D ISSOLUTION is in the air, and in spite of the
evident desire of the Government to remain in office and not to appeal to the people for another year, old Parliamentarians are shaking their heads at the situation and expressing the gravest doubts as to whether Mr. Balfour can "carry on." Mr. Chamberlain, indeed, according to the newspapers of Thursday, has evidently no illusions as to the capacity of the Ministry to survive the Session. We are told that in a letter to the West Birmingham Conservatives, read at a meeting of his constituents on Wednesday night, Mr. Chamberlain made the following significant statement : " I think that the time is coming shortly when I shall once more have to ask for your confidence, and when I shall venture to hope that Birmingham will once more lead the way in a great and necessary reform." Men in Mr. Chamberlain's position do not use language of that kind unless they believe that a Dissolution is very near. But though the force of circumstances is tending to bring about a Dissolution, it will not be popular with the Unionist party, and so with the majority of the House. The Unionists will appeal to the constituencies because they must, and not because they will.
Though we are ourselves anxious for a Dissolution, we do not wonder that the ordinary Unionist Member looks upon the prospect with something like dismay. Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Balfour—the one by his recklessness and the other by his weakness—have laid the party in ruins ; and the unfortunate Unionist Member whose chief aim is to keep his seat hardly knows where to turn. Let us look at the position of such a man a little more in detail. By the ordinary Unionist Member we mean the man who was quite content with the political aspirations of the Unionist party before the Chamberlain propaganda, and who, though he was inclined to Cham- berlainism while it looked as if Mr. Chamberlain might sweep the country, now feels deeply aggrieved " that Mr. Balfour did not stop all that Tariff Reform nonsense at the beginning." When at the Dissolution he ceases to be a Member and becomes a candidate, he will, he feels, be confronted with a host of difficulties. To begin with, he will find the bulk of the Unionists of wealth and im- portance in his constituency committed to Chamberlainism, and the local caucus in the hands of Tariff Reformers. But though the Chamberlainites have captured the "machine," he is painfully aware that they have not captured the electorate, and that the Unionist working men to whom he owed his election in 1900 are opposed to the Chamberlain policy. What is he to do ? He cannot win if he defies the caucus, and offends the people whom he looks to to provide him with chairmen for his meetings, and to do the other work of " influential supporters." It is equally impossible for him to win without popular support. In addition to this, he will be confronted with a group of determined and sincere Unionist Free-traders, who, though they may not have been very active up till now, will be forced into action when the time comes for recording votes at the poll. In these circum- stances, the Unionist M.P. we are describing would, no doubt, like to stick tight to the fence ; but this will clearly be impossible, for the Tariff Reform League, as soon as they are freed from restraint by a Dissolution, will put up candidates of their own in all seats where the Unionist declares himself opposed to the Chamberlain policy, or is not of that shade of Balfourism which the Chamberlainites approve. The fact that the Tariff Reform League have chosen a candidate for Greenwich, in spite of the Unionist Whip's formal declaration that Lord Hugh Cecil must be regarded as a sound Unionist and a supporter of the Government, has a very unpleasant significance, and shows that though it may be the fashion for the moment to decry the Tariff Reform League as " an extinct volcano " and Chamberlainism as " finished," there is still a good deal of fighting force behind Mr. Chamberlain. In a word, though the candidate would like to talk platitudes about his devotion to Free-trade " so long as Free-trade is fair trade," and to pass encomiums on Mr. Balfour's policy, he knows quite well that before the election day comes he will have to say whether he is for or against the Chamberlain policy. If he says he is for it, ho will alienate the Unionist Free-traders and the bulk of the balancing electors, who are determined not to have taxes on food in any shape or form. If, on the other hand, he says he is against it, the spectre of a Tariff Reform candidate rises before his eyes.
