[To THE EDITOR or THE "SPECTATOR.') SIR, — The correspondence following on
Lord Hugh Cecil's excellent letter seems to show that, whatever may or may not happen at the next Election, men of moderate views are likely to sink their differences and to unite in opposing the present Government. It seems almost grotesque to imagine a man who considers himself to possess moderation supporting a policy which can be supported by the Chancellor of the Exchequer's speeches at Limehouse and Newcastle. The position now is very different from what it was a few years ago. On October 10th, 1903, in advising Unionist Free- traders to support Liberals, you spoke of Socialism as a bogy that would fade quickly in the light of facts. " The next Liberal Government will not be dominated by ex-Pro-Boers, but by men who, like Mr. Asquith, Sir Edward Grey, and Mr. Haldane, are sound Imperialists." I see that in the same issue of the Spectator I seemed hopeful that office and responsibility would have a good influence on Mr. Lloyd George. Mr. Wilson Noble, on the other hand, felt that the Radical rank-and-file would have a preponderating voice in the party, whatever moderate men might be in the Ministry. With sound prophetic instinct, he feared " too much Mr. Lloyd George." In your footnote to Mr. Noble's letter you, Sir, said: "If Free- trade wins, the mandate of the electors will be to safeguard Free-trade." Can any Free-trader say that the Government have by their Finance Bill, or, for the matter of that, by their general policy, safeguarded Free-trade? Genuine Free- traders will re-echo the exclamation of a prominent Free- trader when the Bill was introduced : "What a Budget ; it
has killed Free-trade l"—I am, Sir, &c., E. M. Ross.
Previous page
