TOPICS OF THE DAY.
LORD HARTINGTON.
LORD HARTINGTON is not a figure to take the demo- cracy of any country by storm ; but we do no more than justice to the respect of the democracy in this island for calm strength, if we suppose that it will awaken before very long to his singular force, stateliness, and wisdom. He stands like a pillar amongst the confusion of the time, doing justice to every one, ignoring calmly the attacks of opponents, willing to support heartily to-day the men who attacked him bitterly yesterday, refusing to retaliate, earnest only to guard the State from danger, smiling thoughtfully and not unkindly at the fidgettiness of his friends, though he can- not share their illusions, abating nothing of his admiration for the achievements of his great opponent, self-possessed when others are agitated, patient when others are impatient, strong in his reserve when others " unpack their hearts " with words, lucid in judgment, and never allowing himself to be diverted from the main issue,—a great political fortress in time of danger which it will not be easy for any enemy to storm, and yet one so strong and so commanding, that even the most impetuous of foes would not like to leave it unmasked in his rear.
We need hardly say that it is Lord Hartington's speech on Wednesday at Newcastle-on-Tyne which has brought this aspect of his character so vividly before us. Never was there a speech which showed a greater capacity for silence where silence is better than speech, or which said the one thing that wanted saying in fewer and more fitting words. The dignified scorn with which he treated the babblement which goes by the name of a debate on the Address ; the severity with which he repressed the tendency to hiss Mr. Gladstone's name ; the simplicity with which he explained the reasons why he him- self should stand aloof from the Conservatives, while giving them his most cordial help, and made it clear why those reasons did not apply to Mr. Goschen, whose influence over the Liberal Party had been impaired by his previous differences with them ; the half-amused equanimity with which he regarded Mr. Chamberlain's efforts to convert Sir William Harcourt to a better mind, and the suspicion he threw out that all this eagerness to adapt the Canadian Constitution to the case of Ireland would entangle the shrewd statesman who is displaying it in difficulties from which even his shrewdness may not be able to extricate him ; the frank encouragement to keep the Ministry up to a prudently Liberal policy with which he repaid Lord Randolph Churchill's sneer ; and last, not least, the warm support which he gave to the Government, both as regards the so-called " pressure " they have put on Irish landlords, and the prosecutions they have instituted against Irish agitators,— all showed the straightforwardness, the sagacity, and the resoluteness which mark Lord Hartington out as the one man to whom the nation might turn in any crisis, with absolute confidence that it would receive from him counsel at once steady, masculine, and wise. He is one who prefers to bear the ills we know, rather than to change them in a fit of impatience, for others the character of which we do not and cannot know. He is one who prefers a very imperfect remedy which can at least alleviate an evil, to a so-called kill-or-care remedy, when the alternative is by no means between killing and curing, but includes also any conceivable measure of deterioration short of killing, quite as certainly. And, best of all, far from loving a great political sensation, he thoroughly dreads it. He wishes above everything to keep the democracy to sober expectations, and not to dazzle it with brilliant hopes for which there is little or no foundation. In times of public excitement and confusion, Lord Hartington is always cool and steady, always disposed to expect little, and to show no disappoint- ment if he gets what he expects, yet always patient, and not weary in well-doing. He is a man to trust, if all other statesmen lose their heads.
He was particularly happy on Wednesday in his remarks on each one of the various centres of political sensation. Towards Mr. Gladstone his tone of reverence while he ventured to ask, in reference to the late Prime Minister's .Nineteenth Century article, why the phase of cool reflection had not been allowed to precede definite proposals for the reform of the Irish Government, instead of to succeed them, was particularly admirable. The Irish agrarian question was before the people of this country in 1885, and the Home-rule question was not. It had not been even considered by any leading British states- man. It was a question for which the public generally was utterly unprepared. It was a question which, if it needed to be raised at all, ought to have followed, not preceded, the
settlement of the agrarian question. It was a question on which Mr. Gladstone's chief colleagues had not been taken into counsel. It was a question sure to explode soon like a bomb, and to render the phase of " cool reflection " quite impossible for many months to come. Even on the hypothesis that Mr. Gladstone was absolutely right in his solution, he was more than premature ; and the consequences to England and Ireland alike were deplorable. Lord Hartington could not have asked, or asked more respectfully, a more germane question than this,—why the phase of "cool reflection," which Mr. Gladstone now so cordially welcomes, had not preceded, instead of following, the alarming proposals of last year. And we venture to say that, whatever apologists for Mr. Gladstone's great and impetuous genius may have to say for his policy, they will never find an adequate reply to this home- thrust of Lord Hartington's as to the time and manner of its production. What Lord Hartington said of Mr. Chamberlain and his conference was equally good. Mr. Chamberlain and Sir George Trevelyan, he mid, were far too trustworthy to be easily suspected of throwing away their principles. He wished them every success in bringing over the followers of Mr. Gladstone to their view ; but still, it would have been for himself a desertion of duty to engage in such negotiations. He was bound to keep himself perfectly free from engagements, and to make it his main object to guard against sudden risks. There was great risk in going into details on new Constitutions. For his part, the right way seemed to be to get the purely municipal character of any local bodies it might be well to estab- lish, acknowledged first, and to have the practical authority of the Imperial Parliament over them, asserted and recognised without any shade of doubt. After that, the discussion of details might begin. Till that was clear, no details could be safe. The implied criticism of Mr. Chamberlain's and Sir George Trevelyan's rash proceedings was as sound as it was gentle. They were embarking on a thoroughly unsafe track.
Then, again, what could be more dignified than Lord Hartington's perfect willingness to be the "crutch," if Lord Randolph Churchill so called it, of the Conservative Party, and his equally perfect willingness that that party should, as quickly as it pleased, vindicate its competence to stand alone ? All Lord Hartington wished was to help it while its maintenance of the Union depended on his help. So soon as it ceased to do so, he would cease to interfere. But had Lord Randolph done what was calculated to promote the coming of that time by resigning prematurely on unsatisfactory economical grounds, and trying to sow discord between the parties whose combina- tion is essential to secure the Act of Union ? In the mean- time, Lord Hartington's encouragement to Lord Randolph to go on in his efforts to make the Tory Government as progres- sive as possible, was the most effective and stately of rebukes to his sneer.
A speech more effective for its purpose of giving support to the Government without exciting any irritation amongst either Conservative or Liberal Unionists, could not have been delivered. It makes the Act of Union sensibly safer than it was before the speech was delivered. And, without the least vestige of self-importance or vanity, it calls the attention of the country to the one statesman on whom it might safely lean to defend the Union, if a moment of great peril should be at hand.
Previous page
