305). By 1939 Mackinder was beginning to opt for a quieter life. He moved out of London to live on the south coast near Boumemouth. He offered his resignation as chairman of the Imperial Shipping Committee and began to work on a biography. If he feared a quiet life Mackinder need not have worried. His ideas on German expansion and the importance of the Heartland were widely written about in American magazines after the US entered the war late in 1941. Newsweek, The Reader’s Digest, and Life all carried extensive coverage of geopolitics and Mackinder’s ideas. As a result of renewed interest in the Heartland concept in the early 194Os, Democratic Ideals and Reality was reprinted by Holt, and Foreign Affairs commissioned Mackinder to write ‘The Round World and the Winning of the Peace’ (Mackinder, 1943). The article acknowledged the downgrading of Britain in world affairs, warned the Western allies and Russia to form bulwarks against Germany in the postwar world, and hinted at a future danger from China (Parker, 1982: 208-2 12). Mackinder did not create the concept of containment but it is a policy response that could be developed from his Heartland thesis. Interest in Mackinder’s ideas in the US in the years 1941-1945 created an environment in which the reading public was aware of the Heartland problem and ready to accept a policy of containment to deal with the difficulty.
Summary In the first decade of the 20th century a small group of British politicians came to the view that Britain was likely to become a second-class power. Decline might be avoided if Britain and her overseas territories bound themselves into a league of democracies, with common
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
366
policies on defence and foreign affairs. The means of promoting imperial unity was to be a tariff policy which favoured trade between commonwealth countries and made more expensive the products of competing nations. Within the group subscribing to these views Halford Mackinder was an influential thinker. The fear that Britain would become a second-class power has been fulfilled, perhaps more rapidly than Milner, Amery and Mackinder thought. Whether or not the prescriptions advocated by Milner’s imperial unity group were viable will always be a matter for debate. For a time events moved in the direction Mackinder desired, and imperial institutions were established that led to improved economic cooperation. At Ottawa, in 1932, a system of imperial tariffs was established but this ‘represented the last chance for making the British imperial realm into a functioning economic unit’ (Fisher, 1963: 125). World War II quickened the movement towards local political control in colonies and dominions. In the rush to independence many of the economic cooperative mechanisms dissolved, particularly as Britain abandoned a world role and moved to integrate with Europe. Was the idea of a unified commonwealth all an impossible dream? As Charles Fisher suggested: . . . the empire had not been designed as a self contained economic unit and its geographical unbalance was such that it could not effectively be transformed into one (Fisher, 1963: 125). Or could the empire have evolved into a commonwealth common market in which developed and less-developed countries worked together for mutual benefit within a multicultural framework, as Milner and Mackinder hoped? The answer is probably no, for there never was the political will in Britain nor in the commonwealth territories to promote economic union or a common stance in international relations. Mackinder’s political contributions were not lost. Many of his basic arguments for tariff reform and economic union could be adapted in support of Britain joining a European Common Market, while his fear of a Heartland force was a powerful argument for strengthening Western Europe. Overall, however, Mackinder’s political career was a failure. This may be a harsh judgement but his cause-the development of a multicultural commonwealth united by economic ties and a common stance in world affairs-failed to crystallize. References AMERY, L. S. (1953). My PoliticalL.& vol. 1. London: Hutchinson. The Leo Amery Diaries, vol. 1. London: Hutchinson. BLOUET,B. W. (1975).SirHalfordMackinder 1861-1947: some newperspectives. Oxford: Schoolof Geography, Research Paper 13. BLOUET, B. W. (1976). Sir Halford Mackinder as British High Commissioner to Sooth Russia, 1919-1920. Geographical Journal 142, 228-236. BLOUET,B. W. (1987). Sir Halford Mackinder: A Biography. College Station: Texas A&M University Press. BODLWN LXMARY OXFORD(1908a). Milner Papers, 193, Mackinder to Amery, 2 May. BODLE~ANLIBRARYOXFORD(1908b). Milner Papers, 271, Diary, 19 September. B~DLEIAN LIBRARYOXFORD (1916). Milner Papers, Letters 1916, Mackinder to Mimer, 11 December. B~DLEIAN ~RARY OXFORD (1923). Milner Papers, 52, Mackinder to Milner, 15 November. BURLEY, K. H. (1974). The Imperial Shipping Committee. Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 2,206-225. BURLEY,K. H. (1975). Canada and the Imperial Shipping Committee. Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 3, 349-368. CANTOR, L. M. (1960). Harford Mackinder: his contribution to geography and education. MA thesis, University of London. CAMLACHIE(1909). West of Scotland Liberal Unionist Association. Minute Book 3,23 April. Document held at Scottish Conservative Central Office, Edinburgh.
BARNES,J. AND NICHOLSON,D. (1980).
