LORD SALISBURY'S NEW ERA.
IN his speech at Watford on Wednesday, over which the Gladstonians try to make merry with rather a melancholy air, Lord Salisbury made a remark on which we wonder that he did not enlarge a good deal, for it was undoubtedly a very shrewd remark on the political signs of the times. He said that ever since Lord John Russell first introduced his Bill for enlarging the suffrage, the great political struggle of this country had been conducted on the lines, or the extended lines, of that proposal so to enlarge the area of the representative system as to include in it first one, and then another, class of the English people. The last great battle on that subject was the inclusion of the agricultural labourer by the Reform Bill of 1885. Since then Lord Salisbury thought that the British working class have begun to feel indifferent to struggles which no longer promise any new departure in the spirit of political life, and have turned their attention to reaping the harvest, hitherto very imperfectly gathered in, of social well-being. That remark goes very much deeper into the forecast of the future than the careless reader would suppose. And we are specially glad to hear it from Lord Salisbury, since he and Mr. Balfour were known to have entertained the design of waging yet another grand campaign on the old lines for the inclusion of women among the class of political electors. Now, it is worth notice that Lord Salisbury referred casually to their present exclusion when he said,—" Nearly all people, —all men, at least,—who desired the franchise, are now included in it ; " and he then went on to suggest that a new political era is opening in which the great effort would be not to go on pumping away at this barren and exhausted stratum of political desire, but to turn to social account the political victories already won. That looks as if Lord Salisbury were no longer so much disposed to take up the policy of striving to bring a new host of political Amazons on to the battle-field, but were becoming aware that there is no real desire, even among the women of the masses themselves, to be enlisted in the ranks of the political voters, knowing, indeed, as they probably do, that they are far more influential politicians if they preserve their political incognito, and do not attempt to provoke a battle of the sexes, than they would be if they attempted to unsex themselves and to carry by mere numerical majorities measures on which their husbands and sons and brothers are not agreed with them. That silence of Lord Salisbury's is a very hopeful sign of the times. We have no doubt that the experience of the Primrose League, which includes many women of the masses in its ranks, has convinced him that the shrewder politicians amongst women have no desire to weaken their real influence in politics by measuring too openly their strength against the political strength of men. And we heartily welcome the neglect with which Lord Salisbury now passes over that possible though negligeable prospect of reviving the old franchise war.
Now what are the signs which appear to show that Lord Salisbury is right in anticipating a great transfer of political energy from questions which involve great constitutional revolutions to questions which touch the ground of social amelioration ? In the first place, the conspicuous success of the Irish party in exchanging the political for the agrarian field of battle is a most significant sign of the times. Never did a rather tepid politician make a bigger mistake than Mr. Justin MacCarthy made the other day when he snubbed Mr. Horace Plunkett with the remark that he could not join in any enterprise even for the social benefit of Ireland with a party that did not take Home-rule for the very basis of its political demands. That was not using Mr. Parnell's experience of the fruit- fulness of the agrarian cry, but deliberately ignoring it. We all know that it was not till Mr. Parnell " took off his coat" to commence the Land agitation that he really succeeded in organising his new Irish party. And it was not till the Unionists took off their coats for the organisa- tion of a peasant proprietary in Ireland that they suc- ceeded in finding the true antidote to the Land League poison. We may depend upon it that it will be the social amelioration of great classes which will prove the key to the legislative successes of the future. Even the English peasantry perceive it, The Independent Labour party, though they blindly grasp at imaginary reforms, which they only see dimly, and, as it were, in dream, are so convinced that Mr. Parnell was right, that they too are attempting, in a very clumsy and fumbling way, to imitate his policy, and to dissever their connection with mere political agitation. They aspire to be Socialists in the first instance, and politicians only in the second place, and though their Socialism is wild and mischievous, and will certainly alienate a great many more electors than it will conciliate, they are so far right that they recognise social amelioration, if they could only make up their minds what social amelioration ought to aim at, as far more important than any agitation in the direction of constitutional subversion. Nothing was more remarkable in the last General Election than the evident disgust felt for a new and barren effort at political revolution. Lord Rosebery's failure to elicit even a faint response to his attack on the House of Lords, was far the most significant feature of the great struggle. The new desire of the electors is for a little more well-being in the lower strata of our society. Those who see what can be effectually done in that direction, and only those, will be the heroes of the next great popular struggle. The new era will be an era of social amelioration.
And a very delicate business it will be to find the true line of least resistance. Both Lord Salisbury and the Duke of Devonshire see that. For it will be only too easy to aim at social amelioration and to produce instead social deteriora- tion. Of this we are perfectly sure, that any subversion of the rights of individual property in the lowest stratum of society would produce social deterioration, and, moreover, social resentments of a very bitter and lasting kind. Here, at least, the Independent Labour party are making the biggest mistake that any party ever could make. Nothing is more deeply rooted in the English mind, and especially in the mind of the poorest English class, than the ambition to exercise the rights of individual property freely and prudently. There the labourer agrees heartily with the small tradesman, and the small tradesman with the large tradesman, and the large tradesman with the merchant prince. It will require the greatest possible discrimination and the most careful explor- ing of the ground to take forward steps in the policy of ameliorating the condition of the poor without de- teriorating the condition of the saving working man and the small shopkeeper. The so-called Liberal party are making a very great mistake when they chuckle over the anxieties of Lord Salisbury and the Duke of Devonshire, and hint that it takes a thoroughgoing democrat to benefit the poor, and that it can only be done by those who will not scruple at effecting their purpose at the cost of the rich. On the contrary, we believe that Lord Salisbury is quite right when he says that anything which permanently stops accumulation in the richer classes will impoverish the poor even more fatally than it will impoverish the rich. If the so-called Liberals do not show the caution and discrimination which the Prime Minister and the Duke of Devonshire enjoin, in their attempts at Social amelioration, they may certainly get a premature and disastrous victory over the present Government at the next General Election, but they will bring on themselves later a terrible and sudden retribution. The fatal consequences of a policy of spoliation would be soon detected and severely punished by a British democracy.
Previous page
