WASHINGTON — My friend, Andrew Roberts, has inherited the
title of Historian of the English-Speaking People, from Winston
Churchill. Churchill wrote his four-volume history up to 1900.
Roberts took the story from there and has written his stupendous
History of the English-Speaking Peoples Since 1900. I
commend it to you.
In that book Roberts says that there is something about the
English-Speaking people that encourages a certain number among
them to speak ill of us. He does not think that their criticism
is legitimate for the most part, and I do not either. But it is a
characteristic of certain of us. You never find that captious
quality in Russia. Would Vladimir Putin say the kinds of things
about Russia that, say, Barack Obama says about America? Would
Hugo Chavez say such things about Venezuela, Fidel Castro about
Cuba, Hu Jintao about China? Roberts’ case is made, and the
Democratic Party and Labour Party offer plenty of examples to
fortify his point.
Yet lay that observation aside for another day. He makes
another case in his book worth mentioning. The English-Speaking
people love liberty. I thought of this the other day when I read
a piece in the Washington Post about the revival of fox
hunting in Britain and the desire to legalize it once again. Ian
Farquhar, an English hunter, leads the piece by saying that when
the 2004 ban on fox hunting went into effect, “I felt — we all
felt — they were spitefully taking away the very essence of our
liberty.” Now the Conservative government is back and the law is
up for repeal. What will happen I do not know, for the
Conservatives are in a coalition with the Liberal Democrats and
only a minority of them are with the Conservatives on this one.
However, that is not the issue. Rather it is the question of “the
very essence of our liberty.” It is a part of British tradition.
Some have it. Some do not.
We have the tradition here, and it is seen by many as “the
very essence of our liberty.” The right to keep and bear arms is
actually written into our Constitution, in the Second Amendment.
Guns are seen as essential to liberty by many of us. In many
communities we can actually carry guns. There are studies that
show that gun ownership and law abidingness correlate. There is a
robust debate in America over gun ownership, but robust as it is
it is unlikely that the gun controllers will ever outnumber the
gun rights people. We are safe with our guns.
Yet let us look at another matter, the hunt itself. Over in
Britain it is all tallyho, handsome attire, follow the pack. An
occasional fox gets mauled, but that is one less fox for a farmer
to gas or shoot, to trap or snare. If the hunt is legalized,
rather than being restricted as it is now, there will be a few
more foxes to be mauled. But attendant with the hunt are the
festivities, and there are jobs for the keeper of kennels,
stables, and the land managers. There is equipment to be
maintained. The Countryside Alliance claims 45,000 members in
some 300 clubs. During the winter months the countryside comes
alive with activity. I say good show!
On this side of the Atlantic we do of course have the
tallyho set. There are the hounds and horses, and stylish dress.
Yet there is much more. North America is a continent and a pretty
raw continent when the great outdoors is at issue. Some hunt for
trophies, some for the feast after the hunt. I am numbered among
the latter. I freely get up before the sun is in the sky and set
up for turkey, deer, or even bear. But I am not a particularly
avid hunter. Once when with my partner I shot a bear — or more
likely he did — I had to follow the critter for two hours or
more before it dropped. Not much fun — but when we got back to
camp we told some great stories and there was a stupendous feast
that night.
The important thing on this side of the Atlantic or the
other is that English-Speaking people find liberty in the air. We
relish our freedoms, and one is to hunt. I hope the present ban
on fox hunting is repealed over there. Possibly I will even join
in the fray. Though if I do, I shall ride at the back of the
hunt. I would not want to incite a dog to carnage.
