In July 1805 Thomas Creevey MP writes to his friend Lord Petre:
“You must know that I came out of the battle of the [last parliamentary] session very sick of it and of my leaders. It appears to me we had Pitt [the prime minister] upon his very last legs, and might have destroyed him upon the spot; instead of which, every opportunity for so doing was either lost or converted to a contrary purpose. Could the most inveterate enemy of Pitt have wished for anything better than to find him lending £40,000 [roughly £3m today], appropriated by law to particular public purposes, to two bankrupt merchant members of parliament who voted always with him? And could the most pertinacious derider of [Charles James] Fox’s political folly have dared to conceive that Fox on such occasion should acquit Pitt of all corruption, and should add likewise this sentiment to his opinion, that to have so detected him in corruption would have made him (Fox) the most miserable of men? …I believe that Fox has no principle about public money, and that he would give it away, if he had the power, in any way or for any job quite as disgusting as the worst of Pitt’s. It is a painful conclusion… and dreadfully diminishes one’s parliamentary amusement.”
In November 1930 Harold Nicolson writes in his diary:
“Lunch with the Mosleys. Tom [Sir Oswald Mosley] talks afterwards about the future. He is evidently thinking of leading some new party of younger Nationalists. He is not certain what to do or when to do it. If he strikes now he may be premature. If he delays he may be too late. ‘If,’ he says, ‘I could have £250,000 [around £12m today] and a press I should sweep the country.’ By the press he means Beaverbrook [owner of the Daily Express]. I warn him against the impulsive character of Lord B. I tell him so long as there is a battle on, B will behave as a great and loyal fighter. But once the battle is over and victory is assured B will get bored and will create battles, if necessary in his own party. His pugnacity destroys both his judgement and his decent feeling.” [Mosley’s New party was founded early the following year.]
In January 1976 Bernard Donoughue, the head of Harold Wilson’s policy unit at No 10, records in his diary:
“Attended the economic strategy cabinet committee. On the next round of price control everybody agreed that it was necessary to provide the degree of relaxation which would help industry to invest, while not letting prices rip to the extent which would alienate the Trades Union Congress… The other item was on London salary weighting for civil servants being applied to MPs. It is all scandalous really. London weighting has increased by about 150 per cent in the past three years. It is supposed to apply automatically to MPs. Michael Foot [employment secretary] resisted this sensibly, saying it would upset many in the private sector to see MPs and ministers voting themselves a pay rise now. But Ted Short [leader of the house] was afraid with our small majority of upsetting MPs and the prime minister supported him.”
“You must know that I came out of the battle of the [last parliamentary] session very sick of it and of my leaders. It appears to me we had Pitt [the prime minister] upon his very last legs, and might have destroyed him upon the spot; instead of which, every opportunity for so doing was either lost or converted to a contrary purpose. Could the most inveterate enemy of Pitt have wished for anything better than to find him lending £40,000 [roughly £3m today], appropriated by law to particular public purposes, to two bankrupt merchant members of parliament who voted always with him? And could the most pertinacious derider of [Charles James] Fox’s political folly have dared to conceive that Fox on such occasion should acquit Pitt of all corruption, and should add likewise this sentiment to his opinion, that to have so detected him in corruption would have made him (Fox) the most miserable of men? …I believe that Fox has no principle about public money, and that he would give it away, if he had the power, in any way or for any job quite as disgusting as the worst of Pitt’s. It is a painful conclusion… and dreadfully diminishes one’s parliamentary amusement.”
In November 1930 Harold Nicolson writes in his diary:
“Lunch with the Mosleys. Tom [Sir Oswald Mosley] talks afterwards about the future. He is evidently thinking of leading some new party of younger Nationalists. He is not certain what to do or when to do it. If he strikes now he may be premature. If he delays he may be too late. ‘If,’ he says, ‘I could have £250,000 [around £12m today] and a press I should sweep the country.’ By the press he means Beaverbrook [owner of the Daily Express]. I warn him against the impulsive character of Lord B. I tell him so long as there is a battle on, B will behave as a great and loyal fighter. But once the battle is over and victory is assured B will get bored and will create battles, if necessary in his own party. His pugnacity destroys both his judgement and his decent feeling.” [Mosley’s New party was founded early the following year.]
In January 1976 Bernard Donoughue, the head of Harold Wilson’s policy unit at No 10, records in his diary:
“Attended the economic strategy cabinet committee. On the next round of price control everybody agreed that it was necessary to provide the degree of relaxation which would help industry to invest, while not letting prices rip to the extent which would alienate the Trades Union Congress… The other item was on London salary weighting for civil servants being applied to MPs. It is all scandalous really. London weighting has increased by about 150 per cent in the past three years. It is supposed to apply automatically to MPs. Michael Foot [employment secretary] resisted this sensibly, saying it would upset many in the private sector to see MPs and ministers voting themselves a pay rise now. But Ted Short [leader of the house] was afraid with our small majority of upsetting MPs and the prime minister supported him.”
