TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE PRIME MINISTER IN SEARCH OF A PARTY.
MR. LLOYD GEORGE is in search of a party. That is the meaning of all the rumours and counter- rumours, alarums and excursions, of the past three weeks. The Times has really behaved very unkindly to its former idol. Just when preparations were being quietly and unostentatiously made for announcing the " fusion " of the Unionists and the Coalition Liberals under the leadership of Mr. Lloyd George, the Times revealed the fact that the most valuable steeds in the Liberal Coalition stable were lashing out with their hind-legs in a manner 'ever he had originally intended to do) the fusion of elements which were evidently not at the moment fusible. He therefore contented himself with developing a grave attack upon Labour, which he bodily identified with Socialism. In order to ward off this danger, "better co-operation" between Unionists and Liberals in the constituencies was essential. Mr. Lloyd George's words, though very hot about Socialism, were very cool and cautious about the fusion of Unionists and Coalition Liberals. Fusion had, in brief, become "better co-operation."
That batter co-operation is necessary in the constitu- encies if the Coalition is to carry on for long is notorious. From every side there are reports of the sorrows and difficulties of the party agents in choosing their candidates. The litter of torn-up coupons is causing no end of mischief, because some Members and candidates keep trying to piece their coupons together again, while others trample the bits underfoot and say that the coupons entitled the holders to plenty of blanks but no prizes. The rumours of attempted fusion to which we have referred were, after all, only an anticipation of what must happen sooner or later, and more or less in the manner predicted. Mr. Lloyd George cannot possibly return to the camp of Independent Liberalism, nor can he tempt the occupants of that camp to come over to him, because the memory of what happened during the war is too bitter among the followers of Mr. Asquith. Although before the war Mr. Lloyd George was apparently a true Left Wing Liberal, denouncing those who said that Germany meant war and advocating—as he did as late as January, 1914—a great reduction of expenditure upon the Navy, he threw Dyer his Left Wing Liberal friends during the war and took up the attitude of one who had always stood en vedette in securing the safety of the country against foreign enemies. He got rid of Mr. Asquith from the Premiership in a way which made it look as though Mr. Asquith had been ex- tremely inattentive to the great object of winning the war, and that only his supersession by the forceful personality of Mr. Lloyd George himself could save the situation at the eleventh hour. All this, we say, could not be forgotten by Asquithian Liberals. At Manchester not long ago Mr. Lloyd George nevertheless seemed to think that Mr. Asquith and his friends might forget, and he accordingly sounded their feelings by assuring them that there was really no difference between them. He suggested that they might come together again, kiss and be friends, and the help of the Unionists would be thrown into this delightful bargain and reconciliation. The attempt failed, and Mr. Lloyd George is still looking for a party. The situation is one of the most striking examples of a man being overtaken by Nemesis that one can possibly con- ceive. With all that Mr.Lloyd George says about the menace of Socialism as such we of course agree. But in declaring a ehad against Socialism he has, as usual, done the right thing in the wrong way. It is tragic to reflect that this statesman who now denounces Socialism has for years steadily prepared the way for it. At Limehouse with hich had alarmed all the grooms and attendants. The members of the Unionist Reconstruction group, not to be out of the picture, suddenly revealed a great deal of uneasiness about the Home Rule Bill. Result :—when Mr. Lloyd George met the rank-and-file of the Liberal Coalition Members of Parliament on Thursday week he considered it inexpedient to announce or advocate (which- light-hearted irreverence he involved many of the best established and most -respectable of our institutions in the contemptuous ridicule which he poured out upon the more legitimate objects of his banter. He trained up a class of men to believe that they could get something for nothing, or at all events ninepence for fourpence. He implied that the sum of citizenship was to grasp, not to serve. He promised "rare and refreshing fruit" to those who were sufficiently importunate in demanding it, whether or not they had earned it or deserved it. He wholly misread the deepest thoughts of his countrymen when he assumed that the politician who wishes to attract must always offer bribes and never ask for sacrifice. Now he is at last alarmed, and he unfurls a new banner and beats a new drum to summon to his side all those who will help to destroy the bogy of his own planning. He has done the right thing in the wrong way, we repeat, because it is always a mistake to attribute to a huge class of the community motives which they are far from feeling. Of course extreme leaders of Labour do preach Socialism of a subversive kind, but it is a blunder cn the grand scale to drive men back upon leadership to which their allegiance is more than doubtful by branding them all with a common name and accusing them in a lump. What Mr. Lloyd George ought to have done was to declare that he stood for the rule of the majority against all attempts at minority tyranny. He would then have had an enormous number of people, including manual workers, with him, who are now thrown into a state of violent estrangement and defiance. We cannot help agreeing with Mr. Asquith's remark at the National Liberal Club on Wednesday that Mr. Lloyd George had preached "class cleavage."
Wherever we look we trace the footsteps of Nemesis. In Mr. Lloyd George's political philosophy, easy, attractive, or temporary accommodations—the art of finding the "way out" brought up to the nth degree—have become so familiar that it is now hardly thought at all absurd that in the discussions as to what party Mr. Lloyd George would lead in future, an almost equal credibility till lately attached to those who said that he would lead the Unionists and to those, like Mr. Sidney Webb, who suggested that he might lead the Labour Party. Where has principle flown to in the land of Gladstone that such a thing should be possible ? When we read Mr. 'Asquith's speech of Wednesday we cannot find that there is really any essential difference between what he wants and what Mr. Lloyd George says he wants. Both are for Constitutional methods and for the will of the majority against the forces of Direct Action. The only exception was Mr. Asquith's denunci- ation of the Home Rule Bill, and on that point we can only say in passing that, as Mr. Asquith was careful to admit that Ulster cannot be coerced, his denunciation seemed singularly unreal. He would really do much better to bend his mind to helping the Government by some positive means to end the present appalling crisis in Ireland. The explanation, then, why Mr. Lloyd George and Mr. Asquith cannot work together for the good of the country against what is admitted by all thinking men to be a real danger is that Mr. Lloyd George has made it impossible by his instability, • and his inconsiderateness to his colleagues in the past.
And here is a plain warning for the Unionist Party. The Unionist Party is clearly marked down for Mr. Lloyd George's future exploits, now that he has put both the Independent Liberals and the Labour Party out of the question. In spite of the fact that Mr. Boner Law has played the part of the too careful fugleman to Mr. Lloyd George, the Unionist Party is now the strongest, the most consistent, and the most truly democratic party in the country. Much suspicion has been thrown on the party by the acts and words of the group of Liberals, mostly undesirables, whom Mr. Lloyd George brought with him into the Coalition. If the Unionists are to shake oft this undeserved disconsideration, they must not only show plainly what their principles are, but must exhibit a determination to stand firmly upon them. They must not consent to any paltering with shifty doctrines on the ground of convenience. They are quite strong enough and quite gifted enough to take the line that they will accept no leadership of a kind which is bound to bring Nemesis on their track.
Previous page
