A. MALCONTENT GROUP. -u - NLESS we read the signs wrongly, next
Session will see the formation of a group of malcontents among the ranks of the Home-rule party. The presiding genius of that group will be the senior Member for Northampton. That Mr. Labouchere intends to form such a group is clear from his most recent utterance in regard to the question of his exclusion from the Government. He evidently resents that exclusion as bitterly as ever, and is resolved to be revenged upon the Prime Minister. It is true, he appears to vent his anger on the Queen, and speaks as if his quarrel was with her alone, and as if Mr. Gladstone was not to blame in the matter. If we read between the lines, however, we see that Mr. Labouchere's true feeling is against his venerated chief, and that the Queen is but the stalking-horse he uses to attack the real foe. Mr. Labouchere knows the feeling in the Glad stonian party well enough to realise that while he would alienate all sympathy from himself were he to attack Mr. Gladstone personally, he is able, in representing the Queen as the source of his disappointment, to pose as a guardian of the Constitution. His case would look a very poor one if he merely abused Mr. Gladstone for leaving him out in the cold. He would be told at once that there was not room for every one, that Mr. Gladstone must be given a free hand, and that, at any rate, his case is not so hard as that of Mr. Stang- feld, who is patriotic enough to make no complaint. By declaring, however, that it is owing to objections made by the Queen that he is not in office, Mr. Labouchere gains a great many points. He is relieved from the extremely difficult position of having to prove himself l'homme necessaire, and is able to do what is politically always a, very paying thing—to fight the battle of freedom and the Constitution against their assailants. Occa- sionally, however, Mr. Labouchere forgets himself, and we see his face without the mask, and realise how great is his indignation with Mr. Gladstone, and his desire for revenge. For example, in the letter to Mr. Covington, the chairman of the Northampton Liberal and Radical Association, Mr. Labouchere, after alluding to Mr. Gladstone's declaration that he (Mr. Labouchere) had never sought office, goes on :—" It is, however, one thing not to desire office, and another thing to be stigmatised as a political leper, unfitted for it owing to incidents' which, whilst testifying to my energy and influence, are in no way disparaging to my honour." Surely, if this means anything, it means that the political leper hopes to have the power of dealing his esteemed leader some very nasty blows,— for, remember, it was Mr. Gladstone who is asserted to have " stigmatised " Mr. Labouchere as a political leper. Mr. Labouchere's meaning is still clearer where he ex- plains that he trusts that it will not be necessary to put his leader into the horse-pond, but goes on to explain that he will certainly do it, if it turns out to be necessary. We must assume, he says, that the Ministry will act in a thoroughly Radical spirit,—that is, not only pass the New- castle programme, but make it "a stepping-stone to a good deal more." "I have no reason to suppose that the pre- sent Ministry is indisposed to do this, but in politics good intentions count for nothing ; and, to judge by all previous experience, the atmosphere of the Treasury bench has a curiously dissolving effect on electoral pledges. What we have a right to demand of our leaders is action—energetic, determined, and democratic. If we can count on this, no Ministry will ever have had a more fervent supporter than I shall be of the present servants of the Crown.'" Mr. Labouchere goes on to point out that there was a Liberal Ministry in 1880, "many of whose members are now again in office." This Ministry inaugurated "coercion in Ireland, and piratical intervention in Egypt," and he therefore opposed them. Now, however, 'most of our leaders" have come over to Mr. Labouchere's way of thinking, and "have realised the errors of their former ways." All this is threatening enough, but the passage which concludes this part of Mr. Labouchere's lecture to his leaders is still more ominous :—" I trust, therefore, that we shall be in accord with the present Ministry in everything, and that, as they have attained power by Radical support, they will retain that support by being themselves Radicals in power. If (and I in no way anticipate that this will happen) they are not, I shall act as I did during the Parliament of 1880, for my creed is measures, not men.' As the representative of Radicals, I hold that no Ministry that is not Radical can expect Radical support." Now, every one knows perfectly well, and no one better than Mr. Labouchere, that the very last thing in the world that Mr. Gladstone, Sir William Harcourt, Lord Kimberley, and Lord Spencer will be is, "Radicals in power." They may be forced to try and pass some of the things in the Newcastle programme, but they will be its least, not its most Radical items. Hence, for Mr. Labouchere to say that he will attack any Ministry which is not distinctly Radical, is to say in so many words that he will attack the new Government. In other words, Mr. Labouchere is determined to form a group of malcontents, and to wreck the Ministry which rejected his claims for office.
No doubt it may be said, that to do this is beyond Mr. Labouchere's power, and that, however great may be his desire to make a group of malcontents, he will not be able to accomplish his end. Those who argue thus have not realised the nature of the Parliament elected two months ago. Mr. Labouchere will not, of course, be able to recruit his malcontents all at once ; but that, sooner or later, they will draw together under his banner, we have no sort of doubt. At first, indeed, he will seem quite power- less, and men will say, when they see Mr. Gladstone's un- diminished majorities, that the Member for Northampton need not be dreaded. Before very long, however, the Government, like every Government before it, will make an enemy or two on personal and individual grounds, and these men will immediately rally to Mr. Labouchere. The senior Member for Northampton, probably aided from the beginning by the Member for the Forest of Dean, will thus very soon be at the head of an embryo party, to which adherents are sure to flock. For example, after the first of the rebuffs which " Labour " is sure to get from the Ministry when it makes any of its more exaggerated claims, we should not be in the least surprised to see one or two of the Labour Members joining the malcontents. Mr. Keir-Hardie, for example, is certain to drift to them sooner or later. Thus, by the time the House has been some six months in Session, Mr. Labouchere may quite conceivably be at the head of seven or eight malcontents. In one sense, no doubt, such a party is absurdly weak. In another, however, it is formidable even to a strong Ministry. For example, the Government would practically always be at the mercy of a combination between the malcontents and the Parnellites. Under the peculiar circumstances of the present Parliament, Mr. Labouchere may, then, very easily make himself exceedingly disagreeable to the upholders of what he terms "senile nonsense."
Though we note the ill effects that Mr. Labouchere's action is likely to have upon the Government, we do so with regret. As we said last week, we detest class particularism as much as we do national particularism ; while the particularism of faction is quite as hateful as the other two. We want good government for the country, but if we are to have government resting on Parliamentary groups, good government we shall never have. Hence we regard the prospect of the formation of a new group with the utmost regret. We have no desire to see Mr. Gladstone put out of office by a Cabal. What we want, is to see him produce the best Home-rule Bill he can, and then for the country to be consulted on the plain issue. That would put an end to the Home-rule contro- versy for ever. If, however, Mr. Gladstone goes out of office on some side issue, the Parliamentary ground will be cumbered by the carcase of Home-rule. In a word, the growth of groups makes for weaker Governments ; and we desire, as long as they remain in office, that our Govern- ments should be as strong as possible. Hence our desire for homogeneity, even among our opponents.
Previous page
