There are now numerous ebook readers available. Some of these have their own ebook formats that mean they are unreadable on most other types of reader. However, virtually all readers accept pdf files. It is for that reason that Darcy Press have standardised on providing books in pdf format and not in the proprietry formats peculiar to a specific ebook type.
The following books are available as ebooks in this format, in addition to paperbacks.
Love and Hate
The Dykebreak
Unreasonable Men.
Worsted to Westminster
Airship Pilot No 28
It is Mr Darcy's intention to make all titles from Darcy Press available in both formats as they become available.
Monday, 28 February 2011
Wednesday, 17 November 2010
Passive Resistance
This is one of a number of blogs about items in historical byways:
Passive Resistance
In 1901 came one of those contentious legal rulings which, in the Edwardian period, caused great upheavals because they changed the law as it was commonly understood. The Cockerton Judgement declared that instruction in science and fine art could not be described as 'elementary education' which was the only legitimate area of activity on which School Boards were allowed to spend public money. Unless the law was changed, the secondary schooling, into which all over the country they had been quietly but steadily expanding, would have to be abandoned.
This was the excuse for which Arthur Balfour, the nephew of Prime Minister Lord Salisbury, had been waiting. After the failure of the Education Bill in 1897 there was still the funding crisis in the Anglican schools, and the government was seeking a solution. The principle of the new Bill was to do away with all the thousands of School Boards and put education in the hands of the much smaller number of local authorities. They would be empowered to fund secondary education as well as primary.
The further difficulty was that there was no government money available as the Boer war was soaking up what was available, so there was no alternative to raising the additional money from the local rates. The quandary was whether they should force the local authorities to support the denomination schools, so that they didn't disappear due to lack of funds. This was bound to cause trouble and the Bill as first submitted to Parliament had a clause allowing the local authorities to opt out. While seeming clever in the House this would have been an administrative nightmare, and in any case it was removed during the Bill's passage.
Joseph Chamberlain, who had been absent at the critical moment due to a cab accident, was appalled. He knew that his Liberal Unionist supporters, mainly Nonconformists, would see the Bill for what it was, partisan in favour of the Anglicans. They would view it as paying for sectarian education as part of their local council rates. There was nothing he could do, as he was largely responsible for the war which had absorbed the available government money. He felt that it was going to destroy Liberal Unionism.
In July 1902 Lord Salisbury suddenly resigned and Balfour became Prime Minister, but he was even more reluctant to listen to Chamberlain's pleas for concessions to the Nonconformists. He was convinced that reform was essential, and most agreed with that, but it was the manner of it that caused the problems. With his Victorian patrician attitudes he saw no reason why the government should not blatantly legislate in favour of its supporters, in this case the Anglicans. The idea that the Church schools should be merged into a unified non-denominational state education system was something he couldn't accept, particularly after strong representations by the bishops.
The Nonconformists were furious and started protesting even before the Act was passed. At the end of September a large meeting in Manchester was organised by the local Free Church Federation, and of course, Charles Leach was present. The Chairman, Rev Dr McLaren made their position clear that though there were good aspects, 'we oppose this bill because it gives public money and does not secure public control – we oppose this bill because it endows the teaching of sectarian creeds; we oppose this bill because it re-establishes religious tests.'
Finally in December the Bill became the Education act of 1902. It established two sorts of school, Provided, and Non-Provided. The former were the previous Board schools, while the latter were the voluntary - mostly those owned by the church. At face value it appeared innocuous, and many Churchmen could not understand what the fuss was about. The devil was in the detail, and particularly the way managers were appointed for Non-Provided schools. Usually this left control, and specifically that of religious instruction, in the hands of the Church. While in theory assistant teachers could be appointed without reference to their creed, heads were subject to the trust deeds of the school which normally defined their religious denomination. The reference in the Act to the bishop being the arbiter in the case of disputes was a giveaway as to its biased nature.
Undoubtedly, the most contentious point was the use of money from the local rates to support these Non-Provided Schools. Though the other issues were of concern to many, and significant numbers thought that the opportunity to create an efficient national education system had been squandered, it was the rates issue that really stuck in Nonconformist throats. There was this sense that the government, and Balfour in particular, had either just let the Bishops have their way, or were unconcerned with the effect of the Act. They seemed unaware that with the coming of the twentieth century the world had changed, and what had been acceptable in Victorian times was no longer so. The Nonconformists were going to fight the Act all the way, and Passive Resistance Leagues sprang up all over the country.
