THE MODERN CR A SS1JS. N OTHING is more serious or
more interesting in the Boulangist " revelations" which are now scandalising Paris than the new evidence they afford of the power of the political capitalist in Europe. There are disputes still as to who found. the money for the Boulangists, though it is nearly certain that the bulk of it came from a group of rich Royalists, with the Duchesse d'Uzes at their head ; but there is no dispute at all that, without money, the great movement which for a time interested, and, indeed, affected all Europe, would never have been commenced. The General himself wanted money for his election expenses, and to meet the risks to his income involved in the con- spiracy, and so did every conspicuous follower. Every agent required pecuniary stimulants ; almost every favourable newspaper, a subvention ; every speaker, payment of his expenses ; every man who risked a trial, a guarantee for his costs ; the demand for hard. cash was positively endless, and occasionally produced infinite embarrassment. There are limits to the resources as well as the liberality of individuals, especially individuals trained in the French ideas of family economics ; and when £80,000 a year proved insufficient, the party were now and then reduced to severe straits. On one occasion the treasury, it is said, was empty, and an indispensable 200,000 francs was only procured by a direct application to Baron Hirsch, who granted them as a loan, but, on the plea that between gentlemen documents were unnecessary, refused to receive any written evidence of the transaction. We do not mean to say that all the Boulangists were bribed, though there is a distasteful scent about some of the stories told. Many of -them were doubtless sincere enough, if it be a proof of sincerity to disregard means in pursuit of political ends; but without money they could not, or would not, move. Cash was needed to utilise enthusiasm, devotion, and even party feeling ; and it was sought in every direction save one. ' The electors who made up the Boulangist Party, and who were supposed to include a third of France, were never asked for the franc or so a-head which would have furnished an ample revenue. Such a demand would, it was felt, have cooled popular fervour too much, and the leaders relied exclusively on the rich. The money came from above, as it were, and to be a Boulangist was, at all events, not to be a poorer man. We are all familiar with a similar feature in the most recent Irish agitation. There is no doubt whatever of the general sincerity of the Irish leaders, though they may exaggerate their bitterness for effect, or be secretly jealous of each other's position in the party, and therefore in the separated. Kingdom ; and the charge that certain Members vote for their pay has been far too loosely made. But that money, and money in large sums, is necessary to "the cause," is admitted in nearly every Parnellite speech. It is wanted for election expenses, wanted for committee expenses, wanted for defences in Law-Courts, wanted for useful allies who are impecunious, wanted, we do not doubt in some instances, to enable men to sit in Westminster who otherwise could not spare the time from the management of their own affairs. In this instance, also, the bulk of the money comes from above,—that is, it is not raised from the Irish- men who are to be benefited, but from Irishmen abroad who sympathise with the movement. America is the Duchesse d'Uzes of the -Irish agitation, and Australia its Baron Hirsch. In both cases there is an im- possibility of keeping exact accounts ; in both, charges of improper, or unauthorised dealings with the funds, are frequently made ; and in both, we fancy, though we should probably disapprove utterly much of the expenditure, it is at least honestly intended to advance the cause. General Boulanger's personal magnificence, for example, was part of the programme,—first, because advertisement was essential ; and secondly, because, as he had won no battles and convinced no Senates, it was needful to let him pose as a sort of Henri Quatre, the only part he was capable of filling well. In America, money has even a more direct power. Each party admits that without it there is no hope of carrying a Presidential election, and the one in power levies a direct tax or seignorage from the salary of every office-holder. If rumour may be trusted, moreover, every millionaire in the States who wishes for political position, contributes on a great scale to the party funds—one reason for the extraordinary number of rich men in the Senate—while the " holy cause of Protec- tionism " is believed to be defended. by payments, often to very large amounts, from the protected Companies which under that system are permitted to fleece the general com- munity. We can hardly believe the American stories of elec- tions actually won by money ; for if they are true, we do not understand why the defeated side put up with the scandal, possessing as they must possess the means of tracing the facts ; but that money is scattered for political purposes, scattered to create public opinion, and secure enthusiastic agency, there is no manner of doubt. England is more free from the practice, because in England opinion is still in the main controlled by men who scorn pecuniary " transactions ;" but even in England it is not unknown, and millionaires who will found. party papers, or subscribe large sums to fight difficult contests, or help towards sup- porting peripatetic lecturers, are not the least influential men in party councils. It would. be quite possible for a man with a million or two, who saved up his resources against a great election, and then spent them freely, to become a very important, though not perhaps prominent, personage ; and even after the election, to exercise an influence in particular directions which would greatly perplex those who think that party position can only be won within the Parliamentary arena.
