TOPICS OF THE DAY.
LORD HARTINGTON'S ATTITUDE.
T4OED HARTINGTON'S speech of Friday week to the Eighty Club has been regarded, both by many who applaud it, and by many who censure it, as an announcement that he is about to neutralise himself in relation to the Home-rule Question, and that, while unable to give Mr. Glad- stone his support, he is determined not to cross the path of the Liberal Government in its dealings with the Irish Ques- tion. Nothing could be further from the true drift of the speech. Lord Hartington did declare most manfully that he would be no party to any attempt to harass Mr. Gladstone into a premature declaration of his Irish policy ; that he would give that policy the most impartial and anxious consideration in his power, and open his mind gladly to anything which appeared to be intended to prevent the concessions made to Ireland from operating injuriously, whether on the prospects of Ireland or on the unity of the Empire ; and he declined altogether to identify himself with the Tory Party, which has, in Lord Hartington's estimation, been directly responsible for rendering it all but impossible to renew those provisions of the law by which the lawless party in Ireland were chiefly kept in check. But everything which he said implied that if the Liberal policy, when produced, proved to be incompatible with the welfare of Ireland and the true unity of the Empire, he should be compelled to state forcibly his opposition to it, and, on appeal being made to the people, to give his help to those who would pronounce for its rejection. He declared, for instance, that he recognised no right in a party numbering less than one-seventh of the House of Commons to dictate a policy to the other six-sevenths. He protested that by no possible manipulations of their consciences could British Members rid themselves of their responsibility for doing what they believed to be injurious to Ireland and to the British Empire, merely on the ground that the great majority of Irish representatives cry out for such a course. And though he pledged himself to abide by the decision of the people, he virtually pledged himself to tell the people honestly what he may think of the policy proposed to them, and to do what in him lies to bring them over to his own conviction. Now, this is a course which, far from involv- ing neutrality, pledges Lord Hartington to a frank and straightforward, but steadfast, resistance to any plan that he may disapprove, and we will add, to a resistance far more really serious and formidable, than any resistance could be which should have been determined on in ignorance of Mr. Gladstone's proposals, which should have been followed by an unreal and unjustifiable alliance with Mr. Gladstone's foes, and which should consequently have had the effect of merging the Moderate Liberals in the ranks of the Conservative Party. Both those Liberals who breathe freely because they regard Lord Hartington's speech as a declaration that his distrust of Home- rule is to be of a purely neutral and inert kind, and those Tories who fret and fume because Lord Hartington's distrust of Home-rule is not going to take effect as a distrust of Liberal principles, are blind to the true features of the situa- tion. Lord Hartington's attitude is much more really significant, much more really formidable to any scheme which may tend to throw Ireland into confusion and bankruptcy, or any scheme that renders the ascendency of the Parliament of Westminster over the affairs of the Empire doubtful, than it would have been if he had boen less careful to reserve his judgment on the one hand, or less careful to insist on his hearty Liberalism on the other hand. It is because Lord Hartington has not pre- judged the proposals of the Liberal Government, and has not rushed into a coalition with the Tories, that his opinion, when- ever it is given, on the Irish policy of the Government will carry the greatest possible weight with British constituencies. Every one now sees that he has not ceased to be a genuine Liberal, though he cannot join a Government which has come into existence on purpose to try and give satisfaction to the Home-rule Party. And it is just because he has not ceased to be a genuine Liberal, that his opposition, if he should ultimately be compelled to give it, to a Home-rule policy, will weigh heavily with the constituencies.
