LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
FREE-TRADE AND "DOWN WITH THE LORDS."
[TO Till EDITOR OP PHI "SPECTATOR...I Sr,—In the Spectator of December 19th you protest against what you describe as Mr. Asquith's "monstrous suggestion that the Liberals should at the next General Election go to the country on the double cry of Free-trade and 'Down with the Lords.'" Will you allow me to ask, not as a rhetorical question, but in all sincerity; what course, in your view, the Liberal Party as it is (not as you would wish it to be) should take ? You are always willing to credit your political opponents, whatever their wrong-headedness, with honesty of purpose. Let us assume, then, that both the leader and the great bulk of the Liberal Party are as honestly convinced as you that Free-trade must be maintained,. while they do not agree with you that "incalculable injury" has been done to that cause by their policy. Let us assume, further, that they are also honestly convinced that the veto of the Lords is a fatal obstacle in the path of social reform. Where, then, is the monstrous element in Mr. Asquith's suggestion ? You would not, I know, ask us to abandon our Free-trade principles how- ever poor may be your opinion of our actions. Do you suggest, then, that because we are Free-traders it is monstrous of us to seek to abolish that which thwarts and destroys at every turn legislation which we conceive to be beneficial ? Surely if you grant that the Liberal Party has honest convictions, it is entitled to ask the country for power to take the first step towards carrying them -out, and not the less so because it agrees with you on the economic question of Free-trade.—I am, Sir, Scc., E. WILFRID FORDHAM.
White Gables, Heath Drive, Hampstead, N. W.
[Free-trade can only be maintained if those who desire to maintain it agree that while it is in danger they will sink their differences on other matters, and stand steadily shoulder to shoulder in its defence. To do this no doubt demands great sacrifices from all concerned, but we venture to assert that they are worth the making. Take our own case. Does Mr. Fordham think it was a light or easy task for the Spectator to fight the battle of Free-trade week by week for three years, and to recommend its readers to vote for Liberal candidates,—for men, that is, opposed to the Spectator on almost all other political questions, and against men with whom the Spectator was in hearty agreement on all other points? In order, however, to preserve Free-trade we took such action. Yet now when we suggest that it is the part of the Liberals to show that they too can make sacrifices for Free-trade, we are treated as if we were bereft of our senses. Are you crazy, says our correspondent in effect, that you ask us to give up our policy of abolishing the Lords lest we offend Unionist Free-traders ? Such a suggestion, as you would see if you were not blind, is utterly preposterous. You are asking us to sacrifice some- thing which we value. How can you be so foolish ? Well, we suppose we were foolish in imagining that the Liberals, like ourselves and our fellow Unionist Free-traders, would think the maintenance of Free-trade and the placing of it out of Clanger worth a sacrifice.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
