THE RESUSCITATION OF THE UNIONIST PARTY.
LTO THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR...I
SIR,—Will you allow me, in view of the correspondence in your columns, as a Liberal Unionist, who was closely associated with the late Duke of Devonshire and chairman of the Council of the Affiliated Associations of the Unionist Party during seven eventful years under his leadership, to make some practical remarks on the proposed reorganization of the Conservative staff and its future leadership ? I do not believe that any reorganization of the Unionist staff will be of the slightest use to resuscitate the Unionist Party as it existed under ti e leadership of those patriotic statesmen the late Duke of Devonshire and the late Marquis of Salisbury during the most trying days of the Unionist coalition, unless the reasons of the great defeat of the Tariff Reform Party in 1906 are fully realized and advantage taken of past experience.
The late Government had most unfortunately forced the Education Bill in 1902 through the House of Lords, refusing all amendments, and thus offending Nonconformist Liberal Unionists and indirectly bringing discredit on the Second Chamber ; they had retained office after they had ceased to enjoy the confidence of the country through their vague Protectionist theories on Tariff Reform, and had lost some of their most trusted colleagues whom they could not replace ; and they had failed to introduce and pass a Redistribution of Seats Bill in the general interest of this country. But it is no use to bewail past mistakes except so far as to learn by experience, and it is most unfair to put all the blame on Mr. Balfour or Lord Lansdowne for all the errors of the ex- Cabinet and their various advisers both in office and since they have been in Opposition, especially for the action of the House of Lords on the Budget of 1909 and the Licensing Bill in the previous year. Far better to work for the recon- stitution of the Unionist Party in the future on sound consti- tutional principles.
Neither is it any use to imagine that the Unionist Party can be reconstituted by a mere reorganization of the Con- servative staff in London or by purely Conservative, i.e., Tariff Reform, associations in the constituencies; on that point I entirely agree with my friend Lord Avebury in his
letter to a correspondent; and it is equally clear to me that the Conservative Party, even with the aid of the Halsbury Club, cannot hope to obtain a majority at the next General Election without the support of Unionist and Independent Liberal electors. The Unionist policy under Lord Salisbury and Lord Hartington's leadership was conducted on well- defined principles, with a certain amount of " give and take" on both sides, but entirely free from the " toe-the-line " dicta- tion exhibited at the last General Election towards stalwart Free Trade Unionists, and especially towards the Liberal Unionist followers of the late Duke of Devonshire, which has caused a feeling of deep resentment amongst those who have always been opponents of Home Rule, but are also convinced Free Traders.
It must be for those who have to bear the real responsi- bility now and in the future to decide what are the essential principles on which they can now reunite the Unionist Party against revolution and wasteful extravagance of the tax- payers' money, and there can be no doubt that in the opinion of all Liberal Unionists—whether Tariff Reformers or Free Traders—Mr. Balfour and Lord Lansdowne stand out pre- eminently as the statesmen and Unionist leaders who have their thorough confidence and support. At the same time old Liberal Unionists see with pleasure the present Duke of Devonshire taking his rightful position by reason of that sound, honest common sense and plain speaking which were the great attributes of our late leader both during and after the Home Rule debates of 1886.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