BRIAN W. BLOUET
367
CHAMBERLAIN,A. (1937). Politicsfrom the Inside. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press. CHILDS,W. M. (1933). Making a University. London: Dent. DURHAM UNIVERSITY(1908). Department of Paleogeography and Diplomatic, Grey papers, 4th Earl, 170 file 6, Mackinder to Grey, 8 July 1909. FISHER,C. A. (1963). Britain and the Common Market: the changing significance of the Commonwealth in the political geography of Great Britain. Geography 48, 113-l 29. GILBERT,E. W. (1950). Seven lamps of geography: an appreciation of the teaching of Sir Halford J. Mackinder. Geography 35, 21-41. GILBERT, E. W. (1959). Mackinder, Sir Halford John. Dictionary of National Biography 1941-1950, pp. 556-557. KEARNS, G. (1985). Halford, John Mackinder 1861-1947. In Geographers’ Biobibliographicalhdies (T. W. Freeman, ed.), vol. 9. London: Mansell. MACKINDER, H. J. (1900). The great trade routes. Journal of the Institute of Bankers xxi, l-6 January, 137-155 March, 266-273 May. MACKINDER,H. J. (1902). Btituin and the British Seas. London: Heinemann. MACKINDER,H. J. (1903). Letter, The Times, 22 October. MACKJNDER,H. J. (1904). The geographical pivot of history. Geographical Joumnl23,421-437. MACKINDER,H. J. (1907). On thinking imperially. In Lctures on Empire (M. E. Sadler, ed.). London. MACKINDER,H. J. (1915). Parliamentary Debates, fifth series lxxv, 10 November. MACKINDER,H. J. (1919). Democratic idealsand Reality. London: Constable. MACKJNDER,H. J. (1921). Railways: Scottish lines. Glasgow Herald, 30 May. MACKINDER,H. J. (1943). The round world and the winning of the peace. Foreign Affairs 21, 595-605. MCCLEAN, I. (1983). The Z.egend of Red Clydeside. Edinburgh: John Donald. MIDDLEMAS, R. K. (1965). The Clydesiders: A L.eft Wing Struggle for Parliamentary Power. London: Hutchinson. MILNER, VIXOUNT (1907). Imper&zl Unity. London: The Compatriots’ Qub. MILNER, VXOUNT (1909). Speeches Delivered in Conadz. Toronto: William Tyrrell. PARKER, W. H. (1982). Mackinder: Geography as an Aid to Statecraft. Oxford: CIarendon Press. PORTER,D. (1976). The Unionist tariffreformers, 1903-1914. PhD thesis, University of Manchester. SEARLE,G. R. (1971). The Quest for National Efficiency: A Study in British Politics and Political Tbougbt 1899-1914. Oxford: Blackwell. SEMMEL,B. (1960). Imperialism and Social Reform. London: Allen and Unwin. SETON-WATSON,H. AND SETON-WATSON,C. (198 1). The Making of a New Europe: R. W. Seton- Watson and the Last Years of Austria-Hungary. Seattle: University of Washington Press. SYMONDS,R. (1986). Oxford and Empire: The Last Lost Cause. New York: St Martin’s Press. WEBB, B. (1902). Passfield I: Diary of Beatrice Webb. London: British Library of Political and Economic Science.
GEOGRAPHY
QUARTERLY, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 1987, 355-367
Political geographers of the past V
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder BRIAN W. BLOUET
Department of Geography, Texas A&M University, College Station TX 77843, USA
ABSTRACT. The political career of Halford Mackinder can be divided into three phases. In the first decade of the 20th century Mackinder evolved a broad imperial viewpoint and advocated the balanced development of a multi-ethnic empire within an economic system protected by tariffs. During the second phase, 1910-1922, Mackinder was a Conservative and Unionist Member of Parliament, but failed to gain office in government and, until the end of World War I, did not advance much politically. He was defeated in the 1922 election and did not attempt to get back into Parliament. In the third phase, 1922-1939, Sir Halford devoted himself to creating such mechanisms for imperial economic cooperation as the Imperial Shipping Committee. During World War II his ideas on geostrategy were rediscovered in the United States and widely discussed in journals, periodicals and newspapers. This writing helped educate the American public on the concept of containment.
Halford Mackinder is an enigmatic figure. His political views and alliances evolved throughout his life. He can be portrayed as a Liberal, a Liberal Imperialist (Limp), a Free Trader, a Tariff Reformer (protectionist), an advocate of Imperial Union, a Conservative, and an apostle of the commonwealth ideal. His views on social legislation and educational policy were Liberal. When it came to foreign policy, imperial affairs and tariff reform he was a Conservative and Unionist, and towards the right wing of the party. Many aspects of Mackinder’s multiple careers are well known. His famous lecture ‘On the Scope and Methods of Geography’, delivered at the Royal Geographical Society in January 1887, launched English academic geography, with RGS support, at Oxford and Cambridge. Within months of delivering the paper Mackinder was appointed to a readership in geography and went on to establish the Oxford School of Geography in 1899 (Gilbert, 1950; Keams, 1985). In the early years of the Oxford readership Mackinder delivered two lectures a week and devoted much of his time to teaching for Oxford University Extension, then under the leadership of Michael Sadler. In 1892 Sadler and Mackinder started a University Extension College at Reading and laid the foundations of the present university (Childs, 1933). Mackinder was the Principal at Reading from 1892 until 1903, leaving just after University College status was achieved and a place on the treasury grant list secured (Blouet, 1987). 0260-9827/87/04
0355-13
$03.00
0 1987 Butterworth
& Co (Publishers)
Ltd
The political career of Sir Haljord Mackinder
356
In the late 19th century university extension teaching was part of a crusade to raise educational standards. The London School of Economics, founded in 1895, grew out of the extension movement at Oxford and Cambridge. W. A. S. Hewins, an Oxford Extension lecturer, became the first director of the LSE. Mackinder, who taught at the School from the start, became the second director in 1903. He directed the LSE until 1908, and held teaching positions there up to his retirement from academia in 1925. In addition to substantial teaching and administrative loads, Mackinder published heavily (Gilbert, 1950). His work includes textbooks at all levels, writings on educational matters, professional papers and broad-ranging books like Democratic Ideals and Reality. The volume of work Mackinder achieved as a teacher, writer and educational administrator is stupendous. To have been a leading figure in the creation of a new academic disciplinegeography, a new university-Reading, and a new faculty at London Universityeconomics, are achievements that few academics have matched in the last century. Less well known than Mackinder’s academic achievements are the range of his political involvements (Semmel, 1960). As a student, Mackinder was active at the Oxford Union, occupying the positions of secretary, treasurer, and finally president in 1883. The Union had the reputation of being a training ground for debaters with political aspirations. However, it was not until the end of the century that Mackinder’s political involvement became overt. His connection with LSE may have been the catalyst. The School was established by a group which was interested in improving national efficiency and prompting the study of Britain’s role in the world. At the LSE, Mackinder offered courses, such as ‘British History From a Geographical Viewpoint’. He came into contact with people, for example the Webbs, who had excellent political connections. The main events in Mackinder’s political life are set out in Table 1. There are three major phases to the political career of Sir Halford Mackinder: 1 I Developing
an imperial view. In the first decade of the century Mackinder evolved an imperial philosophy and eventually created alliances with those promoting the cause of imperial unity. He contested Warwick and Leamington Spa in 1900 as a Liberal Imperialist (Limp), but in 1903 left all Liberal organizations and became a Conservative and Unionist. 2. Member of Parliament. From 1910 to 1922, as a Conservative and Unionist, Mackiider was a Member of Parliament. Prior to 1914 he spent much time establishing business interests and spoke infrequently in the House. With the start of World War I he began to make an impact. He spoke on economic policy and was a major instigator of war savings schemes for small investors. The House of Commons never liked his style as a speaker but came to appreciate his skill in developing solutions (Parker, 1982: 44-46). In the latter part of his parliamentary career he served on committees trying torationalize British railways and on Royal Commissions concerned with income tax, awards to inventors and food prices. 3. The Imperial Committees. After leaving Parliament in 1922 Mackinder did not wish to contest another election. He devoted himself to the cause of imperial unity and helped develop mechanisms such as the Imperial Shipping Committee that promoted economic cooperation between commonwealth countries.