But even if we imagine a candidate so clever as to be capa- ble of steering between this electoral Scylla and Charybdis, his difficulties are by no means ended. He has got to meet, quite apart from the question of Free-trade, a great body of Unionist criticism. For example, when he is asked how it happens that the Government, though they had so many opportunities, have done nothing to reduce the over-representation of Ireland, and to do electoral justice to England, what is he to say ? He cannot beat the Unionist big drum and invoke the Home-rule bogey on the one hand, while on the other he defends the Government for leaving the Irish with a far larger share of electoral power than they have any right to possess. You cannot declare that the Union is in danger while at the same time excusing the Government for not taking the one step which would have put it beyond all possible risk of over- throw. Again, how is the Unionist candidate to deal with the MacDonell incident ? If it taxes even Mr. Balfour's matchless powers of dialectic to explain the Government's action in this matter, is it likely that the ordinary platform speaker will weather the storm of criticism which will beat down upon him from two sides over this astonishing episode? When the Unionist candidate comes to defend the action of the Government in regard to Army questions his position will be almost as difficult. What is he to say on the question of the guns, and on the failure of the Govern- ment, though they have had three years since the war, to put the Army on a sound footing ? The Militia may be a negligible quantity at the polls, but the Volunteers are certainly nothing of the kind ; and unless we are greatly mistaken, they will expect Members to explain their support of the Government policy in regard to their branch of the Auxiliary Forces. No doubt all Government candidates will be able to count upon the whole-hearted support of the liquor interest, but nevertheless there will be some Unionists in every constituency who will want to know why the holders of annual licenses were given a freehold property in such licenses without having to make any adequate return to the State for the immense new benefit conferred upon them. It is difficult, indeed, to see what the ordinary Unionist candidate will be able to talk about with safety, unless it be foreign affairs. Here, no doubt, he will be able to claim some credit,—first, for the Japanese Alliance, and secondly, for the Anglo-French Agreement. Since, however, his opponent will in all probability agree on these points, it will be difficult to make much electoral capital out of them. Besides, there is a growing feeling in the country that foreign affairs are outside party politics, and that the less said about them at contested elections the better.
The Education Bill, again, though it is not as unpopular in the country as "passive resisters " would have us believe, is not a matter which creates any enthusiasm even on the Unionist side. In truth, the cry of " the Union in danger" is likely to prove the chief refuge for the ordinary Unionist candidate. But here, as we have pointed out already, the failure of the Govern- ment to deal with Redistribution and the MacDonnell episode will to a great extent render such a cry unreal. What will also prevent its use is the fact that in most constituencies the Liberal candidate will be perfectly willing to pledge himself not to vote for a Home-rule Bill in the next Parliament. If nothing else, the knowledge that the Irish vote in English constituencies will be against him over the Education question would render the Liberal willing to give satisfaction to the Unionist Free-traders in regard to Home-rule. In a word, in the majority of English constituencies the Home-rule bogey will be quickly laughed out of court. What the constituencies will want to hear about, and what they will insist on hearing about, is the Fiscal question. That question may be dead in Parliament, but nothing can prevent it being the main issue at the General Election. Here, no doubt, the convinced Chamberlainite will be at a great advantage over the ordinary Unionist candidate. He will have plenty to talk about, and will not be afraid to express himself strongly. For him the issue will be clear enough, and in its discussion he will be able to avoid the difficulties and dangers which we have named above. He may not be able to carry his seat, but at any rate his electoral campaign will not be the sort of night- mare that it must be to the balancing Balfourite.
When one contemplates the condition of the Unionist party as a whole on the eve of a Dissolution, it is difficult for Unionists like ourselves not to feel a very keen sense of indignation in regard to the men who have brought the party to such a pass. If only Mr. Balfour had had the courage to tell Mr. Chamberlain at the beginning that while he was leader of the party he would not allow Tariff Reform to be considered as part of the Unionist policy, and that he would regard those who did not respect his wishes as in opposition to him, he might, no doubt, for a time have found himself in a difficult position, but in the end we are convinced that the party would have rallied to him, and would not now be about to face the country in its present pitiable condition. The party might have received a severe shock, but it would not have been laid in ruins. Now it is,we fear, too late for Mr. Balfour, even if he were willing, to throw over Mr. Chamberlain and to acknowledge that a great mistake has been committed. The party must go to its doom. All we can hope for is that so great a popular vote will be recorded against any change in our Fiscal policy that the leaders of the Unionist party will realise that they must accept the decision of the nation, will determine that henceforth they will do nothing to challenge the prin- ciple of Free-trade, and will insist that the Unionist party in the future shall devote itself to those domestic and Imperial objects which made it great and victorious under the leadership of Lord Salisbury and the Duke of Devonshire. If after their defeat they will do this, there will still be hope for the Unionist party. If, instead, they decide to drink the Chamberlain cup to the dregs, they are doomed to wander in the political wilderness, it may be for twenty years.
Previous page