For what would have been the result, had Lord Hartington shown the same kind of hostility to Mr. Gladstone which Lord Salisbury and Lord Randolph Churchill show,—that is, if he had formed an alliance offensive and defensive with them? Why, simply this, that Lord Hartington and the few Mbderates who might have determined to co-operate with him would have been merged in the Tory party, and that no large class of Liberals would, after that period, have been sensibly affected by their arguments or by their conduct. That would really have been a complete abdication,—it would have diverted a mere rivulet, we might almost say a mere driblet, of political influence to the Tory Party, and there and then have ceased to have any further effect at all. But the course on which Lord Hartington has actually resolved is very different, and far more powerful. He declares that he is still as hearty a Liberal as he ever was ; that to him, looking at Home-rule from a Liberal point of view, it seemed too dangerous a policy to give it even a preliminary and provisional sanction by joining a Government which must fall if it fails to satisfy the Parnellite Party ; but that, for the rest, everything which Mr. Gladstone may propose commands his most respectful consideration, and that if he shall disapprove it, it will not be because he thinks it a great innovation, because he thinks it inconsistent with a Con- servative bias, but on the contrary, because he thinks it incon- sistent with true progress, because he thinks it likely to strike out a track which will discredit Liberalism, because he thinks it a retrograde and not a forward policy. Now, which of the two courses is really likely to influence the electorate at a General Election ? We should say the last, and the last only. The Tory Party, a little swelled by Lord Hartington's joining it, would still have a very immaterially increased influence at the General Election. The long tradition of the past has connected too many unfavourable associations with the Tories to render it possible that the Tories should be joined by any large number of true Liberals. However important the Irish Question may be, and however dangerous the Home-rule policy of Mr. Gladstone may be, it is not credible that ordinary Liberals all over Great Britain can attach so. exclusive an importance to it, as to vote with the Tories solely to defeat it. But it is very possible indeed that, if Lord Hartington and those who act with him stick openly to their Liberal faith, but nevertheless find Mr. Gladstone's Irish policy so full of hazard and probable calamity that they are com- pelled to disapprove it, so many Moderate Liberals in all the con- stituencies will follow Lord Hartington, that the Conservatives will be compelled in a very large number of instances to prefer a Moderate Liberal candidate to their own ; and that if they would really defeat Home-rule, they would see their way to doing it better by following Lord Hartington than they could by follow- ing Lord Salisbury. For of this we have no doubt, that at heart the British nation is Liberal, and is moderate,—is not Conserva- tive, and is not revolutionary. The British electorates dislike an obstinate adherence to old customs that are almost obsolete ; and they dislike equally the rashness which precipitates itself into untried and unmeasured risks. They would vehemently object to find themselves embarked on a policy of reaction ; and they would equally object to find themselves embarked on a policy of madcap adventure. We can quite conceive their preferring a steady and unflinching resistance to Home-rule under prudent leaders, to even Mr. Gladstone's great leadership after he had struck his flag to Mr. Parnell. But we cannot conceive their preferring the leadership of Lord Salisbury and Lord Randolph Churchill to Mr. Gladstone's leadership, even after such a surrender as that. They would say, we think, that Lord Salisbury had never been a prudent leader ; that Lord Randolph Churchill is a mere madcap ; that it is not for sober citizens to prefer a party led by such men as these, to a party which Mr. Gladstone had so often led to wise and cautious victories. If Home-rule is to be defeated at all, it will be by prudent Liberals who oppose it not because it is an innovation, but because it is an innovation in the wrong direction ; because it is a new departure in the direction of weak government and divided counsels ; because it threatens financial ruin to Ireland, and political discord to the Empire. These are the objections which only Liberals can effectually urge, and which Tories, if they are in earnest, must be content to second them in urging, instead of aspiring to lead them to the battle. The Conserva- tives must for once consent to fight under a Liberal banner, if they wish to defeat the dismemberment of the Empire, should Mr. Gladstone propose what seems to good Liberals likely to result in the dismemberment of the Empire. If Liberals attempt to fight under a Tory banner, they will but defeat their own object ; and in defeating their own object, will defeat the object of the Conservatives also, so far at least as the danger caused by Horns-rule to the Empire surpasses in Conservative minds the dangers involved in the defeat of the pettier Tory traditions.
Previous page