Developing
an imperial
view
Around the beginning of the century Mackinder decided that Britain was in danger of becoming a second-class power likely to be overshadowed by emerging, continent-sized states. He wanted to create a league of commonwealth democracies which cooperated on
357
BRIAN W. BLOUET TABLE 1. Mackinder’s 1900
1902
1903
1904
1906 1908
1909
1910
General Election: contests Warwick and Learnington Spa as a Liberal Imperialist (Limp) Founder member of Co-Efficients Dining Club-the Co-Efficients were interested in promoting national efficiency; appointed to represent the Victoria League on the Colonial Office Visual Instruction Committee Abandons Limps, becomes a Chamberlainite, and joins the Conservative and Unionist party; joins Stafford House Group and the newly formed Tariff Reform League Founder member of The Compatriots, an organization promoting the broader patriotism of the British Empire General Election-Mackinder does not contest a seat Resigns as director of the LSE; joins Lord Mimer’s imperial unity group; visits Canada and delivers speeches on imperial unity Contests the Hawick Burghs byelection as a Conservative Unionist, and is defeated by Liberal candidate; in June, adopted as Conservative and Unionist candidate for Camlachie (Glasgow) January General Election: wins Camlachie, defeating a Liberal and a Labour candidate; December General Election: retains Camlachie by 26 votes
political career 1914 1917 1918
1919
1919
1920
1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1930 1939
Committee on war loans for the small investor Chairman of the Tariff Reform League General Election: retains Camlachie by a substantial majority, as Coalition Unionist British High Commissioner to South Russia (October 19 19 to February 1920) Royal Commission on Income Tax; Royal Commission on Awards to Inventors Knighted for Public and Parliamentary services; appointed chairman of the Imperial Shipping Committee Committee on Regionalization of British Railways General Election: lost Camlachie to Labour party candidate Refused invitation to contest Camlachie again Royal Commission on Food Prices Appointed chairman of the Imperial Economic Committee Sworn of the Privy Council Resigns chairmanship of the Imperial Economic Committee Resigns chairmanship of the Imperial Shipping Committee-due to war the resignation did not take effect until 1945
defence, foreign policy and economic matters. We can see these themes in the writings of the period. As Mackinder was defining his imperial mission, he wrote several broad-scale, speculative essays. These pieces include ‘The Great Trade Routes’, ‘Imperial Britain’, and ‘The Geographical Pivot of History’ (Mackinder, 1900, 1902, 1904). In these essays Mackinder’s ideas evolved rapidly as he developed the view that the end of the age of sea power was approaching and in the future great land powers would dominate world affairs. In ‘Trade Routes’ Mackinder argued that ‘the oneness of the ocean’ was the ‘basis of British power, whether that power he naval or commercial’ (Mackinder, 1900). But he saw a threat emerging and wondered whether sufficient attention had been: . . . given to the influence of railways on the development of German trading. Germany occupies a central position on the continent of Europe. It is possible for Germany to send goods, without breaking bulk, from the factory to any market on the continent which is accessible by railway (Mackinder, 1900: 153). In the essay on imperial Britain Mackinder indicated how intertwined British industry and banking were with the British Empire. He estimated that nearly half of British exports
358
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
and 60 per cent of the imports could be attributed to the empire (Mackinder, 1902: 348). The whole imperial structure with its overseas territories, merchant marine, telegraph system, exports and imports, and financial network was protected by the Royal Navy. If Britain lost the power to build an adequate fleet, then overseas markets might be lost (Mackinder, 1902: 350). But he hoped that the: . . . Old Britain, when unable to maintain from her own resources a navy equivalent to those of the United States and Russia, after they shall have developed their vast natural potentialities, may still find secure shelter behind the navy of the Britains (Mackinder, 1902: 35 1). These themes had been forcefully developed in his unsuccessful election campaign as a Limp at Warwick and Leamington Spa in 1900 (Mackinder, 1903). In 1903 political allegiances were disrupted by Joseph Chamberlain’s speech of 15 May calling for the abandonment of free trade and the creation of protectionist policies. Although Mackinder was a Liberal, Chamberlain’s ideas reinforced the analysis he had developed in ‘Trade Routes’ and ‘Imperial Britain’. Together with L. S. Amery, and a number of other Liberals, Mackinder wrote to The Times on 21 July endorsing aspects of Chamberlain’s policy and commenting that: Many of the British Colonies are beyond doubt great and undeveloped estates, the production of which might be multiplied many times over in the near future under the stimulus of an intelligently directed fiscal policy of the States comprising the British empire. Shortly after this Amery and Mackinder left the Liberal party and joined the Conservative and Unionist party. By 1903 Mackinder wanted to devote more time to his political career. He resigned as Principal of University College Reading. The School of Geography, Oxford was partially in the hands of Herbertson. Teaching at LSE, work for the Victoria League (Cantor, 1960) and the Colonial Office Visual Instruction Committee kept him much in London, close to political institutions. In the summer of 1903 it was decided to appoint a secretary to the newly formed Tariff Reform League. Mackinder, supported by Leo Amery and Steel-Maitland, was seen as the front-runner for the job. In the end the selectors favoured a rather staid lawyer for the position, and Mackinder found this route into the political arena blocked (Porter, 1976: 234). As fate would have it, he was appointed to another academic administrative post as a result of the tariff reform campaign, for Hewins resigned the directorship of the LSE to run Chamberlain’s Tariff Commission. Sidney Webb quickly appointed Mackinder in Hewins’s place. Whether or not Webb got any undertakings as to length of service is not known but Mackinder did not contest the 1906 general election and served as Director of the LSE for 5 years, resigning in 1908 to join Mimer’s Imperial Unity Group (Bodleian, 1908). When Mackinder gave up the directorship of the LSE he retained his readership in geography but otherwise devoted himself to advancing his political career. In July 1908 Mackinder left Britain on the battleship HMS Russell for Canada. The Dominion was celebrating the tercentenary of settlement on the St Lawrence, and many naval units and British public figures visited Canada during the summer including the Prince of Wales, Lord Roberts and Lord Milner. Efforts were being made to draw Britain and Canada closer together. Mackinder’s visit, and the speeches he made on imperial affairs, were a part of an attempt to bring together Canadians and Britons who favoured closer economic links between their countries. Mackinder travelled from the St Lawrence through Ontario, across