For a while the activity was mostly in huge demonstrations, speeches and letters to the papers. There was no way the government could now say that it was merely the concern of the few. However, while the opposition to the Act was large, not everyone agreed about the tactics, and it was only the 'hard liners' that went for the Passive Resistance. Some thought that the correct way was, as Balfour said, to change it in Parliament, but he knew perfectly well that this would be very difficult. Even should the Liberals have a majority in the House of Commons, it was unlikely to be able to get amending legislation through the House of Lords, with its inbuilt Tory majority, as leading Liberal Sir William Harcourt pointed out. The argument was degenerating into one about the tyranny of majorities over minorities, though whether this referred to Nonconformists, or only their position in Parliament, is not clear.
Then came the first cases of people refusing to pay a proportion of their rates. The authorities responded by sending police to seize some goods from the offenders. These were then taken to auctions and sold to pay the debt. The Passive Resisters would turn up in force and buy back the property of their colleagues, and there the matter would rest. However many of the sales were disrupted and sympathetic auctioneers, when they understood what was happening, refused to conduct further ones. It was more a matter of making life difficult for the authorities, than outright civil disobedience.
On the other hand there were those who took their opposition to its logical conclusion and refused to co-operate at all with the authorities. The courts had no option but to send them to prison. Though the numbers were not large the impact of the threat of a lady being sentenced raised the profile of the protest still further. She was quite prepared for jail, but in the event someone paid her rate and she was spared.
The movement was still spreading and by mid December some 7,000 summonses had been issued and 300 sales had taken place. Two months later the number was over 10,000 and positions were becoming entrenched. By April they had reached 20,000, with 23 men having been sent to prison. At the end of the following month it had reached 45,500 with 1,600 sales, and 108 imprisonments. This was in England, but in Wales a movement led by Lloyd George had rendered the Act almost unworkable, and the Prime Minister was reported to be considering a Bill to deal with the situation.
The Nonconformists were still fighting battles for equality that had been going on for centuries against an entrenched church that was state sponsored. This was the basis for them wanting to disestablish the church; so that they might have a more level playing field. There was also no doubt that Balfour, in the Act, had made no attempt to be fair and reasonable. He seemed unaware that now it was the twentieth century and more egalitarian attitudes prevailed.
In that it did not achieve changes in the Act, the movement seems a failure, but it was just the sort of issue that the Nonconformists and Liberals needed to galvanise them and bring them out of the doldrums that they had been in really since the split in 1885. Once they started to be active again they realised that there was a lot that needed to be done, and that the Tories, particularly under the insouciant Balfour, had no idea of this. When a year or two later the election did come, the result was not in doubt, and the passive resisters had made a considerable contribution to that situation.
For more on this subject see Worsted to Westminster: The Extraordinary Life of the Rev Dr Charles Leach MP by J. B. Williams available from Darcy Press www.darcypress.co.uk.
Passive Resistance
In 1901 came one of those contentious legal rulings which, in the Edwardian period, caused great upheavals because they changed the law as it was commonly understood. The Cockerton Judgement declared that instruction in science and fine art could not be described as 'elementary education' which was the only legitimate area of activity on which School Boards were allowed to spend public money. Unless the law was changed, the secondary schooling, into which all over the country they had been quietly but steadily expanding, would have to be abandoned.
This was the excuse for which Arthur Balfour, the nephew of Prime Minister Lord Salisbury, had been waiting. After the failure of the Education Bill in 1897 there was still the funding crisis in the Anglican schools, and the government was seeking a solution. The principle of the new Bill was to do away with all the thousands of School Boards and put education in the hands of the much smaller number of local authorities. They would be empowered to fund secondary education as well as primary.
The further difficulty was that there was no government money available as the Boer war was soaking up what was available, so there was no alternative to raising the additional money from the local rates. The quandary was whether they should force the local authorities to support the denomination schools, so that they didn't disappear due to lack of funds. This was bound to cause trouble and the Bill as first submitted to Parliament had a clause allowing the local authorities to opt out. While seeming clever in the House this would have been an administrative nightmare, and in any case it was removed during the Bill's passage.
