TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE LIBERALS AND THE UNIONIST FREE- TRADERS.
WE have always desired to deal in a reasonable, and, as far as -Unionist principles admit, in a sym- pathetic, spirit with the present Ministry. It is true that we are strongly opposed to them on a very great number of political questions ; but, as men entrusted by the country with the guardianship of the Free-trade cause—such guardianship was the real mandate of the last Election— we have insisted that they ought to be given a fair oppor- tunity of governing the nation, and should not be harried in their conduct of public affairs on mere party grounds. The Unionist Party, as Mr. Arthur Elliot well points out in a most able letter which we publish in our issue of to-day, gave way to an access of delirium on the question of Protection, and it was only natural and right that they should pay the penalty for their folly, and for the want of strength displayed by their leaders in yielding to outside coercion instead of maintaining their independence. But though we did our best to secure the cause of Free- trade from the imminent danger threatened by the accession to power of a Protectionist Ministry, and were glad to see the Unionist Party given an opportunity of recovering their good sense and public spirit in the cool shades of Opposition; we feel that it has now become necessary—as, indeed, we deemed it probably would become necessary—to warn the present Government that they must not consider themselves free to do just what they like with the power which the nation entrusted to their hands last January. They must remember that their present position is due, not to a party triumph, but to a great national upheaval. The Ministry are in the position of trustees rather than of an ordinary party Cabinet, and the essential condition of that trusteeship is the preservation of the cause of Free-trade from injury. They cannot, as can a, normal Government, think solely of what they would like to do from the party point of view. They are bound. in honour to think of what we have called their trust, and of the very large number of persons who, though Unionists, and opposed to them on ordinary political grounds, yet gave them support at the polls lest the nation should suffer the irreparable calamity of seeing its old and well-tried fiscal policy swept away in a moment of madness, induced by the delirious demands of a self-confident and impulsive, if well-meaning, popular leader. It may be that in theory the Unionist Free- traders have no way of enforcing the obligation under which they laid the Liberal Party ; but it is hardly necessary for us to point out that in politics, as else- where, debts of honour demand, and almost invariably receive, not less, but more exact and more loyal repay- ment than debts which can be made good in a Court of Law.
We may be sure that if the debt which is due to the Unionist Free-traders is repudiated or ignored, the result will in the end be disastrous to the Liberal Party. We have only to look back at the history of the past six years to realise the truth of this declaration. In 1900, at a moment of national crisis, the late Government appealed to the country to give them a majority in order to bring about a sound and satisfactory settlement in South Africa, and to impress upon•the Boers that they were fighting a united nation. The country, as we think very properly, determined to return a Parliament in regard to whose opinion on the war there should be no possibility of doubt. In 1900, therefore, a very great number of men who ordinarily voted Liberal in politics, or whose habit was to move with the swing of the pendulum, voted for Unionist candidates for fear that a change of Ministry would be disastrous to the higher national interests. The late Government, if they had been wise, would have recognised this fact, and would have refused to take advantage of their triumph for purely party purposes. Unfortunately, the temptation was too great for them. Having won a victory on non-party grounds, they proceeded to use it for sectional issues. In i he matter of education they passed a. Bill which, though not bad per se, as we have always contended, offended the feelings of a good many of those who had voted for Government candidates at the " War " General Election. The measure could certainly not have been carried in a House where there was only the normal Unionist majority. The same thing must be said of the last Licensing Bill, though here the measure cannot be described as good per se, for it involved a most profligate waste of a great national asset. Finally, the Government clung to power for two years after the nature of the Ministry had been completely changed by the driving from office of the Duke of Devonshire and his Free-trade colleagues. In a word, the Unionist Government and. Party were to a great extent ruined by obtaining a huge majority on a national issue, and then by using that majority to further party purposes. If the present Government, as we regret to say they seem inclined to do, follow the bad example set them by Mr. Balfour's Administration, they will share a similar fate.
