The Spectator
Thursday
Borders
Spectator letters: Scottish Tories, ambulances and Florence Nightingale
The other Tory split Sir: With regard to the article by James Forsyth (‘The great Tory split’, 6 September), there is another dimension to the future of the Conservative party of which the Scottish independence vote is symbolic. The Conservative and Unionist party looks as though it lacks the leadership and the political skills to keep the Union together, certainly to make a convincing job of it. Whichever way the vote goes, it will not reflect well on the Conservative leadership. They are seen as part of an ‘out of touch’ Westminster elite which has neglected not just Scotland but much of England, becoming a party of the south-east rather than a genuinely national/UK wide party; what is more they do not seem even to mind that this is the case.
Tories weren’t quite sure about the Union 300 years ago, either
[audioplayer src="http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_11_Sept_2014_v4.mp3" title="Fraser Nelson, Tom Holland and Leah McLaren discuss how we can still save the Union" startat=50] Listen [/audioplayer]Birth of a nation A reminder of how England and Scotland came to be one country: — Proposals had been made throughout the 17th century, with English Whigs generally in favour and Tories less keen. — For the English, there was the attraction of neutralising an old enemy. For the Scots the attractions were mainly economic. The collapse of the Darien scheme, a failed attempt to establish a Scottish colony, New Caledonia, in what is now Panama, had run up heavy losses for investors. Union would bring Scotland access to markets in England’s extensive colonies.
One week to save Britain
[audioplayer src="http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_11_Sept_2014_v4.mp3" title="Fraser Nelson, Tom Holland and Leah McLaren discuss how we can still save the Union" startat=50] Listen [/audioplayer]Next week, the most important vote in recent British history will be held. Indeed, it may well turn out to be one of the last ballots in British history. Seven months ago, this magazine devoted its front page to warning that the United Kingdom was at grave risk of dissolution. The unionist apparatus had decayed, argued Alex Massie, and Alex Salmond was the best late-stage campaigner in Europe. The SNP deployed the language of nationhood and destiny, while the ‘no’ campaign droned on about the Barnett Formula. The conditions for calamity were in place.
Portrait of the week | 11 September 2014
Home England suddenly began to take the prospect of Scottish independence seriously after a poll of 1,084 people by YouGov put support for it at 51 per cent and opposition at 49 per cent. A survey by TNS showed 38 per cent of Scots backed independence compared to 39 per cent opposing it (with 23 per cent not knowing). The pound fell to its lowest for ten months against the dollar. George Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in concert with Labour and the Liberal Democrats, promised a timetable for further devolution if voters in Scotland would only reject independence. The Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition agreed to cancel Prime Minister’s Questions and fly to Scotland, in the apparent belief that it would help. Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, went too.
Books and arts – 11 September 2014
Podcast: Stay with us, Scotland!
With only seven days to go until the referendum, urgent action is needed to help save the Union. In this week’s issue, we asked Spectator readers to write to Scottish voters, saying why they are hoping for a ‘No’ vote. The response was extraordinary. You can read some of the letters here. Fraser Nelson is joined by Tom Holland and Leah McLaren to discuss what else can be done to save the Union at this late stage. They also take a look at Canada and Quebec, and how their union managed to survive not one but two referendums. It’s safe to say that Westminster has gone into full panic mode. If a ‘Yes’ vote passes, Cameron and Miliband’s jobs could both be on the line. But how should they respond to the threat of the country breaking up?
The Spectator at war: An apology to a chemist
‘An apology’, From The Spectator, 12 September 1914: WE are informed that a story told in a letter from a correspondent signing herself "A Country District Visitor," and published on August 22nd, 1914, has had an injurious effect upon Mr. C. H. Schuhmacher, Chemist, of Heswall, Cheshire. In contradiction of the statements quoted in that letter, we are now informed that Mr. Schuhmacher is a natural-born British subject of English parentage on his mother's side, and that his only son, Mr. Cyril Schuhmacher, is serving this country with the Liverpool Scottish.
From the archives | 11 September 2014
‘An apology’, from The Spectator, 12 September 1914: We are informed that a story told in a letter from a correspondent signing herself ‘A Country District Visitor’, and published on August 22nd, 1914, has had an injurious effect upon Mr C.H. Schuhmacher, Chemist, of Heswall, Cheshire. In contradiction of the statements quoted in that letter, we are now informed that Mr Schuhmacher is a natural-born British subject of English parentage on his mother’s side, and that his only son, Mr Cyril Schuhmacher, is serving this country with the Liverpool Scottish.
‘Please, stay with us’: the best of Spectator readers’ letters to Scottish voters
[audioplayer src="http://traffic.libsyn.com/spectator/TheViewFrom22_11_Sept_2014_v4.mp3" title="Fraser Nelson, Tom Holland and Leah McLaren discuss how we can still save the Union" startat=50] Listen [/audioplayer]At 9.30 p.m. last Saturday news broke that Scotland’s ‘yes’ campaign had established its first opinion poll lead. Since then, the country has been confronting the possibility of its impending dissolution. The vote will affect all 64 million people in the United Kingdom, and most have neither a vote, not a voice. Last weekend, The Spectator asked readers to submit letters to Scottish voters, saying why they are hoping for a ‘no’ vote. Those printed here are a small selection from the hundreds we received.
Wednesday
The Spectator at war: Spiking the guns of German intrigue
The papers of Monday published the welcome news that Britain, France, and Russia have agreed ‘not to conclude peace separately during the present war.’ Of course, it was quite unthinkable that Britain, France, or Russia should be so base as to make terms at the expense of her friends. Nevertheless, a signed pledge is an excellent thing to have, if only because it puts the matter beyond the possibility of doubt, and because it spikes the guns of German intrigue, which, if report speaks truly, had already began. It is, indeed, a pitiable situation when allies think of their own interests more than of the common cause, as William III.
Tuesday
The Spectator at war: Fairly well, so far
From The Spectator, 12 September 1914: WE are not going to begin shouting before we are out of the wood. We say this out of no foolish superstition that it is unlucky to do so, but for the very plain and good reason that we are not out of the wood, though we admit that during the week things have gone fairly well, and that the prospects look somewhat brighter. But even so our success may well turn out to be temporary. Indeed, we might almost say that in one sense it is certain to prove temporary, because a campaign with fairly equal forces such as are now arrayed against each other is bound to sway backwards and forwards. All that we have a right to hope for is that on the balance of, say, two months the swaying in the western theatre of the war will prove to be slightly in our favour.
Monday
The Spectator at war: An eloquent call to arms
From The Spectator, 12 September 1914: We were unable to find space last week in which to chronicle the election of the new Pope—Cardinal della Chiesa. Let us trust that, though he takes possession of the Holy See at a period of such stress and storm, the major part of his pontificate may be peaceful and fortunate. In spite of the great pressure on our space, we must make some reference to Mr. Asquith's speech at the Guildhall on September 4th. A more dignified or more worthy call to arms to a free people was never made. What Mr. Asquith said as to Belgium was in every way adequate, and we feel sure that our gallant allies in France and Russia will fully appreciate his references to them. To realize the full eloquence and dignity of Mr.
