6 NOVEMBER 1869, Page 9

THE GLASGOW AND ABERDEEN ELECTION.

THEpresent contest for the representation of the Universities of Glasgow and Aberdeen is worthy of some attention. The contest is between an Edinburgh lawyer with a strong power of Tory voting, and a sound Liberal of the highest scientific eminence. When we add that the latter candidate has no slight local claims, being a native of Glasgow, and having been a distinguished student at Glasgow University, it appears strange, considering the result of the last election, that there should be any doubt as to the issue of this contest. There is, however, such doubt, and what is matter for great regret, it has its origin in the scruples of certain Liberal electors.

The flippant and insulting tone adopted towards both can- didates and the whole constituency by the Saturday Review can affect the vote or opinion of no rational man. But there are others, swayed by very different reasons and animated by a very different spirit, who do not conceal their reluc- tance to support the Liberal candidate, Mr. Smith. It would be idle to treat the hesitation of these men with disrespect. They say that Mr. Smith's opinions are not sufficiently advanced, and that they are not rested on a sound basis of knowledge, or held with sufficient firmness of conviction. And their conclusion is to remain neutral in the contest—not choosing to support, even against a Tory, a half-hearted Liberal. That there is some foundation for this criticism we, at least, cannot deny. Mr. Smith's opinions are by no means what we could wish to see them. They are, on some points, what we should call "not sufficiently advanced ;" he is often too undecided and too timid in the expression of them. But, so far as we can judge, we think this has been pressed against him further than the facts justify. His indecision or timidity has generally appeared to us matter of expression only. He seems to want those arts—not always the noblest —by which a dexterous candidate can persuade an audience to take him very much on trust. He sees both sides of a ques- tion so clearly that it is impossible for him to adopt the lan- guage of a blind partizan. He gives us the state of his opinions, even the history of their formation, with almost obtrusive frankness, and the impression produced upon us is that he is really Liberal in his way of looking at political questions, that he will bring to the consideration of every subject candour and openness to conviction, that in action and in the future he will—unlike James IL—prove "better than his word." In such matters it is far more important to know the direction in which a man is going than the exact point of the road at which he has arrived. But if we differ from our recalcitrant friends in their estimate of Mr. Smith's opinions, we differ from them still

more in the conclusion at which they have arrived. Such a political character as we have described seems to us not altogether unfitted to represent a university constituency, and we are fortified in this persuasion when we consider the circumstances in which the electors are placed. In politics we must work with such means as we have. Now Mr. Smith was selected, after careful deliberation, by the great bulk of the Liberal constituency as the only man that could be put up with any prospect of success. Even though, in the judgment of some, he may not be the best possible, he is entitled to claim the suffrages of all as the best available candidate. And these considerations gain greatly in force when we consider his opponent. Politically, Mr. Gordon is a Tory of the Tories. His convictions would seem to attach him to the school of Mr. Gathorne Hardy, but in suppleness he is a worthy follower of Mr. Hardy's chief. To sum up the matter in a sentence, Mr. Smith has assured us that he will go to Parliament as a supporter of Mr. Gladstone ; Mr. Gordon, we know, will go to Parliament as the obedient par- tizan of Mr. Disraeli. Can any Liberal hesitate between the two?

Apart from politics, any comparative estimate of Mr. Gordon and Mr. Smith is at once an irksome and a painful task. It is irksome, because there are no grounds on which such a comparison can be instituted ; it is painful, because we are thus forced to speak unpleasant truths of an amiable man. Mr. Gordon's injudicious friends are alone responsible for what his political opponents are compelled to say of him. And; what they are compelled to say of him is simply this,—that. he is a most respectable man, and a second-rate lawyer. His most enthusiastic friends can claim for him no more. He has shown no signs of any literary or scientific tastes. A certain professional adroitness, combined with great good- luck, has raised him to professional eminence ; but we have never heard of anyone who, even in joke, has ventured to credit him with the learning or the thought which goes to make a great jurist. And, failing all these things—failing science, failing literature, failing even law in its highest sense, what remains ? Simply Tory partizan- ship. And on this ground, and on it alone, he is forced by the Tory party on one of the most highly educated consti- tuencies in the kingdom. On the other hand, Mr. Smith has every possible claim which a candidate could have on such a constituency. He is a native of Glasgow. His father was eminent as a man of varied accomplishments, and of emi- nent scientific acquirements. His great-grandfather made, we believe, scientific discoveries which are treated with respect even at the present day. He himself was a distinguished stu- dent at Glasgow University ; and he subsequently justified the distinctions he there won by gaining the place of Senior Wrangler at Cambridge. And even these high honours, though much, are not all. Above them we would venture to place the knowledge of the University system, and, indeed, of the whole educational system of the two countries—the respective merits and demerits of both—which such an educa- tion cannot fail to bestow. What a difference, in all knowledge of educational matters, between a man who has gone through a training like this and a man who has never, so far as we know, been at any university at all 1 We confess to a certain interest in these University con- stituencies. Many zealous reformers opposed the extension of the franchise to academical bodies. We were not among the number. And we shall deeply regret to see our Northern Uni- versities following the example of our great southern institu- tions. Mr. Gordon is to Mr. Smith all, and more than all, that Mr. Gathorne Hardy was to Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Mowbray to Sir Roundell Palmer. If Glasgow and Aberdeen are to become as Oxford is, then great will be the sorrow of all who aided to extend the University franchise.