Just a month ago we began a leading article in
these words :- " Mr. Baldwin is in a tragic predicament. To prove this, the situation in which he finds himself has only to be described. He has, to begin with, united the Liberal Party and split the Unionist. Next, he has split the Unionists both laterally and horizontally. He has alienated the Free Trade Unionists. Yet he has not gained the whole-hearted sympathy of the Protectionists. . . . With all these spectres new-raised and gibbering around him, Mr. Baldwin proposes to walk on a dark, cold winter's night through the churchyard ! He is a brave man, and a sincere man, but i3 his policy at this moment practical polities I . . . We honour him. We agree with him. We want to help him. But our sympathy is not going to make us deceive him or fail in our duty of stating the problem as we see it.... Let them wherever possible obtain a pledge in favour of adding a Referendum Act to the Statute Book without delay.... If he fails, and if the three parties come back each with a third of the House, as is not unlikely, the nation will have to find a neutral leader."
Unfortunately, our forebodings have been justified. Between writing these words and the election we stifled our doubts and only gave rein to our hopes. We cannot be accused of being of that company of prophets who Beek to make their prophecies of ill come true by repeating them to their own troops as they go into battle ; but to-day, when the battle is over, it is, perhaps, not uninteresting to recall them.
