LORD SALIBURY'S TWO BOGEYS.
TORD SALISBURY stands among the Tory Peers like J Saul among the Israelites ; but he sometimes makes it difficult for Liberals to believe that he is really a great man. He is, for example, so fond of parading bogeys in which, if he does believe, he is a foolish man, and if he does not, an in- sincere one. Now the bogey is Russia, then it is Mr. Kruger; again it is the "plundering Democracy," and by-and-by it is Mr. Chamberlain. Just now he has two on hand which he displays on every platform, much as some Missionaries when they want to excite a torpid or sceptical audience bring forward hideous little idols, and tell their horror-stricken hearers that there are people, and people with immortal souls, who worship those. These bogeys are "the arrogant Dictator" and the " tyrannical Caucus." To judge by Lord Salisbury's words, Mr. Gladstone is constantly engaged in coercing his colleagues, the House of Commons, the House of Lords, and the people at large, into some line of action which has abso- lutely no justification, except his own vanity and inordinate greed of power. Lord Salisbury is " frightened " at his audacity and success ; and declares that the growth of what Americans call " one-man-power " in the United Kingdom is the most dangerous present symptom in the condition of the State. Now, does he say this because he believes it, or because he thinks it will tell If he believes it, facts make no impression on his mind. Mr. Glad- stone is, no doubt, a man of strong convictions ; and being Premier, and aware of his place in the national regard, pro- bably presses those convictions strongly upon his colleagues. But so far is he from dictating to them, that it is notorious that on one cardinal point of politics—a point which Lord Salisbury deems the most important of all, the policy pursued in Egypt-- the Premier is carrying out their views rather than adhering to his own. He has said so almost in so many words half-a. dozen times ; and it is because on Egyptian matters he is not a dictator, not arrogant, but remarkably self-distrustful, that our conduct in that region is marked by a certain want of decision. A dictator like Lord Palmerston or Lord Beaconsfield would behave very differently in Cairo, as he would also in Parliament, where Mr. Gladstone, rather than dictate, bears in the Commons with a kind of anarchy which makes his nearest colleague, Lord Hart- ington, who is not accused of dictatorship, almost savage ; and in the Lords, with an opposition which exasperates good- humoured Lord Granville into fury, and very moderate Liberals into menace. Throughout this controversy, the Premier, so far from dictating to the Lords, has shielded them, till his followers grow angry and say he is half-hearted, has reasoned with them, has implored them, has tried with every art of his oratory to persuade them into retreat. He has not, it is true, given up his Bill ; but, then, what statesman gives up his Bill when the country has accepted it, and he has pointed out certain dangers which will arise if it is re- jected, which is in the line of his clear duty. Lord Salisbury would hardly praise the counsellor who, when he thought the Monarchy in danger, did not warn the Monarch; and the utmost extent of menace addressed by Mr. Gladstone to the Peers has been such a warning as Kings have repeatedly received, and sometimes profited by. As to the people, how can Mr. Gladstone dictate to them any more than can Lord Salisbury ? His power is wholly derived from them, from their confidence, their affection, both of which the slightest attempt to dictate would seriously shake. It is open to Lord Salisbury or Mr. Walton to convert them all. If Lord Salisbury believes his own statement he is blind to the facts, and if he does not he is foolish ; for the multitude, like any other employer, when told that a trusted servant rules him, dislikes not the servant, but the critic who inferentially so despises the master's manliness and judgment. The charge of dictatorship is not only ill-founded, but is, as a matter of tactics, ill-chosen.
So is the other bogey, the Caucus. It is hard to credit, though we do not deny it, that Lord 'Salisbury honestly be- lieves what he says,—that a Committee sitting at Birmingham, with no authority, no money, and no influence, except what may accrete to its members as successful guides, actually dic- tates to Parliament, and domineers in the constituencies, and enslaves the independent minority. How does it do it, and when? That the Liberal "Hundred," or "Three Hundred," or "Four Hundred," conveys its views to the Member it has supported, sometimes counsels, sometimes urges, and some- times censures, is true enough ; but when has it ever been otherwise? The "influential constituent" has always written, always been treated with respect, always exer- cised a certain influence, or where would be the " repre- sentation " in our system ? He never was accused of enslaving his Member ; and what is the " Caucus " but an influential constituent, with this difference, that the strength of the latter might be derived from external sources, such as property, while the Committee's can only be derived from its represen- tative character ? If Lord Salisbury truly believes his own warnings, he misconceives Northern England exactly as Mr. Buckle misconceived Scotland. That philosopher, whose in- tellect was always over-burdened with the weight of the facts it had to carry, asserted that Scotland was of all lands the most priest-ridden, the truth being that Scotland is of all lands the one where the clergy is the most lay-ridden. In attacking the Committees, Lord Salisbury is only attacking the electors behind them, and asserting that the constituency dictates, which, if representative government is to be real at all, must within limits be the case. Members of the House of Commons are not sent there to represent, like Peers, their own fancies, but the views of those who send them ; and how, with huge masses of electors, are those views to be ascertained ex- cept through elected Committees? If Lord Salisbury is sin- cere in his charge, he misses patent facts ; while if he is not, he has, for the second time, selected the wrong weapon. Of all bogeys, this of the Caucus frightens electors the least. They know quite well they can dismiss the Committee, or alter the Committee, or disregard the Committee, if they please ; and regard the accusation of being slaves, just as Scotchmen regard the accusation of being priest-ridden, as slightly comic. Their Member will go their way, or his own, whatever any Committee or federation of Committees may do or say.
The truth is, we believe, that Lord Salisbury, whose mind is in many respects Continental rather than English, has, in the exasperation of continuous defeat, worked himself up to a condition frequently seen among Continental statesmen, and he sees men as trees walking. You will constantly meet men in France, full of experience and ability, who sincerely believe that "the Church," now fighting for bare life, is an ogre determined and able to destroy all liberty ; or that in a country with five millions of small owners and fundholders, Socialism will in a year or two insist successfully on universal liquidation. Lord Salisbury has brought himself to believe that Englishmen, who have de- feated their Kings, are about to pass under the sway of a series of Dictators called Premiers, who, aided by elective committees in each district, and by the quintessence of Caucus styled the House of Commons, will set up a hideous personal despotism, under which no man, and especially no Peer, can be content to live. It is all nonsense, as great nonsense as that of the respect able Islingtonian who thinks nothing happens except by leave of the Jesuits, or sees the International in every street riot; and it rather diminishes one's confidence in Lord Salisbury's right to occupy his place. It is good that the Opposition should be well led ; and good leading is difficult when the leader every now and then starts from a fevered dream to order his forces to march with all their artillery upon a spectre or a will-of- the-wisp. They will not find the spectre ; and if they do find the will-of-the-wisp, they will only have marched with all that effort and parade upon a little vaporous light flickering across the marshes. Lord Salisbury laughs when he is compared to Strafford, and asks if Dr. Benson is Laud ; and he is right, for only excited imaginations suspect him of "Thorough ;" but he has his own illusions, too. We all have, perhaps, but we do not all aspire to the government of kingdoms.
Previous page