BRIANW. BLOUET
359
the Prairies, over the Rockies and visited Vancouver and Victoria. He gave a number of speeches, for example, in Winnipeg, where he was the guest of the grain dealers, he spoke on ‘The Sea Power of Great Britain’ (Manitoba Free Press, 11 September 1908a) and tried to convince his audience of the need for one imperial fleet. He stressed the idea that within the empire there should be ‘free and equal nations’. At the end of his tour Mackinder consulted with Lord Milner (Bodleian, 1908b) who had arrived in Canada to deliver speeches of his own. For example, Milner spoke to the Canadian Club in Vancouver about the growth of Canadian patriotism and his faith in an empire that could accommodate such independence (Milner, 1909). The Vancouver Daily World (9 October 1908) commented that the speech was the most ‘complete acknowledgement of the nationhood of Canada that has ever been made by a statesman of the first rank’. Milner was developing a theme already tried out by Mackinder. In fact, Mackinder’s ideas on imperial economic reform, the need for an imperially financed navy, and equality among the various parts of the empire, echo in Milner’s speeches in Canada and elsewhere (Milner, 1907). Most of the ideas adopted by Milner’s imperial unity group, with the exception of tariff reform, had been aired out by Mackinder in the Warwick and Leamington campaign of 1900. Amery and Steel-Maitland, both key members of Milner’s group, held similar views. It would be wrong to suggest that Mackinder generated all the ideas in Milner’s group but certainly he was a powerful contributor, more than capable of holding his own with leading politicians of the day (Amery, 1953: 228-229). Mackinder’s visit to Canada was an important part of the work of Milner’s imperial unity campaign in 1908. Amery, as he had in 1903 when he persuaded Mackinder to leave the Liberals, played a major role in getting Mackinder to resign from the directorship of LSE and join Milner (Blouet, 1975: 29-30). Mackinder was paid a salary and the first task assigned to him was to visit Canada to study the geography, people, resources, politics and relations with the United States. This Mackinder did with care, and on his return delivered three lectures on Canada in London, at Caxton Hall, under the auspices of The Compatriots, a group which encouraged ‘the wider patriotism of the Commonwealth’ (Amery, 1953: 265). In the first lecture, ‘The Canadian Nation’ (The Times, 1 December 1908), Mackinder described the geography of Canada. He pointed out the difficulties of creating a unified state in a country where the natural divisions tended to run north and south but economic activity was conducted east and west. In spite of the environmental problems, and the difficulties of trying to remain independent of the United States, a Canadian nation had emerged. In a leader, The Times commented (2 December 1908) on Mackinder’s lecture and was generally favourable to the idea of promoting more trade between Britain and Canada, particularly as the United States was interested in establishing free trade with Canada for some commodities. In the second lecture, ‘Canada and the Empire’ (The Times, 15 December 1908), Mackinder argued that Canada was marked by nationalism, and independence from the United States, but had a partially critical attitude towards the United Kingdom. Canada was perfectly capable of steering her own course in the world but: Canada was essential to the Empire. If all North America were a single power Britain would be . . dwarfed. That great North American power would, of necessity, take from us command of the ocean . . If Canada parted from the Empire the Empire ended. Mackinder closed by urging an immediate tariff preference for Canadian wheat as a start to encouraging more trade between the United Kingdom and Canada, within a system of
360
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
imperial preference. For Mackinder, and Milner, if the empire were to survive it had to offer economic advantages to the members. The Times may have approved of these ideas, but other journals like The Economist (23 May 1908) rejected any form of imperial preference as suggested by Milner’s group. Of course, nothing came of Mackinder’s proposals for favourable treatment of Canadian wheat at the time. The Canadian episode, however, was not to be wasted time. When Mackinder chaired the Imperial Shipping Committee, after World War I, a great part of the committee’s work was taken up with Canadian questions which Mackinder handled with knowledge and skill (Burley, 1975: 349). While in Canada Mackinder was able to advance projects of the Colonial Office’s Visual Instruction Committee. The VIC was engaged in producing slides and books for use in schools throughout the empire in order to inform schoolchildren of imperial possessions. Mackinder had been involved in the scheme from the start and took a leading role in writing materials (Blouet, 1975: 23-25). In Ottawa Mackinder worked with A. Hugh Fisher (The Globe, 7 August 1908) who had been commissioned by the VIC to travel around the world to produce illustrations of empire scenes. Later Mackinder contacted the governor, General Earl Grey, enlisting his support for lecture tours by VIC lecturers in the provinces of Canada (Durham, 1909). In February 1909 Mackinder was adopted as the Unionist candidate for Hawick Burghs on a tariff reform platform (Glasgow Herald, 9 February 1909). The prospects of victory were poor. In 1906 Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had fought the constituency for the Unionists and lost. Mackinder was defeated too, but he made an impact on Scottish politics. After the defeat, the Unionists in Selkirk formed a ‘Mackinder League’ to promote union of the empire and fiscal reform. The Galasheils’ Unionists had a dinner for the defeated candidate to mark Mackinder’s ‘magnificent effort . . . and force of character’ (Glasgow Herald, 3 April 1909). A few days later he addressed the