TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE ELECTIONS AN.D THEIR LESSON.
WE faced the elections with many fears and hopes. Unfortunately, it was the fears, not the hopes, that proved well founded. The Unionist Ministry, which only a few weeks ago held the complete con- fidence of Parliament and the country, and was looked on with envy and admiration by its opponents, is now in ruins. It is not, however, our desire to lament or disparage. The lessons of the election, as far as the Government is concerned, need no emphasizing. All that it is necessary to say, and this we desire to say in the strongest and clearest toms, is that no one has a right to attribute unworthy motives to Mr. Baldwin. He indulged in no personal gamble. He served no private ends. He acted unwisely, but he acted sincerely. He was greatly moved by the spectacle of Unemploy- ment. He thought that he had hold of a remedy which would cure the ills he deplored, andovithout consultation, or preparation, or deliberation, he threw it at the head of the country. The result was what we see.
Though the appeal to the country was so gravely mismanaged in time and circumstance, the policy pursued by the Unionist leaders since the destruction of the party's majority has been wise. The essential point was to avoid Minority Government and to give a true, and not a false, interpretation of the verdict returned by the electors. That verdict reflected the tumult of the public mind, but on two negative points it was perfectly decisive. The voters decided by a majority of over two to one that they would not have the Labour programme, would not give a majority to Labour in the House of Commons, and so would not give a mandate for the appointment of a Labour Government. The golden rule of true democracy is Majority rule. That rule it is the duty of the King, of the House of Commons, and of the party leaders to obey. In view of this, and whatever their private feelings, it was therefore right of the existing Govern- ment to meet Parliament and so to get its directions and orders from its masters, the majority of the Commons. If the House by a vote of want of confidence orders Ministers to go, go they must. If it does not give that order, they have in effect received an order to stand fast. They must not make way, without orders, for a Government who would be in an intensified minority.
The country also decided strongly against Protection. But that does not make Labour any less in a minority, or the present Government any more in a minority— as long as it does not receive an order from the House of Commons to quit office. Besides, Protection as a policy has been dropped by the Unionists and is no longer a vital issue, as the Labour programme is.
The practical result of all this is that the Liberals hold the balance between two minorities. But the Liberal leaders very wisely are not going to snatch at office and so find themselves faced by two hostile parties, either of which could defeat them if the other Opposition party merely abstained. Further, they are not inclined to put Labour into power when Labour will not, like the Unionists, drop its defeated programme. It will be far easier for the Liberals to give the support of toleration to a Unionist " Carry on " Government than to an aggressive Labour Government.
It will be said, perhaps, that these difficulties could be best solved by another dissolution. Those who suggest such a course must be singularly unappreciative of the trend of public opinion. All cool-headed and non-revolutionary leaders of public opinion are agreed that there must not be another immediate appeal to the electors. This is why it is so essential to repose power in the hands of the party which has (1) the greatest number of Members of Parliament behind it ; (2) can most easily keep out of Parliamentary adventures; and (3) can most easily be tolerated by the third party, the party which holds the balance, namely, the Liberal Party. The Labour extremists, no doubt, would not mind reducing the country to a condition of revolu- tionary indignation by a new dissolution. They would, indeed, welcome the chance, though in truth such a crisis would be far more likely to raise the evil spectre of Dictatorship. Labour cannot hold office unless and until it can command a position in the Commons which will allow it to remain in power without the risk of a sudden dissolution.
It must not be supposed, however, that, though we think a Unionist Government tolerated by the Liberals the best immediate solution, we think that such an arrangement can certainly be maintained. The delicate poise of toleration might easily be broken down. Unless, then, provision is made against such an eventuality, we might have forced on us that sudden General Election which it is above all things necessary to avoid.
The provision we desire, and the provision which we believe the country would approve, would he an arrangement for a " Carry on " Government of National Trustees. Let the leaders, Unionist and Liberal, agree upon a non-party man—such a man can be found— who would be able, if entrusted with the task, to command the support of a majority of the House. The feeling that such a man was standing by to take the helm if necessary would be a great source of security in itself. If the moderates had such a man behind them, it would not be worth while for the partisans to fish in troubled waters. The face at the window would keep them in order.
What is the lesson of it all ? The lesson—one which, as our correspondence columns show, is rapidly dawning on the country—is to fit the Constitution with the safety catch of the Referendum. If we had possessed the Referendum, Mr. Baldwin, instead of hurling himself over Niagara, would have quietly arranged a scheme for meeting Unemployment by an enlargement of Mr. McKenna's Safeguarding of Industries policy, and have referred it to the country.
With a need so plain, why should not the new Parliament, at any rate, serve one good purpose and honestly democratize our Constitution by establishing the Poll of the People on definite and concrete but not abstract projects, as set forth in Lord Balfour of
Previous page
