Three Autograph Letters Signed (two 'W Fowler' and one 'Wm Fowler') from William Fowler, Liberal MP for Cambridge, to Colonel Spencer Childers, regarding his father the Liberal Chancellor Hugh Childers, Gladstone, Irish Home Rule, and other matters.

William Fowler (1828-1905), Liberal Member of Parliament for Cambridge, 1868-74 and 1880-85 [Colonel Edmund Spencer Eardley Childers (1854-1919), son of Hugh Culling Eardley Childers (1827-96)]
William Fowler (1828-1905), Liberal Member of Parliament for Cambridge
Publication details: 
1, 4 and 8 July 1901; all on letterheads of Broadwater Cross, Tunbridge Wells.
SKU: 10517

All three items good, on lightly-aged paper. All bifoliums. Letter One (1 July 1901): 12mo, 4 pp. 42 lines. He is pleased to have received Childers' life of his father (published that year). 'I knew your Father well, [...] I was in the House in the Parliaments of 68 & 80 when he had his most serious work'. Praises his 'amazing pluck in going out as he did to Australia [Childers was first Vice-Chancellor of the University of Melbourne] & in his conduct there in the early days & during the gold discoveries time, the story of which in his letters is very curious'. He is interested to learn that he 'had Jewish blood in his veins'. He finds it 'evident that he was very doubtful as to Gladstone's wisdom on several points & in that I agree with him'. He believes that, though 'most anxious to help Ireland', he was not 'really happy about Home Rule', wanting to 'separate the Imperial from the Local', which 'could not be done'. Ends: 'Where should we have been in 99, if we had given Ireland over to an Irish Parlmt in 93?' Letter Two (4 July 1901): 12mo, 4 pp. 33 lines. Having received Childers' reply, he is pleased he wrote. Childers' 'Jewish blood' is 'very interesting to me'. Praises Disraeli's comments on the subject in his biography of Lord George Bentinck - 'a most interesting book & written by a most remarkable specimen of that famous nation'. Attacks Gladstone's handling of the Home Rule question. The recipient is 'right that Gladstone acted in a hurry [...] but he did more - He broke faith with his old friends to whom in Septr 1885 he sent a message utterly opposed to the plans which he developed, even before the Election of that year. He was not straight & he had his reward. And he destroyed the Liberal party. - Where is it now?' Letter Three (8 July 1901): 12mo, 3 pp. 31 lines. He thanks him for 'the Copy of that very remarkable letter - It does the Father credit'. Until the recent case of 'Mr J. E. Backhouse of Darlington' he had 'never heard before of a boy being made a Baronet'. He does not 'altogether agree with your history as to 79-80 - I remember well saying after that terrible Afghan disaster, at end of 79, that it would finish the Govmt - that & the Zulu war were too much for the Electors.'