The Merchants of Death

CHAPTER IX STEPMOTHER OF PARLIAMENT

“The Government of your country! I am the Government of your country, I and Lazarus. Do you suppose that you and half a dozen amateurs like you, sitting in a row in that foolish gabble shop, govern Undershaft and Lazarus? No, my friend, you will do what pays us. You will make war when it suits us and keep peace when it doesn’t. . . . When I want anything to keep my dividends up, you will discover that my want is a national need. When other people want something to keep my dividends down, you will call out the police and military. And in return you shall have the support of my newspapers, and the delight of imagining that you are a great statesman.”—Undershaft, the armament maker, in Bernard Shaw’s Major Barbara.

OF course this diagnosis of the armament situation has that readable but exaggerated quality which has become known as characteristically Shavian. No scholar would undertake to prove that the armament makers alone brought about the World War, nor is it possible to say that these magnates dictate orders to the government. Nor on the other hand do governments control arms makers. The matter is more complex than all that. But that there is an intimate relationship between governments and the arms merchants is indisputable; and, to judge by the situation in England, the arms barons have woven a fine web of influence which enables them to condition if not to direct public policy. England may be the Mother of Parliaments, but it is fairly evident that Vickers Ltd., is the stepmother of Parliament.

Vickers did not spring, armed for the munition conflict, from the brain of Basil Zaharoff. Its history dates back to the early nineteenth century. Then it started as merely a general engineering and iron works, and, like most English firms of that day, it was the mentor of engineers of all nations. In the forties Herr Krupp went to England to drink of the technical wisdom of the British. But a few decades later the term “Made in Germany” became synonymous with authority, and the rôles were reversed. Young Thomas E. Vickers served his apprenticeship in Essen and returned home so well armed with the precious Teutonic practices that he was able to take the lead over his English competitors.

With the advent of Zaharoff in the nineties, the firm took on a more venturesome character. It acquired the Wolseley Tool & Motor Co. and then the Electric & Ordnance Accessories Co. Beardmore, the Glasgow firm of shipbuilders, combined with them; and the consolidated firm obtained a subsidiary in Italy, the Terni company, which later took the name of Vickers-Terni. Zaharoff shook Vickers out of the humdrum business of dealing solely with the British government. Cecil Rhodes was directing British policy in South Africa in such a way that it pointed ominously toward war, and Vickers took the first halting steps on the soil of arms internationalism with the sale of rapid-fire guns to the hostile Boer Republic. Maxim’s machine gun, the “Pom-pom,” now a Vickers property, was placed at the disposal of Oom Paul.

Other corners of the globe offered loamy soil for Vickers and their agent Zaharoff. Supplying the rickety army and navy of Spain was not unprofitable. The Sino-Japanese War brought heavy orders, and the war between Russia and Japan found Vickers sending munitions to both sides. The English firm was well launched on international roads to prosperity, and by this time it was offering to customers every lethal article from machine guns to warships.

In South America and the Far East, its principal competitor was Armstrong-Whitworth. This firm had a salesman, Mr. R. L. Thompson, who was less famous than Vickers’ Zaharoff but no less energetic. He was particularly active in the nineties of last century, but the world was unaware of it until he sued his employers in 1904 for salary and commissions which he charged were due him. His counsel claimed that he held, with Armstrong-Whitworth, “a position somewhat analogous to that of a private diplomatic agent, or a sort of private ambassador.” After a few days in court, the action was settled, but not before some interesting revelations were made.

It seems that Mr. Thompson acted as special correspondent for the London Times while working for Armstrong-Whitworth. His first exploits were in South America, where, during the tension between Argentina and Chile, he tried to sell to both republics; he was successful in the latter country, where he sold warships. Then he transferred his operations to Siam, China and Japan. Selections from letters which Thompson addressed to his employers, read at the trial, disclose his methods:

“I shall try to see the Mikado with regard to the model of your new battleship. In spite of all difficulties I shall also try and show the model to the Emperor of China.”

“The First Lord of the Admiralty . . . some time ago said that the relations of the Admiralty with Vickers and another large firm in the trade are far more cordial than the ordinary relations of business. That might be one reason why the representative of these firms was received in audience at a Cabinet council. Patriotism is not one of the distinguishing features of the trade methods of this great combine. For instance, I find Messrs. Vickers have works at Barrow, Sheffield and Birmingham, but they do not confine themselves to this country. They have a yard in Placencia de las Armas in Spain; they have another place in Spezzia, Italy. They evidently take time by the forelock, they anticipate the promise of a Mediterranean squadron.”

No wonder the relations between the departments of the government dealing with national defense were “cordial” with the arms firms. The representatives of the arms firms were in many cases former army or navy officers, and the men they dealt with had the pleasing prospect, when they would retire, of augmenting their pension with the shilling of the arms manufacturers. It was natural that these interests should want to obtain former officers of the government. They wanted men who “knew the ropes,” and retired officers of course kept in touch with their old comrades. As Mr. Snowden put it, “kissing undoubtedly goes by favor and some of these things might be characterized as corruption.” Certainly the following list of honorable servants of their country’s defense did not consider themselves as scoundrels. We find these men on the board of directors of Vickers: General Sir Herbert Lawrence, Sir Mark Webster Jenkinson, formerly auditor of the Ministry of Munitions, General Sir J. F. Noel Birch, Sir J. A. Cooper, formerly with War Office, Sir A. G. Hancock, formerly of Ordnance Committee. But the system had become so ingrained in the conduct of the Government and the industry that it was not regarded as corruption.

“The appointment of Sir John Fisher at the Admiralty is a fact of some importance to a firm like ours, and I am glad to see Sir John is prepared to go in for building battleships, because the heavier the work, the more of it goes to our firm. We are makers of armor plate, large marine shafting, and turbine engines so that, when heavy work is about, we will get our share of it.”