annual meeting of the Scottish Tariff Reform League and outlined his broad view of tariff reform: . . . a change in our fiscal system is necessary for increasing our revenue, for safeguarding our home industries, for negotiating with foreign countries and for unity and developing the Empire by commercial union with our colonies (Glasgow Herald, 5 April 1909). In the same speech he took the opportunity to warn of the dangers to Britain resulting from Germany’s rise as a naval and industrial power. The next day he spoke to the West of Scotland Liberal Unionists in Glasgow and suggested that Britain and her major overseas possessions ‘should be a group of nations, the Britains, with one fleet on the ocean . . . and one foreign policy’ (Glasgow Herald, 6 April 1909). Mackinder had been expounding this theme since the Warwick and Leamington campaign in 1900. Later in April he addressed the Aberdeen Unionist Association and argued once more for tariff reform: If there were no differences of nationality, if we were one great human universal brotherhood, it would not matter with whom we traded. That was the great ideal of Cobden and Bright . . . That was what seemed possible for 20 or 30 years, but then the nations of the world declared by tariffs that they meant to maintain nationalities, and however grand our ideals might be we were powerless to play our game on the face of the earth if other people would not play with us (Glasgow Herald, 27 April 1909). Mackinder possessed a ‘capacity for oratory and strong picturesque statement’ (Webb, 1902). In the spring of 1909 these powers were given full voice in support of a visionary view of imperial development. Not surprisingly, Conservative and Unionist associations took
BRIAN W. BLOUET
361
notice of Mackinder’s
potential as a candidate, for the Parliament elected early in 1906 was nearing the end of its effective life. In April he talked with representatives of three Glasgow constituencies: St Rollox, Tradeston and Camlachie (Camlachie, 1909). Returning to Glasgow in mid-May he had further talks with St Rollox and Camlachie before deciding on the latter. He was adopted by the constituency association in June. In his adoption speech at the Conservative Institute Mackinder returned to familiar themes: ‘he stood for “sane imperialism”, a strong navy, tariff reform, industrial revitalization, and warned of the German threat to British industry and Britain’s position in world affairs’ (Glasgow Herald, 8 June 1909). Glasgow Unionists were delighted to have secured what they perceived to be a very strong candidate and the Unionist Glasgow Herald (8 June 1909) declared in an editorial that: Mr Mackinder commends himself to Camlachie by the staunchness of his Unionist principles and the clarity of his Imperial Vision. It is not a question of present importance whether all his views are realizable. It is sufficient that at a period when the strength of the Imperial sentiment is making itself manifest as it has never done before he approaches Imperial problems in a spirit of sympathy with the cause of unity and consolidation.
Mackinder’s view of imperial union encompassed an empire bound together by common ideals in an economic system that would benefit all parts (Mackinder, 1907). To many Glasgow Unionists imperial unity meant no dabbling with Home Rule for Ireland. Mackinder was against Home Rule for Ireland in 1909, but his views changed over time and the Irish issue helped defeat him in 1922. By the summer of 1909 Mackinder had a parliamentary seat to contest. As a general election had to come within 18 months he worked in Camlachie to make his ideas better known. He held meetings in June, July, September (3), October (4), November (3), and by December was campaigning hard. What were the main themes of Mackinder’s speeches in the run-up to the 1910 election? Above all else shone the idea that Britain could halt its relative decline in the world if tariff reform were used to create an empire common market within which imperial union could be fostered. Tariff reform would generate revenue, encourage investment in Britain and her overseas territories, and provide greater resources for the navy. Specific suggestions included the use of tariffs to favour products from Australia and Canada (Glasgow Herald, 23 September 1909). In terms of wheat-growing, Britain, Australia, Canada and India should be treated as one country (Glasgow Herald, 26 November 1909). The new tariffs would encourage foreign manufacturers to establish factories in Britain (Glasgow Herald, 29 October 1909). By encouraging investment at home tariff reform would provide more job opportunities, cut unemployment, and reduce the emigration which was draining the country of talent (Glasgow Herald, 23 September and 24 December 1909). The imperial themes were linked to a programme of social reform, partially financed with revenues generated by tariff reform. Mackinder made reference in his speeches to the ‘abuse of wealth’, ‘undeserved poverty’ (Glasgow Herald, 23 September 1909), and ‘the unwholesome conditions of life in Camlachie’, and declared that ‘it was the business of politics to get rid of conditions which were a disgrace to civilization’. He was concerned too about unemployment forcing people to emigrate (Glasgow Herald, 18 November 1909). These statements were not political window-dressing. Mackinder had taken on the working-class Camlachie constituency because he wanted to tackle the problems of industrial Britain. He still subscribed to the reform ideas he had supported at Warwick and Leamington in 1900 (Semmel, 1960: 165). The crusading fervour that Michael Sadler and he had displayed on
362
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
educational matters was still a part of his make-up. If he had wanted a safer seat he could probably have had one. Just before the January 19 10 election the Glasgow Herald expressed the view that in ‘political knowledge and speaking power’ Mackinder could ‘hold his own with any Unionist now before the Scottish constituencies’ (Glasgow Herald, 14 December 1909). Mackinder’s power as an orator was certainly considerable, but the campaign had revealed that he lacked the ability to deal easily with hecklers (Glasgow Herald, 5 January 1910) and could be snared by the words of opposing politicians. When attempting to deal with Lloyd George’s jibe that ‘a fully equipped duke cost as much to keep up as two Dreadnoughts’ Mackinder fell into a trap, arguing that dukes created employment (Glasgow Herald, 13 October 1909) and then declared, to deserved laughter and shouts of ‘ridiculous! ’ , that ‘a duke was merely a saving machine’ (Glasgow Herald, 16 October 1909).