Joseph Chamberlain, who had been absent at the critical moment due to a cab accident, was appalled. He knew that his Liberal Unionist supporters, mainly Nonconformists, would see the Bill for what it was, partisan in favour of the Anglicans. They would view it as paying for sectarian education as part of their local council rates. There was nothing he could do, as he was largely responsible for the war which had absorbed the available government money. He felt that it was going to destroy Liberal Unionism.
In July 1902 Lord Salisbury suddenly resigned and Balfour became Prime Minister, but he was even more reluctant to listen to Chamberlain's pleas for concessions to the Nonconformists. He was convinced that reform was essential, and most agreed with that, but it was the manner of it that caused the problems. With his Victorian patrician attitudes he saw no reason why the government should not blatantly legislate in favour of its supporters, in this case the Anglicans. The idea that the Church schools should be merged into a unified non-denominational state education system was something he couldn't accept, particularly after strong representations by the bishops.
The Nonconformists were furious and started protesting even before the Act was passed. At the end of September a large meeting in Manchester was organised by the local Free Church Federation, and of course, Charles Leach was present. The Chairman, Rev Dr McLaren made their position clear that though there were good aspects, 'we oppose this bill because it gives public money and does not secure public control – we oppose this bill because it endows the teaching of sectarian creeds; we oppose this bill because it re-establishes religious tests.'
Finally in December the Bill became the Education act of 1902. It established two sorts of school, Provided, and Non-Provided. The former were the previous Board schools, while the latter were the voluntary - mostly those owned by the church. At face value it appeared innocuous, and many Churchmen could not understand what the fuss was about. The devil was in the detail, and particularly the way managers were appointed for Non-Provided schools. Usually this left control, and specifically that of religious instruction, in the hands of the Church. While in theory assistant teachers could be appointed without reference to their creed, heads were subject to the trust deeds of the school which normally defined their religious denomination. The reference in the Act to the bishop being the arbiter in the case of disputes was a giveaway as to its biased nature.
Undoubtedly, the most contentious point was the use of money from the local rates to support these Non-Provided Schools. Though the other issues were of concern to many, and significant numbers thought that the opportunity to create an efficient national education system had been squandered, it was the rates issue that really stuck in Nonconformist throats. There was this sense that the government, and Balfour in particular, had either just let the Bishops have their way, or were unconcerned with the effect of the Act. They seemed unaware that with the coming of the twentieth century the world had changed, and what had been acceptable in Victorian times was no longer so. The Nonconformists were going to fight the Act all the way, and Passive Resistance Leagues sprang up all over the country.
For a while the activity was mostly in huge demonstrations, speeches and letters to the papers. There was no way the government could now say that it was merely the concern of the few. However, while the opposition to the Act was large, not everyone agreed about the tactics, and it was only the 'hard liners' that went for the Passive Resistance. Some thought that the correct way was, as Balfour said, to change it in Parliament, but he knew perfectly well that this would be very difficult. Even should the Liberals have a majority in the House of Commons, it was unlikely to be able to get amending legislation through the House of Lords, with its inbuilt Tory majority, as leading Liberal Sir William Harcourt pointed out. The argument was degenerating into one about the tyranny of majorities over minorities, though whether this referred to Nonconformists, or only their position in Parliament, is not clear.
Then came the first cases of people refusing to pay a proportion of their rates. The authorities responded by sending police to seize some goods from the offenders. These were then taken to auctions and sold to pay the debt. The Passive Resisters would turn up in force and buy back the property of their colleagues, and there the matter would rest. However many of the sales were disrupted and sympathetic auctioneers, when they understood what was happening, refused to conduct further ones. It was more a matter of making life difficult for the authorities, than outright civil disobedience.
On the other hand there were those who took their opposition to its logical conclusion and refused to co-operate at all with the authorities. The courts had no option but to send them to prison. Though the numbers were not large the impact of the threat of a lady being sentenced raised the profile of the protest still further. She was quite prepared for jail, but in the event someone paid her rate and she was spared.
The movement was still spreading and by mid December some 7,000 summonses had been issued and 300 sales had taken place. Two months later the number was over 10,000 and positions were becoming entrenched. By April they had reached 20,000, with 23 men having been sent to prison. At the end of the following month it had reached 45,500 with 1,600 sales, and 108 imprisonments. This was in England, but in Wales a movement led by Lloyd George had rendered the Act almost unworkable, and the Prime Minister was reported to be considering a Bill to deal with the situation.