We are, we feel sure, in no way exaggerating the position. Thousands of Unionist Free-traders through- out the country, and thousands of moderate Liberals who hold that the Unionist Free-traders deserve considera- tion and respect, are becoming disgusted and alarmed by the apparent determination of the Government to press on what can only be described as purely party measures without a thought of any wider considerations. We place the Plural Voting Bill first among such measures, —measures, that is, which the Government have no right to force upon the country by the use of a majority secured on non-party lines. That Bill, if accompanied by a fair and seasonable scheme of redistribution doing impartial justice to all parts of thkUnited Kingdom, and so reducing the monstrous over-representation of Ireland, could no doubt have been defended as a national measure suitable to the present Parliament. Brought in, as it has been, unaccompanied by any guarantee that a Redistribution Bill is to follow, it can only be described as a gross outrage on the Unionist Free-traders who helped to place the Government in power, either by voting for Liberal candi- ,dates or by abstaining from voting for their Protectionist Unionist opponents. Nothing that has been said by the fiercest Liberal in condemnation of the late Government for introducing their Education and Licensing Bills in a Parliament elected on the war issue would be too strong to say in regard to the action of the present Government in using a victory won for Free-trade to do away with an electoral anomaly which is believed to be injurious to the Liberal Party, and to maintain a far worse anomaly which is beneficial to the Liberals and injurious to their opponents. Such action is not merely undemocratic, but something very like a violation of the implied Compact of honour on which the Free-trade victory was won. Even at the eleventh hour the Government could put the matter right by adding a clause to their Bill deferring its operation till a Redistribution Bill has been passed, or by assenting to such a clause if it is added in the House of Lords. If no such action is taken, they will, we are convinced, be condemned throughout the country by all men who prize moderation and fair dealing in political life. Though the case is not so bad a one as that of the Plural Voting Bill, it must be pointed out that the way in which the Government have yielded to Mr. Keir Hardie and the extremists in the matter of the Trade Disputes Bill involves a very unfair treatment of the Unionist Free- traders. True Free-traders, whether :Unionists or Liberals, stand for freedom of action for the individual and the abolition of privilege. We, therefore, have a right as Free-traders to condemn the Trade Disputes Bill as essentially injurious to the cause which we have at heart, and for which we have been willing to make no inconsider- able sacrifices. The Bill, if it passes in its present form, is not only likely to demoralise the Trade-Unions by giving them a prerogative position in the State. By giving a similar position of privilege to the capitalists it may help to inflict upon the community those great trade combinations which have bad so sinister an effect on American public life, and ultimately may even lead to the imposition of a tariff system. The first thing which combinations of capital desire in a modern State is a position of privilege above the law. They are more or less indifferent as to the Labour Unions, for they know that in the long run they can always come to terms with them,—can break them or bribe them. This position of privilege, this position above the law, is accorded to the capitalist by the present Bill. The next step will be to demand protection from foreign competition. In order to obtain this step a treaty of alliance with the Trade-Unions is necessary. Such a treaty of alliance is, we are bound to point out, made, not more difficult, but easier, by the Government's measure. Both directly and indirectly, then, the Trade Disputes Bill must be regarded as a heavy blow to the Free-trade cause.
We have taken these two Bills from the measures pro- posed in the present Session as illustrative of our point. There is talk, however, of legislation in the future which will be equally partisan in character, and therefore equally unjust in view of the manner in which the General Election was carried. It is to be hoped that before these schemes are matured 'the voices of the moderate Liberals will be raised, and that they will insist on their leaders remembering that they have a national duty to perform as trustees of Free-trade. After all, the moderate Liberals can, if they like, exercise a very great influence. If their voices are persistently drowned in the hubbub of Socialistic declamation, they can break away from the Liberal Party, and with the Unionist Free-traders form for a time the third party of which so much has been written of late in our columns. As our readers know, we should be very sorry to see such a third party formed. We would much rather retain the two old parties, and see the Unionist Party once more constituted on a Free-trade basis. At the same time, the possibility of the formation of a third party must always be held in reserve. That this possibility will enter the minds of many moderate Liberals we make no doubt should the present Government insist on continuing to disregard the fact that they were placed in power by a national rather than by a sectional movement. What makes such action more likely, and also what makes the prospects of Unionist reunion more vital, is the collapse of Tariff Reform. In spite of the noisy activity of the League, the weight of public opinion has crushed the organisation and left it flaccid, if, indeed, not lifeless. Had Mr. Chamberlain been able to blow the embers, it is just possible that his powerful breath might have restored a momentary glow of warmth and light. As it is, Tariff Reform is rapidly getting to be recognised as a dead issue. That being so, it is not only cynically unjust, but most foolish from the purely selfish point of view, for the Liberal Government to act as if they had the Unionist Free-traders at their mercy, and could afford to treat them as men who could not defend themselves. The falling away from Tariff Reform of all true popular support is increasing, not diminishing, the strength and influence of the Unionist Free-traders.
We have written strongly, for we feel strongly ; but let no one suppose that because we hold that the present Government are not doing their duty, and not carrying out their trust in regard to Free-trade, we are therefore weakening in our determination to withstand Protection. We shall fight it in the future as in the past, and we do not doubt for an instant that those who, like ourselves, put the preservation of Free-trade above party will, whether they be Unionists or Liberals, carry their point. The country is with us, and will, we are convinced, continue with us, in refusing to adopt either Home-rule, Protection, or Socialism. As long as this is so we fear neither the Liberals, the Tariff Reformers, nor the Labour Party.
Previous page
