Sir S. Northcote is trying to neutralise Mr. Gladstone's speeches
in Midlothian, and has spoken twice at great length, on Monday and Thursday. On both occasions he was temperate,. argumentative, and clear, and if he had had anything fresh to say, would have made a success; but he had nothing fresh to say. On both occasions his main point was that the Government could introduce a Redistribution Bill as well as the Franchise Bill if they liked, and that their object in not doing it was to get up a grievance against the Lords, which, considering that Mr. Gladstone alone stands between the majority and a serious movement for remodelling the Lords, is a gross misreading of current history. Sir Stafford also thought that Reform was a grave affair, to be undertaken as care- fully as the building of the Forth Bridge— he pursued that metaphor for a quarter of an hour—and that if the- Lords were deprived of power and the Commons placed under severe rules, we should end in a Dictatorship. He thought Majuba Hill a disgrace, and did not understand this third cam- paign in Egypt, though he was pleased the Government were at length about to protect the national honour. He tried to. prove that Mr. Gladstone had misrepresented the comparative expenditure of the two Governments, and he earnestly entreated his audience to stand upon the ancient lines of the Coastitn- tion. The speeches, in fact, were feeble, even for Sir Stafford Northcote, and suggest always that he only half believes his own case. We suppose the truth is that he sees the force of his opponent's case too strongly, and looks on his victory as tocs certain to be truly energetic. He was not half so effective as Sir Richard Cross, who, seeing neither his adversary's case, nor present facts, nor the certainties of the future, rushes forward through such obstacles as history, logic, and reason with admir- able vigour.
Previous page