Member
of Parliament
In January 1910, Mackinder defeated the incumbent Liberal at Camlachie by 434 votes, and he retained the seat in the second election of 19 10 by 26 votes. On 1 February 19 10, in the debate on the King’s speech, Mackinder gave his first address to the House of Commons. He spoke of the low rates of investment in Britain, as compared with some European countries, and suggested that tariff reform was a way to develop more productive capacity and cut out migration. His maiden speech attracted the attention of influential Conservatives at Westminster (Chamberlain, 1937: 204). But having made a promising start he tended to disappear from sight. The reason for this was straightfoward. When Mackinder gave up the directorship of LSE and joined Milner’s group he was provided with E850 a year for 4 years. The money ran out in 1911 or early 1912 (Bodleian, 1908a). Mackinder, with his London University readership and modest income from books, did not have the resources to promote a promising political career. To overcome the problem he started several business interests, the most important of which was Electra-Bleach in the Cheshire salt industry. The company made some money during World War I, when it was switched to the wartime production of chlorine gas, and Mackinder was able to devote most of his time to politics. During World War I Mackinder was primarily concerned with two issues: first, the form of the postwar boundary settlements and, second, the extent of centralized government power. In Mackinder’s mind the issues were linked. As early as January 1915 he contributed an article to the Glasgow Herald entitled ‘The New Map’, in which he discussed the future of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and made the following statement: Has the day of great Kaiserdoms passed? May it be that when the war comes to be measured in historical perspective its chief ‘decision’ will be held to have been as between imperial centralization and clustered nationalities? In other words, will the terrestrial globe in the future reflect the celestial globe and exhibit only constellations of minor nationalities? If so, one of these constellations will be in the South-East of Europe, as another is already the British Empire (Glasgow Herald, 30 January 1915).
As he was to spell out, in Democratic Ideals and Reality (Mackinder, 1919), one of Mackinder’s great fears was that power would be highly centralized and subject to misuse. The breakup of European power blocs was to be welcomed as it would lead to more provincial control. The Glasgow Herald staement of January 1915 makes it clear that
BRIANW. BLOUET
363
Mackinder’s ‘league of democracies’, and ‘group of nations the Britains’ was a commonwealth with local control, except in the areas of defence and foreign policy. He had already suggested that imperial affairs should be taken out of the hands of Westminster (Glasgow Herald, 7 October 1911) and had supported the devolution of the government of Scotland (Glasgow Herald, 24 November 1911). The idea of curtailing the power of ‘Kaiserdoms’ (particularly Germany), and developing more provincial control, dominated Mackinder’s political thinking during the war and in the immediate postwar years. With regard to the Kaiserdoms he joined the New Europe group led by Seton-Watson (Seton-Watson and Seton-Watson, 1981) and Tomas Masaryk to work for the emancipation of the subject people of East Europe, and by his lectures, speeches and writings helped to bring the issues to early public view. Mackinder’s commitment to less central control by government and more popular involvement grew partially out of his provincial background, and partially from his experiences in Parliament, where there was great concern with running things from the top. When Parliament debated financing the war the topic was dominated by consideration of how to get major financial institutions to buy government bonds. Mackinder thought this the wrong approach. There was a need to involve everyone, and he proposed a war savings scheme for the small investor (The Times, 16 October 1915). The end-product was the creation of the Montague Committee, on which Mackinder served, and the issuance of war savings stamps, as suggested by Mackinder. When the Coalition Government was formed (May 1915) Mackinder became disturbed at power being exercised by an inner ruling elite. He spoke forcefully in the House of Commons of the need to bring MPs and the country more into the running of affairs (Mackinder, 1915). During World War I Mackinder did not make much progress towards office and was probably regarded as a maverick MP. He did not fear to criticize ministers when the need arose. For example, he gave a powerful riposte to the First Lord of the Admiralty who had blamed the shipbuilding industry for delays in finishing warships. The MP from Clydeside told the First Lord that if the Admiralty would stick to designs there would be fewer hold-ups (Glasgow Herald, 13 March 1918). In the light of the above perhaps it is not surprising that Mackinder failed to advance much politically in the war years. As hostilities ended, and boundaries were about to be redrawn, Mackinder hoped to be brought to the centre of things. He wrote a strong article for the Glasgow Herald on the ‘End of an Empire: The Break-Up of Austria-Hungary’ (3 1 October 1918), and worked at the script of Democratic Ideals and Reality, which he completed late in 19 18. Still he was not given office nor a role in the process of making the postwar boundaries. These matters were a disappointment to him (Bodleian, 1916). Democratic Ideals and Reality, published early in 19 19, was almost ignored at the time. Most of the reviews were tepid. In fact, in two major areas the book correctly prophesied the course of events. First, it warned of a resurgent Germany taking over the new states of East Europe and thrusting deep into the Heartland of Eurasia. Germany dismembered Czechoslovakia in 1938, united with Austria in the same year, invaded Poland in 1939, brought Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria under control in 1940, and attacked Russia in 1941. Second, Mackinder discerned trends in social, political and economic organization which he thought likely to result in the emergence of dictatorships. Unfortunately, he did not produce a vivid phrase to improve the visibility of this idea, and his fear that centralized government would come to be controlled by ‘materialistic organizers’ (Mackinder, 1919: 205) did not reach a wide audience. The theme of centralized government controlling populations was developed in lectures
364
The political career of Sir Harford Mackinder
