THE LIBERAL CRISIS
To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sni,—Will you please allow me a word of explanation in re- ference to my previous letter on this subject ? Incidentally it may help Liberals who are anxious to be fair to both Lord Oxford and Mr. Lloyd George and honest with themselves.
My letter dealt solely with the issue of strike policy, by reference to what I believe to be sound Liberal principles. The domestic differences of the Liberal Party are an entirely distinct question, and I have nothing useful to say about them. But I should be sorry to think that support of Mr. Lloyd George, or any other leader, in a single instance, was interpreted as indi- cating approval of his general conduct, or, as it has been rather vaguely put, his " outlook." One is not suddenly trans- figured into a disciple of Mr. George because one has happened to see eye to eye with him on odd occasions. I am afraid a ready assumption to the contrary has been one of the most damaging confusions of the Liberal controversy. It was, per- haps, the offspring of an even worse one—that if, on the strike issue, you supported Lord Oxford you were a Constitutionalist, and a Revolutionist if you agreed with Mr. George.
May I, in conclusion, thank you for your helpful reference to my letter in your leading article, though I still retain the view that support of the Constitution, in normal circumstances and defence of it when it is, or is supposed to be, in danger of attack, raise two real if subtle distinctions in political and individual conduct ? It is, indeed, in these dangerous waters that the wisest of statesmen might easily run the ship on the