There is something tainted about this system, even though most of the money is spent for purposes that are quite legitimate, or at all events quite tolerated by opinion. Wherever money is flowing the hungry and the unscrupulous are sure to gather together, and it speedily becomes im- possible to discriminate between the earnestness born of conviction, and the earnestness which springs only from a hope that if it is sufficiently manifest, some of the loose cash going will flow in the earnest man's way. It is not our object to-day, however, to advocate reliance on unpaid help so much as to point out the immense political in- fluence which, the moment politicians grow unscrupulous, the political capitalist must acquire. He cannot, perhaps, buy a party ; but he can make a party succeed or fail, can found newspapers for it, pay for public meetings on its behalf, engage speakers for it, and defray the expense of all that advertising under many forms which modern party-craft declares to be essential to almost any agita- tion. He may not be able to buy seats, that process being in England a dangerous misdemeanour ; but he can enable his friends to contest seats which other- wise would never be contested, and he can induce men to remain " in politics " who otherwise must go out of them,r--- a peculiarly dangerous use of money which, as penniless men enter Parliament, will become more and more fre- quent, and will not be directed, as Lord Rockingham's liberality was when he supported Burke, solely to patriotic ends. The necessary man always dictates his own terms more or less, and if the capitalist is to be declared the necessary man in politics, he will dictate them too. Whether the Royalists really captured the Boulangist leaders or not, must remain doubtful, that depending mainly on the General's inner resolves ; but one must be very in- credulous to doubt that their need of money for the agita- tion compelled. the Boulangists to give very strong Royalist pledges, and at all events to persuade its donors that the General's ultimate intention was to play the part of Monk. If the capitalist's desire, as it often is, is only personal position in the State, he is nearly sure, as we see by American examples, to attain it ; and he may desire much worse things than that, though that is sufficiently dangerous. Crassus, who is the greatest example of the millionaire politician, materially affected the fate of the Roman world, and cost Rome an army in the field, an army lost through his incapacity, besides. A millionaire is not necessarily a good politician,—is, indeed, not unfrequently a very bad one, irresponsible power of that kind disordering the judgment and producing a kind of intoxication ; and we could easily conceive of a millionaire, either in France or America, or England, whose political fad resulted in grave public misfortunes. The impartiality of the State in the conflict between labour and capital might be deflected through the hold of millionaires over one or other of the parties, until we saw something verging upon civil war, or witnessed experiments in finance, such as are now actually occurring in the United. States in reference to silver, which would imperil the financial future of the whole com- munity. What would the whole Parnellite Party do, and think themselves justified in doing too, to reward a millionaire who would pay for the next five years the whole of their legitimate expenses P—and that would not take £350,000. We doubt if we yet understand what such a man could do, especially in directions in which he was sincere, or how great the chance is growing that he may choose to do it. It is often said, though not often printed, that this influence of the capitalist is a guarantee of society, that disorder can never be his interest, and that consequently he is a working counterpoise to universal suffrage. That is nonsense, akin to the nonsense so often talked about the Lords protecting us from revolution. The political power of the capitalist, like the veto of the Peers, is operative only when the majority are not excited. When they are, the one is just as powerless as the other. A millionaire might assist the Pamellites enormously, and so work grave political mischief ; but he could no more bribe the party to give up Home-rule than he could bribe the Bishops to give up the Decalogue. A coalition of capitalists might, in a divided condition of opinion, help to turn the scale against the Eight-Hour Bill ; but supposing that Bill to become the real desire of all operatives, the capitalists would be reduced to total impotence. All they could do against a true popular illu- sion would be to increase the bitterness of the fight, and consequently the recklessness with which the fanatics, once victorious, would try their rash experiments. We cannot like this intrusion of money into politics, and shall watch its introduction into this country, where we can almost see its approach, with an increased distrust—distrust to us only painful—in the ultimate future of democracy.
Previous page