Mackinder gave after World War I. He feared the ‘retailing of personality’ which mass communication allowed and wondered if economic interests could come to dominate national government, for the power would exist ‘to bias news, suggest ideas, and control thoughts’ (Glasgow HeraM, 24 November 1921). Mackinder’s political career did start to advance after the world war. He retained Camlachie handsomely, in the Khaki election of 1918, as a Coalition Unionist. He came into demand as a member of parliamentary committees and Royal Commissions (see Table 1) and late in 1919 was appointed by Lord Curzon to be British High Commissioner to South Russia (Blouet, 1976). In 1920 he was knighted for public and parliamentary services and emerged as a leader amongthe Scottish Members of Parliament. In 1921 he took a hand in developing plans to reorganize the railways regionally in Britain (Mackinder, 1921). In his 60th year and with a moderate reputation Mackinder was poised for office in government (Barnes and Nicholson, 1980: 300-301). The following year, 1922, the Coalition broke up and the Conservatives were returned to power. The party made considerable gains nationally but in Glasgow there was a strong swing towards Labour and away from the Conservative and Unionists (Middlemas, 1965). In 1918, of the MPs elected in Glasgow only one was from the Labour party; in 1922, 10 of the 15 MPs sent to Westminster represented Labour. The underlying causes for this were better Labour organization, high unemployment after the war and the continuance of deplorable housing conditions in Glasgow. The city had become increasingly left-wing and was sometimes referred to as ‘Red Clydeside’ (McClean, 1983). Mackinder’s Russian involvement had not endeared him to the far left, particularly as he had proposed an antiBolshevik alliance and the creation of new independent states like White Russia, Ukraine and South Russia which were to be carved out of the USSR (Blouet, 1976: 234). The plan had been kept secret but Mackinder was publicly a strong anti-Bolshevik. Mackinder’s support for Home Rule for Ireland also lost him votes. After the loss of Carnlachie Mackinder did not try to get back into Parliament (Glasgow Herald, 14 November 1923). He told the constituency that he did not want to contest the seat again and indicated to safer seats like Glasgow Central (where he could probably have succeeded Bonar Law in 1923) and Selkirk that he was not interested in selection. As there were elections in 1923 and 1924 Mackinder would certainly have had an excellent chance of being returned to Parliament had he so wished. We must conclude that he was tired of party politics and thought other matters more important. In a revealing letter to Lord Milner, Mackinder explained his position. He felt he had done little to advance the cause of empire during the time Milner had supported him and during the war years in Parliament when he had to undertake some uncongenial tasks. Now fate seemed, at least, to have placed him in complete harmony with what was intended in 1908 when Milner helped him to enter politics. As chairman of the Imperial Shipping Committee and the prospective chair of the new Imperial Economic Committee he had work that gave him real scope at last (Bodleian, 1923). An enclosed copy of a letter to the Camlachie Unionists indicated that, as Chairman of the ISC, he had to be above politics and would not contest another parliamentary seat. In a sense leaving party politics involved going back to another phase in his life in which he had built institutions-the School of Geography, Oxford, University College Reading, and the LSE. Now he wanted to build commonwealth institutions and mechanisms for cooperation between the countries of the empire.
BRIAN W. BLOUET
The Imperial
365
Committees
The Imperial Shipping Committee was established by Lloyd George in June 1920 with Mackinder as chairman. After he left Parliament, Mackinder received a substantial salary as chairman of the committee, and its work was to absorb him for over 20 years. The job of the committee was to promote better shipping links between imperial territories. It represented the type of institution needed if the empire were to become a more integrated economic unit. The work was often detailed and painstaking, requiring persuasive skills, for the committee had no power to subpoena witnesses, and its findings were recommendations to shipping lines, colonial administrations and producers of commodities. The ISC produced numerous reports and, in the view of The Times (8 March 1947), Mackinder wrote most of them. Much of the achievement of the committee was due to ‘Mackinder’s tireless energy . . . his meticulous attention to detail, and his visionary dedication to the imperial ideal’ (Burley, 1974: 212). The Imperial Economic Committee was established by Sydney Webb, as President of the Board of Trade, in 1925. Mackinder was appointed chairman and served until 193 1. The committee produced 18 reports during this time and examined the prospects of importing more meat, fruit, tobacco, timber and other commodities into Britain from commonwealth sources. The imperial committees involved Mackinder in detailed work designed to promote the economic interdependence of the empire. It was essential work for those committed to the concept of a multicultural commonwealth with strong economic ties. Today, perhaps, the effort seems irrelevant, but who, in the 192Os, would have predicted that Britain would relinquish an imperial role in favour of a continental common market? In the aftermath of World War II Britain chose Europe and the value of Mackinder’s commonwealth work looks less important than it might have done. Lost causes have the habit of appearing hopeless (Symonds, 1986: 305). By 1939 Mackinder was beginning to opt for a quieter life. He moved out of London to live on the south coast near Boumemouth. He offered his resignation as chairman of the Imperial Shipping Committee and began to work on a biography. If he feared a quiet life Mackinder need not have worried. His ideas on German expansion and the importance of the Heartland were widely written about in American magazines after the US entered the war late in 1941. Newsweek, The Reader’s Digest, and Life all carried extensive coverage of geopolitics and Mackinder’s ideas. As a result of renewed interest in the Heartland concept in the early 194Os, Democratic Ideals and Reality was reprinted by Holt, and Foreign Affairs commissioned Mackinder to write ‘The Round World and the Winning of the Peace’ (Mackinder, 1943). The article acknowledged the downgrading of Britain in world affairs, warned the Western allies and Russia to form bulwarks against Germany in the postwar world, and hinted at a future danger from China (Parker, 1982: 208-2 12). Mackinder did not create the concept of containment but it is a policy response that could be developed from his Heartland thesis. Interest in Mackinder’s ideas in the US in the years 1941-1945 created an environment in which the reading public was aware of the Heartland problem and ready to accept a policy of containment to deal with the difficulty.
