MR. MORLEY AND THE POLITICAL PENDULUM.
MR. MORLEY did not quite like Mr. Augustine Birrell's dubbing him " the select preacher" for the Eighty and Russell Clubs this day week, though it was at Oxford that he was addressing them. He hoped, he said, that he should not preach too much. Perhaps, as a matter of fact, though he gave his hearers one moral lesson,—on the folly and injustice of reproaching the Irish party for voting in favour of the denominational education in which they sincerely believe,—he preached too little; that is, did not apply to himself and his own party with sufficient candour the obvious lesson of the revival of Radical party spirit and party hopes on which he dilated. There is something rather simple and childlike in the eagerness with which every defeated party in turn plumes itself on the swing-back of the pendulum as it watches the by-elections. We suppose it is not to be wondered at, for even the most highly cultivated human nature has a strong dash of childishness in it, however sophisticated it may be, but it is really pathetic to note how eagerly it catches at straws to console itself for defeat. Mr. Morley knows perfectly well that when after the bare victory of 1892 he was for three years engaged with his colleagues in " ploughing the sands of the sea-shore," he watched the little driblets of enthusiasm for Home-rule, and Disestablishment, and Local Option, and the rest of their proposals, gradually drying up and disappearing in the wastes around him, and tried hard to shut his eyes to what was going on, and more or less succeeded in hoping against hope that when it came to the final trial of strength, he and his friends would be justified by the result. And he knows now what that result was. It was not a justification of their hopes, quite the reverse ; and it is exceedingly likely that the Unionists may follow them in the same fruitless endeavour to believe that the tide of popular favour is not ebbing, and may have to bear the same disappointment. But for a philosophic mind, such as Mr. Morley has so often shown in dwelling on the illusions of others, what comfort is there in demonstrating that the Unionists will probably be doomed to a like dis- illusioning ? Does it offer the least hope of reversing the direction of the political instincts of the nation either on Home-rule or Disestablishment, or for that matter on the freedom to drink what men prefer ? We should say not. It is very likely that if confidence in Lord Salisbury's foreign policy does not delay the catastrophe of democratic changefulness, as it yet may, the next General Election may turn the Unionists out. But will that give any sound hope at all for the victory of Irish autonomy, or the with- drawal of our influence in Egypt, or the Disestablishment of the Church, or any other of the changes on which Mr. Morley's Radical heart is set ? Mr. Morley is not the reflective politician he boasts to be, if be really thinks so. He must by this time, we should think, have convinced him- self that the swing of the pendulum which consists in getting out of temper with the Government that is in, by no means implies giving a carte blanche to the statesmen who are out. Mr. Morley can hardly wish for another three years' endeavour to make the sands of the sea-shore bear a miserable harvest such as he and his colleagues achieved for themselves in 1892. Yet that appears to us the only prospect which a philosophic statesman would be entitled to expect from the swing of the pendulum over which he gloats. Did the Walthamstow election, or the Cleveland election, to say nothing of the Glasgow election, give any shred of reason to believe that the people are at last con- verted to the principle of an Irish Parliament and the destruction of State Churches ? Has there been the smallest outbreak of wrath against the House of Lords, or any hint of revolutionary fervour on any one subject on which Mr. Morley entertains deep convictions ? If not, what is it that fills him with exultation when he watches the by-elections and marks the unexpected strength of the Opposition in embarrassing the Government when they endeavour to fulfil their promises to 'fie voluntary schools ? Is there any satisfaction to such a. mind as Mr. Morley's in the prospect of reaping another perfectly barren victory,—in taking Office once more only to acquiesce in a Unionist foreign policy, and to fail in carrying a single measure which is dear to his own heart ? We have often wondered how he managed to excuse the Radical Administration for not retiring from Egypt during the three years of the Gladstonian Government. During those three years he took part in carrying on a foreign policy which he heartily condemned so far as the occupation of Egypt was concerned, and if he returned to Office to-morrow, he would have to do the same, or even perhaps to sanction a further advance into the Soudan, which he disapproves with something like passion. We cannot understand the satisfaction with which Mr. Morley appears to contemplate such a possibility. Of course it is pleasant to see your enemies defeated, and for that his hopes may not be unreasonable. But to defeat them first, and then to be obliged to follow in their footsteps so far as regards the policy he has most energetically denounced, is sufficiently humiliating to be, for him we should think, almost intolerable.
Mr. Morley in his Oxford speech indulged himself in a great panegyric on the interest and industry with which " Little Englanders" study the difficulties and master the problems of the foreign nations with whom they decline to interfere. Cobden, he said, was more of a citizen of the world in this respect than a mere Englishman ; and he himself, as he hinted, and no doubt with great truth, knows a great deal more of the ins and outs of the questions which deter him from meddling with other European or non-European States than many of those who are always gloating over their own Imperialism. We do not doubt in the least that Mr. Morley is entitled to make this boast, nor that he is a faithful disciple of Cobden as well in his study of the international complications of the world as in his wish to keep ourselves to ourselves. But why, then, is he so timid in blazoning abroad his belief that we ought to evacuate Egypt, and ought to leave that reviving and industrious country either to claim French protection or else to " sink back into the beast " ? Whenever he touches his "Little Englander" creed, he touches it with nothing at all like Cobden's boldness and outspokenness. Why does he not say plainly that he will join no Government that pursues the policy of Mr. Gladstone's and Lord Rosebery's Governments in regard to Egypt ? If he is proud of being a "Little Englander," why does he not publish his creed in the only way in which he could effectually publish it, by insisting on the duty of undoing all we have done for Egypt, and of withdrawing the hand which has effected all the good ? That would indeed be imitating Cobden, but it would also be putting a formidable spoke in the wheel of his party, which would, we suspect, be very repulsive to him. England is proud, and indeed may well be proud, of what she has done for Egypt, and would shrink back in horror from any party which pro- posed to undo it out of any selfish dread of giving offence to jealous onlookers. There seems to us something at once pathetic and grotesque in Mr. Morley's delight in watching the swing of a pendulum which promises him nothing but the chance of ousting the present Government without any chance of putting in its place any administra- tion for whose policy his politician's soul would really care. Perhaps, if Radicals return to power, he might do something to subvert denominational education, though we doubt his attempting even that. Perhaps he might help on democratic County Councils to mortify the London water companies. Perhaps he might stop the expansion of the Army, or the manufacture of precau- tionary cartridges. But as for giving Ireland autonomy, or muzzling the House of Lords, or disestablishing the Church, or withdrawing from Egypt,—the ends on which, as we suppose, his heart is mostly fixed,—he is just as near any of these results now, as he would be after a General Election in which the swing of the pendulum should have restored his party to Office,—though to Office without power.
Previous page
