TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE ELECTIONS. BEFORE Mr. Balfour's announcement of the applica- tion of the Referendum to Tariff Reform had been made we bad decided to write a special appeal to the moderate and Free-trade electors. It was our intention to urge them to vote for Tariff Reform candidates, in spite of the fact that, as we then feared was the case, no definite pledge would be forthcoming that votes given for Tariff Reformers at this Election should not be used to pass Tariff Reform without taking the opinion of the people directly on the Fiscal issue. We recognised the heavy responsibility of giving such advice, but we determined to take it in view of the vast and irremediable evils which must arise from single-Chamber government and its inevitable sequel, Home-rule. We were ready to act on the principle of choosing the lesser of two evils. Happily such an appeal is no longer necessary. There is no need for us to ask Free-traders to make any sacrifice of their economic opinions in order to save the country from the revolutionary dangers of single-Chamber government. With a statesmanship, a moderation, and a sense of justice for which they cannot be too highly praised, the Tariff Reform leaders recognised that it would not be right to ask men for votes to prevent single-Chamber government and the dissolution of the Union and to use the votes thus obtained to pass Tariff Reform. Free-trade Unionists and moderate Liberals who detest the idea of setting up an uncontrolled and uncontrollable oligarchy in the House of Commons are thus at this Election left per- fectly free to record their votes without any feeling that they will thereby be sacrificing their economic principles. In addition, those of them who are anxious to get rid of certain most serious evils in our representative system have the opportunity, thanks again to the boldness and wisdom of the Unionist leaders, of introducing a principle which will prevent the misuse of Parliamentary institutions and secure that the will of the people shall prevail. As we have said elsewhere, the Unionist leaders have made a great sacrifice and taken a great responsibility by the course they have pursued, and Free-trade Unionists would be totally lacking in the sense of gratitude if they were not to recognise this fact. The willingness of the Tariff Reformers to rise above narrow party considera- tions must be acknowledged not merely by voting for them, but by working for them, heart and soul, in the elections that begin to-day. That Free-trade Unionists and moderate Liberals will realise this duty, and act on it, we feel sure, and therefore no more need be urged upon the point.
Though we admit that there is always an incalculable element in elections which may render nugatory the most careful political prophecy, and also that the time is very short in which to make the mass of the voters understand the stupendous change which is involved by the adoption of the Referendum by the Unionists, and by the pledge that Tariff Reform shall be submitted to a direct vote of the people, we feel that Unionist prospects are now distinctly bright. How bright they are may be judged by the condition of consternation—it is nothing leas- t° which the Home-rule and Radical Party has been reduced. All that its leaders on the platform and in the Press now seem capable of doing is to stutter forth indignant declarations that the Unionists have shown the white flag and have surrendered their principles. That is, of course, the merest vituperative nonsense. To begin with, Unionists have always declared that they were willing to abide by the will of the people when once it was ascertained. They showed that this was not mere rhetoric but true conviction by the perfectly loyal way in which they accepted the decision come to at the last Election in regard to the passage of the Budget. All that has happened is that the Unionist Party has come to see that it is neces- sary to establish some definite machinery for ascertaining the true will of the people in matters of grave legislative importance, and that the best possible means of doing this has already been discovered in Switzerland and America,— namely, the Referendum, or, as we should greatly prefer it to be called, the poll of the people.
To suggest that the Unionists have no right to adopt the Referendum because it is a democratic measure, as the Westminster Gazette now does every day with hysterical insistence, is too childish for words. For the last twenty- five years and more the Unionists have openly admitted that they, like every other party in the State, accept demo- cracy, and accept it whole-heartedly. Unless, then, we are to allow that the Liberals not only have a right to oppose the policy of the Unionists, but also have the right to lay down what that policy shall be, it is preposterous to suggest that the Unionists are surrendering or showing the white flag because they have the good sense not merely to talk about trusting the people, like the Radicals, but to take the necessary and practical steps to make their words effective. Instead of the Unionists having raised the white flag, they have raised the fiery cross, an emblem -which, we trust, will rally every true friend of liberty and sane government in the country to fight the pretensions of a log-rolling oligarchy,—men who usurp the forms without the substance of democracy, and who indulge the license without the temper of popular government. Of course we are not so foolish as to think that the Liberals who complain so lachrymosely about the white flag and the surrender of the Tariff Reformers really believe what they say. They only use this language because they have been thrown into a delirious panic, and are utterly at a loss how to meet their opponents. Feeling that they must say something, and not knowing what to say, they fall back on incoherent abuse. What they like to do is to put up a straw man and then beat him to pieces, but that pleasant game has now become impossible. They tell us that the Unionists are "on the run." In one sense no doubt they are, but the "run," unfortunately for the Liberals, is taking the form of a united charge, which will carry the entrenchnients of single-Chamber government, Home-rule, and Jacobin privilege.