Summary In the first decade of the 20th century a small group of British politicians came to the view that Britain was likely to become a second-class power. Decline might be avoided if Britain and her overseas territories bound themselves into a league of democracies, with common
The political career of Sir Halford Mackinder
366
policies on defence and foreign affairs. The means of promoting imperial unity was to be a tariff policy which favoured trade between commonwealth countries and made more expensive the products of competing nations. Within the group subscribing to these views Halford Mackinder was an influential thinker. The fear that Britain would become a second-class power has been fulfilled, perhaps more rapidly than Milner, Amery and Mackinder thought. Whether or not the prescriptions advocated by Milner’s imperial unity group were viable will always be a matter for debate. For a time events moved in the direction Mackinder desired, and imperial institutions were established that led to improved economic cooperation. At Ottawa, in 1932, a system of imperial tariffs was established but this ‘represented the last chance for making the British imperial realm into a functioning economic unit’ (Fisher, 1963: 125). World War II quickened the movement towards local political control in colonies and dominions. In the rush to independence many of the economic cooperative mechanisms dissolved, particularly as Britain abandoned a world role and moved to integrate with Europe. Was the idea of a unified commonwealth all an impossible dream? As Charles Fisher suggested: . . . the empire had not been designed as a self contained economic unit and its geographical unbalance was such that it could not effectively be transformed into one (Fisher, 1963: 125). Or could the empire have evolved into a commonwealth common market in which developed and less-developed countries worked together for mutual benefit within a multicultural framework, as Milner and Mackinder hoped? The answer is probably no, for there never was the political will in Britain nor in the commonwealth territories to promote economic union or a common stance in international relations. Mackinder’s political contributions were not lost. Many of his basic arguments for tariff reform and economic union could be adapted in support of Britain joining a European Common Market, while his fear of a Heartland force was a powerful argument for strengthening Western Europe. Overall, however, Mackinder’s political career was a failure. This may be a harsh judgement but his cause-the development of a multicultural commonwealth united by economic ties and a common stance in world affairs-failed to crystallize. References AMERY, L. S. (1953). My PoliticalL.& vol. 1. London: Hutchinson. The Leo Amery Diaries, vol. 1. London: Hutchinson. BLOUET,B. W. (1975).SirHalfordMackinder 1861-1947: some newperspectives. Oxford: Schoolof Geography, Research Paper 13. BLOUET, B. W. (1976). Sir Halford Mackinder as British High Commissioner to Sooth Russia, 1919-1920. Geographical Journal 142, 228-236. BLOUET,B. W. (1987). Sir Halford Mackinder: A Biography. College Station: Texas A&M University Press. BODLWN LXMARY OXFORD(1908a). Milner Papers, 193, Mackinder to Amery, 2 May. BODLE~ANLIBRARYOXFORD(1908b). Milner Papers, 271, Diary, 19 September. B~DLEIAN LIBRARYOXFORD (1916). Milner Papers, Letters 1916, Mackinder to Mimer, 11 December. B~DLEIAN ~RARY OXFORD (1923). Milner Papers, 52, Mackinder to Milner, 15 November. BURLEY, K. H. (1974). The Imperial Shipping Committee. Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 2,206-225. BURLEY,K. H. (1975). Canada and the Imperial Shipping Committee. Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 3, 349-368. CANTOR, L. M. (1960). Harford Mackinder: his contribution to geography and education. MA thesis, University of London. CAMLACHIE(1909). West of Scotland Liberal Unionist Association. Minute Book 3,23 April. Document held at Scottish Conservative Central Office, Edinburgh.
BARNES,J. AND NICHOLSON,D. (1980).
BRIAN W. BLOUET
367
CHAMBERLAIN,A. (1937). Politicsfrom the Inside. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press. CHILDS,W. M. (1933). Making a University. London: Dent. DURHAM UNIVERSITY(1908). Department of Paleogeography and Diplomatic, Grey papers, 4th Earl, 170 file 6, Mackinder to Grey, 8 July 1909. FISHER,C. A. (1963). Britain and the Common Market: the changing significance of the Commonwealth in the political geography of Great Britain. Geography 48, 113-l 29. GILBERT,E. W. (1950). Seven lamps of geography: an appreciation of the teaching of Sir Halford J. Mackinder. Geography 35, 21-41. GILBERT, E. W. (1959). Mackinder, Sir Halford John. Dictionary of National Biography 1941-1950, pp. 556-557. KEARNS, G. (1985). Halford, John Mackinder 1861-1947. In Geographers’ Biobibliographicalhdies (T. W. Freeman, ed.), vol. 9. London: Mansell. MACKINDER, H. J. (1900). The great trade routes. Journal of the Institute of Bankers xxi, l-6 January, 137-155 March, 266-273 May. MACKINDER,H. J. (1902). Btituin and the British Seas. London: Heinemann. MACKINDER,H. J. (1903). Letter, The Times, 22 October. MACKJNDER,H. J. (1904). The geographical pivot of history. Geographical Joumnl23,421-437. MACKINDER,H. J. (1907). On thinking imperially. In Lctures on Empire (M. E. Sadler, ed.). London. MACKINDER,H. J. (1915). Parliamentary Debates, fifth series lxxv, 10 November. MACKINDER,H. J. (1919). Democratic idealsand Reality. London: Constable. MACKJNDER,H. J. (1921). Railways: Scottish lines. Glasgow Herald, 30 May. MACKINDER,H. J. (1943). The round world and the winning of the peace. Foreign Affairs 21, 595-605. MCCLEAN, I. (1983). The Z.egend of Red Clydeside. Edinburgh: John Donald. MIDDLEMAS, R. K. (1965). The Clydesiders: A L.eft Wing Struggle for Parliamentary Power. London: Hutchinson. MILNER, VIXOUNT (1907). Imper&zl Unity. London: The Compatriots’ Qub. MILNER, VXOUNT (1909). Speeches Delivered in Conadz. Toronto: William Tyrrell. PARKER, W. H. (1982). Mackinder: Geography as an Aid to Statecraft. Oxford: CIarendon Press. PORTER,D. (1976). The Unionist tariffreformers, 1903-1914. PhD thesis, University of Manchester. SEARLE,G. R. (1971). The Quest for National Efficiency: A Study in British Politics and Political Tbougbt 1899-1914. Oxford: Blackwell. SEMMEL,B. (1960). Imperialism and Social Reform. London: Allen and Unwin. SETON-WATSON,H. AND SETON-WATSON,C. (198 1). The Making of a New Europe: R. W. Seton- Watson and the Last Years of Austria-Hungary. Seattle: University of Washington Press. SYMONDS,R. (1986). Oxford and Empire: The Last Lost Cause. New York: St Martin’s Press. WEBB, B. (1902). Passfield I: Diary of Beatrice Webb. London: British Library of Political and Economic Science.