SIR JOHN LUBBOCK AND THE FINANCE OF 1881-2.
[To TEN EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR:] do not often see the Spectator when out of town, but the number for December 23rd I got because I wanted to read a friend's article on Landor. After that, I lighted pn par praise of Sir John Lubbock's financial ability, &c. This, as general praise, is doubtless deserved; but surely his statement on the present occasion is not a perfectly fair statement. • You may have a right to deduct from the expenses of 1882 the cost of the Afghan war, but not also that of the Egyptian war; strum horun& mavia, accipe, as the Latin grammar remarks. Subtract, if you please, the Beaconsfield expenditure; but then, you must add your own in its place, unless, indeed, by 'some formula of Midlothian logic, Sir John is entitled to assume that as all Tory wars are wicked and foolish, the Tory Ministers have to answer, in their guilt, for what such wars cost; whilst, on the other hand, all Liberal hostilities are wise and virtuous, and, therefore, the great heart of the nation refuses to consider Liberal Ministers responsible for their blood-money, but nobly looks upon it as its own debt. If that is the argument, it admits of no answer; only, of course, you do not expect it to be accepted by your obedient servant,
A FOSSIL TORY.
[Sir John Lubbock was not dealing with the present financial year, but with that ending March 31st, 1882, and with that he dealt completely. Of course, the cost of the Egyptian War ought to be counted, and will be counted in the finance of the gresent year.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
