Talk:Albert Grey, 4th Earl Grey

message: Substituted at 07:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: In the lead we read that Grey was "founder of the Society of Apostles, and Aricles Club" but we do not know what these were. The Society of Apostles cannot be the Cambridge Apostles, as according to our article that was founded over 30 years before Grey's birth. A Google search for "Aricles Club" returns lots of Wikipedia mirrors and nothing else. If nobody can shed any light on these I shall remove them from the article. DuncanHill (talk) 09:55, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pretty sure that the "Society of Apostles" does refer to the Cambridge Apostles, which is clearly wrong for the obvious reason you stated above. "Aricles Club", on the other hand, looked to me like an obvious typo of "Articles Club", concerning which a Google Books search gave the following: 
"As Prime Minister [ Rosebery ] had rapidly lost all enthusiasm for running the government. In the last year of his premiership [1895] he became increasingly tired as he suffered from insomnia due to the continual dissension in his Cabinet, and took to opium as a result. Policy details were discussed over dinner at meetings of the Articles Club, a dining club set up by a group of young, ambitious and intellectual Liberal MPs led by Asquith who met weekly at the National Liberal Club".
-from Edwardian Requiem: A Life of Sir Edward Grey, by Michael Waterhouse
"After 1886, Labouchere attracted a following of malcontents by his ceaseless energy, by frequent attacks on the House of Lords, and by constant criticism of the expense of maintaining the royal family. He lacked, however, any steady plans or programs. The most promising young men among the parliamentary Radicals detested him. These made up the group later known as the Liberal Imperialists: H. H. Asquith, R. B. Haldane, Sir Edward Grey, Arthur Acland, Sidney Buxton, Augustine Birrell, and Tom Ellis. Receptive to new ideas, the little alliance was self-consciously progressive and had good relations with the Fabians. Because these young men, known at the time as the "New Radicals" or "New Liberals", thought of themselves as constructive politicians, they sought to counter Labouchere's influence, which they regarded as all destructive. To this end they concerted their activities in parliament with Rosebery, Morley and H. H. Fowler. But the "Articles Club", as the anti-Labouchere alliance was called, was flawed by some confusion of purpose. It clearly was not intended to divert the attention of the party away from Home Rule. The members tended to regard Morley as their mentor, yet he was among the strongest Home Rulers in the House. What held them together was a common desire to check Labouchere's frivolous, irresponsible kind of Radicalism and his annoyance of the Liberal front bench. Moreover, the Articles Club did not represent the provincial Nonconformist Radicals; most of them were too cosmopolitan, too "modern" to speak for the bulk of Radicalism. It was in regard to leadership that Radicalism suffered most heavily from the Home Rule split: Chamberlain did not take many Radicals out of the Liberal party with him, but he did take his own ability, and it was sorely missed."
-from Reactions to Irish Nationalism, 1865-1914, by Alan O'Day
It looks from these that the Articles Club was an informal political subgroup of the late 19th century, from which the Liberal Imperialists emerged. The only Wikipedia article which actually includes a mention of it, is the one on R. B. Haldane, mentioned in the above passages: "Focusing on his writings, Haldane was passed over for political office, being the only one of his group left out in the wilderness. Haldane remained an ally of Asquith and Sir Edward Grey in the Liberal Imperialist wing of the party, followers of Lord Rosebery rather than of Sir William Harcourt. Rosebery admired Haldane's intellect, and the Scotsman urged upon his friend, whom he had known since 1886, an assault on Tory power in the Lords in 1894. Haldane joined friends at the Articles Club, including Asquith and Grey."
You might have also noticed that there is a constant mention of Sir Edward Grey (the first passage is actually from a biography of his), who was the 4th Earl's second cousin, once removed. I cannot say for certain that the 4th Earl was confused with Sir Edward, because he was himself a prominent Liberal Imperialist, but it is somewhat likely. The only certain thing is that the Articles Club appears rather non-notable and its presence in the lead is not the best of ideas, especially if we keep in mind that, from all these people mentioned in the sources, it is only mentioned -in passing- in one article, while this person is not even mentioned in the sources concerning the Club. 
Not to mention the Apostles bit, which looks like a complete mistake, as I said above.--The Traditionalist (talk) 11:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

text: Many thanks - I think you've cleared that up splendidly. DuncanHill (talk) 12:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are most welcome!--The Traditionalist (talk) 12:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Society of Apostles and Aricles Club