That this gentleman should have turned Liberal in his old age, and that
he should have captured his ancient Conservative stronghold in Lynn for
the Rads, will not seem at all extraordinary to those who are a little
behind the scenes. Those who accomplish a great deal for their party
naturally expect that their party will do a little for them, provided
they possess the necessary qualifications. Tommy certainly had the
qualifications, and it is equally certain that he “put in” a lot of good
work for the Tories; but he was never a _persona grata_ with his leaders.
The Conservatives are rather stupid on matters of birth and parentage,
and Bowles did not come up to their standards. Having fought and lost
two elections “on his own,” the party sent him down to a forlorn hope at
Lynn. To their surprise and disgust he won the seat. For years he
served the Tories loyally in Parliament, but when there came a division
of loaves and fishes, Bowles was invariably left out of the reckoning.
In the last Parliament in which he sat on the Conservative benches, he
fell foul of his party, and personally attacked his hereditary leaders.
From his place he alluded to the Salisbury administration as “the Hôtel
Cecil,” and described the Front Bench as “a gallery of family portraits.”
Bowles acquired his knowledge of journalism and his respect for the
conventions of Society on the _Morning Post_. He had started life, I
believe, in Somerset House, which was just over the way, and he became
imbued with the notion—a very profitable notion, as it turned out—that a
paper chiefly devoted to the “hupper suckles,” written in their
interests, and employing what he used to call “the passwords of Society,”
should be a financial success. To what extent (at that period) Bowles
was in Society, or how he obtained a knowledge of its passwords, or what
those cryptic passwords were, I have never been able to find out; but, as
one astute editorial admonition is “Know what you don’t know!” those same
passwords may have been part of a pleasant myth.
His paper was duly launched at the price of twopence, and under the
admirable title of _Vanity Fair_. But the paper, smartly and even
wittily written as it was, would have failed to reach the somewhat
inaccessible class for which its founder proposed to cater had it not
been for his discovery of Pellegrini, and the appearance in _Vanity Fair_
of that Italian artist’s inimitable cartoons. The price was raised to
sixpence, the paper hit those remote circles for which it had been
destined, “Tommy’s” career was assured, and Society journalism was
established in our midst.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account