Let us consider the electoral prospects, by com- paring the existing situation with what happened last January. No reasonable man can, we think, assert that at this moment the Liberals are in a, better position than they were eleven months ago. The most they can possibly expect is to do as well as then ; but clearly they will not do as well. And for this reason. All the signs and omens show that there has been in the last ten days a very large defection of moderate Liberals and of Free-trade Unionists,—men who in January supported the Liberals on the ground that the Lords ought not to have thrown out the Budget. We admit that if you merely count heads those who have publicly announced their defection do not seem very numerous ; but, on the other hand, the aforesaid heads are very representative. We venture to say that men like Mr. Arthur Elliot, Mr. Henry Hobhouse, Sir Alfred Lyall, Lord Joicey, Sir William Forwood, and the other well- known persons who have said that at this Election they mean to support Tariff Reform candidates, do not stand alone. For every one of these notables there are scattered about the constituencies several thousands of less-known people who are thinking exactly the same thoughts and taking up exactly the same position. In other words, after Mr. Balfour's pledge that votes given for Tariff Reformers at this Election will not be used to pass Tariff Reform without another and direct appeal to the people, some two hundred or three hundred voters will, on an average, leave the Liberals in each constituency. But note that there are no signs whatever that there has been a corresponding defection from the Unionist side. We hear nothing of men who voted for the Unionists at the last Election now preparing to vote for their opponents. Putting aside for the moment the question whether the number of revolting Liberals is great or small—this can only be decided at the polls—it is admitted on all sides that whatever change has taken place has only been in one direction, and that is in support of the Unionists. What does that mean when translated into action ? We believe at the very lowest it means that the Unionists are perfectly certain to keep the great bulk of the constituencies which they hold by small majorities, while, on the other hand, they will, save in exceptional circumstances, carry the great mass of the constituencies where last January the Liberal majorities were below, say, five hundred. They may of course do a great deal better than this, but considering the way things are going we should be very much surprised if they did worse. This should mean that at the least Mr. Asquith's mixed majority of Socialists and Nationalists will be reduced to thirty or forty. But if that is achieved enough will have been done to prevent single- Chamber government and the destruction of the -Union. Mr. Asquith's majority will only exist because of that over- representation of Ireland which was so unfortunately left =redressed by the late Unionist Administration. But it is clear that a Ministry resting on a majority of that kind could not have the impertinence to propose to set up single-Chamber government in order to destroy the Union.
. But though the teeth and claws of the tiger will be cut if the Unionists win only thirty seats, we want, and hope for, a great deal more than that. We should like to see the Unionists returned to power with a majority of at least forty votes. To obtain this it will, of course, be necessary to win some seventy seats. The Unionists have a tremendous amount of hard work before them, and it will be difficult to accomplish anything satisfactory without a good working majority in the House of Commons. Remember what is the programme to which they are pledged. They will have to reform the House of Lords on the lines of Lord Rosebery's Resolutions, and to introduce the Referendum with guarantees, as already promised by Lord Lansdowne, that the Liberals shall be able to use the Referendum in cases where they are in a minority, both in the Commons and in the Lords. Next, and this is a matter of vital importance, the over-repre- sentation of Ireland must be reduced and the under- representation of England made good. Happily the fact that the Census is to be taken next spring should give a substantial statistical foundation for doing this work properly. No sane Unionist desires of course to take away a single representative from Ireland to which she is justly entitled. All we want is electoral justice for every part of the United Kingdom. We have too long endured the monstrous injustice under which Ireland has had forty Members too many, and England forty Members too few. There will be no gerrymandering of the constituencies ; but the accordance of a privileged vote to Ireland must be put an end to. People talk as if the Unionists might possibly shelve these duties if they were returned. We have not the slightest fear on this head. The Unionists thoroughly understand their duty, and, as Lord Lans- downe said, mean business, both about the reform of the Lords and the Referendum. But we must not forget that they cannot perform this duty without a working majority in the Commons. That is absolutely essential. We have only one more word to say to the " balancing " elector, if such there should still be. Let his guiding principle be to use his vote in such a way as to secure that in the future the will of the people shall be ascertained and shall prevail in regard to all legislative projects of grave importance. But such a reformed Constitution can certainly not be obtained by voting for Liberals at the present Election. Those who wish for a democratic corrective to the misuse of representative institutions must perforce support Unionist candidates. Let them remember also that the Referendum is the implacable enemy of the caucus.
Previous page