But the tentacles extended farther than this. In 1911 a British financial journal made the following analysis of the boards of directors of three of the leading British arms firms, classifying them according to rank and occupation:

	Vickers’ Sons & Maxims	John Brown &Co.	Armstrong, Whitworth & Co.
Duke	2	1
Marquess	2
Earl, baron, or wife, son or daughter	50	10	60
Baronet	15	2	15
Knight	5	5	20
M.P.	3	2	8
J.P.	7	9	3
K.C.			5
Military or naval officer	21	2	20
Naval architect or government contractor	2
Financier	3		1
Journalists (including newspaper proprietors)	6	3	8

But while the friends of war were busy, the friends of peace were waking up. Increases in the naval estimates aroused their suspicions and some of them voiced their opinions as to who was responsible for this war-minded situation. Lord Welby, one peer who had withstood the attraction of armament shares—and who held the highest and most responsible position as permanent Civil Servant in the country—burst out in indignation:

“We are in the hands of an organization of crooks. They are the politicians, generals, manufacturers of armaments and journalists. All of them are anxious for unlimited expenditure and go on inventing scares to terrify the public and to terrify Ministers of the Crown.”

Mr. Snowden brought up in the House of Commons the fact that the Member of Parliament for the Hallam Division of Sheffield was then a debenture trustee for Vickers and also for Cammell Laird & Co.; and, as his speech proceeded, he became more uncomfortably personal:

But the officials of Cammell Laird were not content to rely on their governmental directors. In 1909 they were very much concerned about the weak condition of the British navy—then the most powerful in the world. Would the growing menace of the German fleet result in a débâcle for England? British arms magnates were determined that it should not, that the British government should be made to recognize the danger and forestall it by more dreadnaughts. And these guardians of the national safety were prepared to take all measures to see that this was done.

“May 13th, 1906—Mr. Mulliner first informs the Admiralty of preparations of enormously increasing the German Navy.” (This information was concealed from nations until March 1909).

“May 3, 1909—Mr. Mulliner giving evidence before the Cabinet proves that the acceleration in Germany for producing armaments, about which he had perpetually warned the Admiralty, was an accomplished fact and that large quantities of naval guns and mountings were being made with great rapidity in that country.”

In the autumn of 1908 Mr. Mulliner was able to get the ear of a prominent British general who lamented in the House of Lords that a “terrible awakening is in store for us at no distant date.” As a result of Mr. Mulliner’s agitation, the navy estimates showed an increase of over two million pounds sterling; and calculations on what Germany might be doing were so skillfully introduced into newspapers that there was much demand in Parliament for eight new cruisers with the slogan—“We want eight and we won’t wait.”

In the end they got four battleships and it was proved that Germany had been falsely accused of these alleged activities. But one of the first contracts was given to Mr. Mulliner’s client Cammell Laird. The rest of Mr. Mulliner’s career is not so brilliant. He boasted that he was the sole author of this scare and his indiscretion was a bit too much for the British public. His effectiveness as a contact man was so reduced as a result of his boast that he was replaced in the firm, quite typically, by a retired British admiral who had specialized in naval ordnance and torpedoes.

“Coventry was improving, but it was a great drag on their finances and would be so for some time (he had reference to the Mulliner case). The place was not fully recognized by the Government as an essential part of the national armament works. Last autumn he went over to the Scotson works where they made the heavy naval mountings with Mr. Winston Churchill, who gave him an assurance—which he carried out—that Coventry would now be regarded as one of the most important supplying firms for the Government, instead of being cold-shouldered as it has been for years past.”

From these stories, it would seem that Shaw’s Undershaft was perhaps not such a gross exaggeration, after all. Indeed, some of the opinions of arms merchants, uttered out of the range of meddlesome reporters’ ears, could well be lifted from the dialogues in Major Barbara.

The pacific-minded Canadians were shocked by these remarks, but with Japanese buyers the Vickers salesmen had more congenial auditors. In 1910 Rear Admiral Fujii visited England as officer for the supervision of the construction of warships. The Admiral recommended Vickers’ specifications and bid, and the Vickers firm got the business. Subsequently the Admiral fell afoul of Japanese justice and it was proved that Vickers, in order to return Fujii’s good will, had remitted to him large sums of money. No wonder they were large, for the Admiral had reported to his superiors that Vickers’ bid and specifications were lower and better than any others.

As a matter of fact Vickers were not the only corrupters. Other firms added to the purse of the venal Japanese envoy. Naval Constructor Hanamoto Kaizo visited the Yarrow works in England, and A. F. Yarrow showed him a new type of destroyer fitted for the consumption of oil fuel, the latest invention of that year. Fujii approved these specifications, and remittances were made later to him by Messrs. Yarrow. Arrol & Co. helped out this enterprising officer to the extent of £1,750 for an order of materials, and Wier & Co. sent him £1,000 for an order of pumps and machinery. The German firm of Siemens and Schuckert also attempted to bribe the Admiral, and perhaps were successful. But it was clear from the material brought to light during the trial that an elaborate system of bribery in connection with armament firms existed.

What a deplorable situation in Japan, said the world. But Japan, sensitive about these revelations, hit back at the conduct of other nations in an article in the Japan Weekly Chronicle of July 23, 1914:

Corruption, influence of the press, directorates, share holdings, friendly members of Parliament—this was the cordon that was drawing tighter about Britain in the years before the war. While men like Philip Snowden were unveiling the true picture of the danger, Vickers waxed stronger. The great steel trust of which it was a member was dissolved in 1913, and thereafter began a keen and augmented competition for greater orders. It was a competition which grew more feverish for some years and found full play in the famous Putiloff case, which brought into the first rank of competition another gigantic firm.