page_0002

2.

this, I think, rather than any stern sense of duty, which determined
their choice. I am glad to think that this excellent habit still continues.
Our home Civil Service is recruited from the ablest men in
the Universities. Our Indian and Colonial Services are recruited
from the most enterprising. The service of the State has, in the eyes
of the ordinary Englishman, a distinction of its own which outweighs
the solemn fact that no one will make a fortune in it.

That is one side of the tradition. On the other side, service
in Parliament has a notable prestige. A successful business man
looks to a seat in the House as the crown of his career. An able
young man going to the Bar, in nine cases out of ten, looks forward
ultimately to entering Parliament. When I was in the House of Commonds
there were at least a score of eldest sons of famous families who
had come naturally into the House of Commons, and who worked very hard
at their parliamentary duties. That, you will say , is due to the
fact that we have a large leisured class whose eldest sons are not
compelled to struggle for their daily bread. Yes, but there is more
in it than that. Why should a rich young man, with every opportunity
for amusement elsewhere, be so ready to devote himself to a calling
which has more kicks than ha'pence in it, which is always laborious
and often unpleasant? Look at our list of Under-Secretaries in Britain
today and you will find among them a very large number of young
men who, in other countries, would never dream of undertaking the toil
and disappointments of parliamentary life.

No doubt there are baser elements in the tradition. There
is personal ambition, for example, which may be much stronger than
any sense of public duty. There is a certain tincture of snobbish-