The Nonconformists were still fighting battles for equality that had been going on for centuries against an entrenched church that was state sponsored. This was the basis for them wanting to disestablish the church; so that they might have a more level playing field. There was also no doubt that Balfour, in the Act, had made no attempt to be fair and reasonable. He seemed unaware that now it was the twentieth century and more egalitarian attitudes prevailed.
In that it did not achieve changes in the Act, the movement seems a failure, but it was just the sort of issue that the Nonconformists and Liberals needed to galvanise them and bring them out of the doldrums that they had been in really since the split in 1885. Once they started to be active again they realised that there was a lot that needed to be done, and that the Tories, particularly under the insouciant Balfour, had no idea of this. When a year or two later the election did come, the result was not in doubt, and the passive resisters had made a considerable contribution to that situation.
For more on this subject see Worsted to Westminster: The Extraordinary Life of the Rev Dr Charles Leach MP by J. B. Williams available from Darcy Press www.darcypress.co.uk.
Saturday, 13 November 2010
Unreasonable Men Launched
A new Novel from J. B. Williams.
Ted Cole's life spirals downward when he is declared redundant. Only the chance meeting with Marie, softens the blow, and prevents him completely falling into depression. He is angry with those he sees as fat cats with nothing better to do than wreck peoples lives. After many months, a new job begins the road back, but he is not helped by constant reminders and the eventual closure of the firm, which brings on his father's heart attack. Eventually the strains become too great, leading to a parting from Marie, and a rocky time at work. It is only when Christine drops a pile of books in front of him that he is able to grasp an opportunity which leads to happiness. As he matures he begins to have a broader view of the industrial decline and rejuvenation which formed the background to his sacking, and starts to wonder who the real villains were.
The book is available in paperback and ebook from our website www.darcypress.co.uk
Tuesday, 30 March 2010
Review for Worsted to Westminster
In the proceedings of the Wesley Historical Society (Vol 57 Part 4 February 2010) is a review of Worsted to Westminster : The Extraordinary Life of the Rev Dr Charles Leach MP. It outlines the story of his life and ends with the line 'It reads like a novel and brings to life a remarkable man who had fallen into undeserved obscurity'.
We couldn't have put it better ourselves.
We couldn't have put it better ourselves.
Wednesday, 10 March 2010
J. B. Williams now on WeRead.com
The author J. B. Williams now has a page on WeRead.com at http://weread.com/authors/ireadhome/101601584
Thursday, 4 March 2010
The Dykebreak Launched
Mary and DD have known each other ever since he first saw her as a baby at his father's funeral when he was six. The Dykebreak traces their lives as they grow up and though she develops a hunchback it does not affect their relationship. DD is a conscripted officer and in 1940 he finds himself fighting for his country as the Germans sweep into the Netherlands. Following the defeat they try to come to terms with being in an occupied country and find ways of resisting the Nazis. As the war progresses, this becomes an increasing dangerous occupation. After the failure of the Allies to break through at Arnhem, the severing of food and fuel supplies, plunges the still occupied north of the country into the 'Hunger Winter'. It requires desperate measures to survive.
The coming of peace alters their relationship drastically and following a successful operation they find happiness for a time. Unresolved problems cause this to slowly unravel leading to a stalemate and them parting. Ironically it is a further disaster which brings them together again, and resolves their problems, allowing them to start again.
The story, while not a sequel, features characters already met in 'Love and Hate', but this time following the lives of Mary and DD over a greater time span.
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Love and Hate launched
Love and Hate by J. B. Williams is now available from the Darcy Press Website - www.darcypress.co.uk.
This is the outline:
Two young people meet by chance in the late summer of 1945 in post war Amsterdam, and slowly find that their wartime experiences mirror each other. But where he is just glad to still be alive, she is consumed by hate for those that so nearly succeeded in murdering her. Love and Hate is the story of the rocky road of their growing love as they try to come to terms with their past. Certainty that the rest of her family will not return and that she is the sole survivor begins her journey back.
Coming face to face with her betrayer, who led to her capture and incarceration in extermination camps, and having her, in turn, in her power helps the healing process, but a surprising discovery in the ruins of war torn Berlin brings a kind of catharsis, as it drains away the fear underlying her hate. He supports her all through this difficult process, but as she recovers in body and spirit the responsibilities of normal life and the loss of his family begin to overpower him, and she must now be strong enough to support him in return. In this survival alone they are helped by many people, but as they return to a sort of normality they find that, without realizing it, they have helped those people around them with their own lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)