LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
MR. BONAR LAW'S SPEECH. pro TILE EDITOR OF TUE "SPECTATOR.") desire to express my entire agreement and fully endorse Sir W. Forwood's very important letter in the Spectator of February 3rd. His facts are undeniable, and his comments on the folly of nailing Tariff Reform to the Unionist masthead are common sense and political wisdom combined together.
The new Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons in his otherwise most excellent speech appears to have for- gotten the raison d'elre of the Liberal Unionist Party who followed the late Duke of Devonshire, as Lord Hartington, in the opposition to the Home Rule Bill of 1886. We are Liberal Unionists and Free Traders, and neither Conservatives and Protectionists or Home Rulers and Socialists. If the Tory Protectionists and their Birmingham allies have captured the" party machine" and Unionist Associations, and boycott Liberal Unionist Free Trade candidates, they cannot expect us to subscribe to the false doctrines of finance propagated by their Tariff Associations or to appear on platforms and listen to Tariff Reform speeches with which we entirely disagree, but cannot reply to.
But, on the other hand, we can keep the real Unionist flag flying, and consistently with our own principles oppose the disintegration of the Empire and the:spoliation of the Church of England in the Principality of Wales. I personally agree with the remarks made by the Duke of Devonshire in the House of Lords last Session when he said that in his opinion the people of England were equally opposed to Home Rule and Tariff Reform. It will be time enough for Unionists to consider any Tariff Reform proposals when they are 'made on the official responsibility of some future Minister of the Crown. At present Tariff Reform is not within the range of practical politics, and is not likely to be so long as the Unionist Party is paralysed by the reckless chatter of irre- sponsible persons on what is vaguely called a fiscal policy.
The Tariff Reform League proposals and that portion of the Unionist leaders who had adopted them were condemned and repudiated at the General Election of 1906, and again in 1910 at two elections, notwithstanding the belated promise of a referendum before their adoption, which has now been apparently withdrawn, and the rumour of a corrupt bargain by the Government with the Irish Party in reference to another Home Rule Bill. There might be some sense now in appealing to Unionif is to waive their objection temporarily to the advocacy of Tar ff Reform on Unionist platforms if that would be a popular and vote-catching cry at the next General Election ; that, however, is distinctly not the case, but the very reverse, and to ask us to surrender our firm convictions in order to bear the deadweight of a disastrous policy repudiated three times already by the constituencies is sheer madness and, in my opinion, a gross betrayal of our Unionist principles and of Ireland.-1 am, Sir, So., HE NEAGE.
Hainton Halt.
Previous page
