Not so, however, the Daily News, which, in a singularly
acrid article on Mr. Trevelyan's speech, taunts him with not being content " with the comparatively humble functions of prompter on the political theatre and merely whispering the words, nor of stage-manager and casting the parts, but he must also be dramatic author and write the piece." Of course, after this laborious bit of satire, we naturally look anxiously to discover the true gravamen of Mr. Trevelyan's sin, and it is indicated later on that this con- sists in the criticism on Sir W. Harcourt. " If it would take a much stronger man than Sir W. Harcourt to do any real damage to Mr. Gladstone, it would take a stronger man than Mr. Trevel yan to 'shut up' Sir W. Harcourt." Possibly enough. Sir William Harcourt would not easily be shut up' by the united efforts of the Liberal party,—there would always be the Conservatives left for him to interpret ; indeed, if there is anything he does under- stand thoroughly, it is the secret of a merely Conservative Govern- ment, which Mr. Disraeli once called "an organised hypocrisy." But why is Mr. Trevelyan to be compared in this contemptuous manner with Sir William Harcourt ? He is a younger man, no doubt, and perhaps a less elaborate orator, but his Parliamentary standing is older, and his course has been much more consistent. He has contributed far more towards the abolition of Purchase in the Army than Sir W. Harcourt has contributed to any political achievement whatever, Liberal or Conservative. We regret to see one of the ablest and most Liberal of our daily papers apologising for the man who does his best both to divide and to discourage the Liberal party, and depreciating the man who does his best to keep it true to its principles, at a time when those principles seem to have lost popularity. If the Liberal Press is going to trim and vacillate, the Conservative triumph will indeed be complete.
