The Man Who Made Toryism

William Atkinson (Committee Member) is a third year reading History at Christ Church.

In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley has a character state that “Everything must have a beginning…and that beginning must be linked to something that went before.” A piece of obvious reasoning, this has dogged philosophers and astrophysicists for as long as there have been people doing philosophy and astrophysics, rather than proper jobs. Fortunately, Conservatives are practical-minded people and tend to eschew these sorts of occupations (PPEists, of course, aren’t really Conservative) and therefore aren’t usually troubled by this. 

 Except when it comes, often, to understanding their own heritage. This is an appalling Tory blind spot, since Conservatism is centred on history and the belief that practice, tradition and previous actions are a better guide to action than any abstract philosophy. Nowadays Tories might vaguely gesture towards Mrs Thatcher or Disraeli, or mention Hayek or Friedman in reverent tones, but their actual interests in where Toryism comes from, what it is and has meant over time, is often shockingly poor. We may giggle at saluting the “divine right of Kings” at Port and Policy, but at least those who do so have a consciousness of bearing the burdens and responsibilities that Tories have done for centuries. They understand their position in the tradition of those who have fought for all those gloriously  irrelevant things in modern life – monarchy, Church, hierarchical authority, the continuing existence of public schools, etc, etc – against those who would want to make politics about boring yet important things like taxes and the NHS.  

In doing so, those who toast the cause for which Charles I against the querulous Puritans  have shown their continuity with the man who first founded OUCA. Yes, our blindness to our own history has meant most of you wouldn’t have heard of Keith Feiling – historian, biographer, academic and indisputable Conservative titan. But with OUCA’s 100th anniversary coming up, it’s about time we gave him his due. Without Feiling, none of us, quite literally, would be here. First cousin of Kenneth Grahame, author of The Wind in the Willows, Feiling was the son of a stockbroker, went to Marlborugh and graduated with a highly impressive first in Modern History from Balliol in 1906. After lecturing in Toronto for a couple of years, he returned to Christ Church to lecture and work towards a doctorate. But his work was interrupted by the First World War, which he ended as a Captain.  

Returning to Oxford, Feiling had a sterling academic career. He chaired the Modern History Board from 1922 to 1924, lectured in Modern History from 1928 to 1938, gave the Ford’s Lectures in English History in 1931-32 (on the subject of the Tory party from 1714 – 1806), and finished his career as Chichele Professor of Modern History at All Souls, from 1946 and 1950. He retired, became Professor Emeritus, and could look back on a happy few decades at the peak of Britain’s historical profession. In that time, he had written a number of books, given wide-ranging lectures in public and the BBC, written columns in The Observer and elsewhere, and influenced a generation of young Conservative politicians.  

What made Feiling noticeable was not only his undoubted talent as a historian, but his commitment to a Conservative interpretation of the past – a defence of the afore-mentioned hierarchical authority, paternalism, Crown, monarchy, Church, family, nation and all the rest. He himself chose not to use the term Conservative often, and preferred Tory. From his first books “Toryism: A Political Dialogue” in 1913, he devoted himself to explaining his political vision through his history. A Tory Democrat, he understood the necessity of change – if it was gradual and rooted not in philosophy but a clear-sighted understanding of English history. His views were perhaps best encapsulated by the great historian A.J.P.Taylor, who in 1950 described Feiling’s history favourably against that of Whig or liberal history:  

"Toryism rests on doubt in human nature; it distrusts improvement, clings to traditional institutions, prefers the past to the future. It is a sentiment rather than a principle.  

Feiling argued in favour of a paternalist view of the world and supported social reforms to encourage more working-class people to attend leading schools and Universities as a way of winning their support in Britain’s new mass democracy. Believing Conservatives possess more character than other people – undoubtedly true – he, more than any other historian, popularised Disraeli as a Conservative icon, arguing forcefully in his works than the social reforms of Disraeli’s governments were in a proud, Conservative tradition. In a period between the wars when Britain was threatened by the rise of Labour at home and Communism on the Continent, this message was undoubtedly popular.  

But it was in influencing a generation of Britain’s leading Conservatives that Feiling left his most concrete legacy. Feiling founded OUCA in 1924 because it filled a hole in Oxford’s educational line up. It was all very well teaching sound young men Classics and Modern History, providing them with the necessary contacts, Brideshead-style high jinks and useful lists of contacts that they need to successfully run the Empire. But they still needed political instruction, guidance and ideas – Britain was democracy, after all, so it might help for people to have an experience of party politics. That was what OUCA provided. It was what it has always been – a place where this country’s future leaders are forged. And a good way of making friends, truth be told.  

Perhaps even more important for the country’s future, though, was Feiling’s role as a tutor. In his few decades at Christ Church, he turned the place into Oxford’s finest college for history – as Hugh Trevor-Roper pointed out, under his tutelage, the House produced more firsts in Modern History than any other college. Men who Feiling tutored went on to be leading writers, diplomats and ministers. Moreover, his writings undoubtedly influenced the generation of Tory politicians at Oxford whilst he tutored there but weren’t sensible enough to do History – like Anthony Eden and Quentin Hogg.  Most importantly, he oversaw the education of British’s finest 20th century Prime Minister – Sir Alec Douglas Home. 

 Though he may have been Prime Minister for two days under a year, and despite being beaten at the 1964 election by Harold Wilson, Home was everything any OUCA member could want in a PM. One of the first hereditary peers to resign from the House of Lords, Home’s upbringing straddled Scotland and England, and his long tenure in the House of Commons saw two stints as Foreign Secretary, as well as time as Neville Chamberlain’s PPS in the 1930s. He was tough on Communism, affable to those who knew him and, as PM, passed the legislation that allowed shops to set their own price for goods they were selling on. He didn’t know anything about economics – he said he used an abacus to count – and was the only Prime Minister to have played first-class cricket. Whilst his Modern History degree may have been third-class, it is surely a tragedy that such as great man was deprived of the long tenure in office he richly deserved.  

So, Keith Feiling: largely forgotten today, but a Tory prophet, a shaper of Prime Ministers and the father of OUCA. As we contemplate an uncertain term ahead, it is perhaps time we each raised a glass to Feiling in whatever Zoom-form of Port and Policy we get to see. And it’s about time that one or two of us picked up a history book – not least those of us with Collections.