Speaking at Newcastle-on-Tyne on Tuesday, Lord Kim- berley, while demurring
to the view that this war was inevit- able, admitted that he had always thought that the difficulties in the way of avoiding it were very great. Mistakes had been made in the conduct of the negotiations, due to a not un- founded suspicion on either side, but he "absolutely refused to believe that Mr. Chamberlain ever was guilty of that of which he had been accused,—of deliberately intending to pro- voke war," and he further paid a handsome tribute to the ability, the knowledge, and the loyalty to his colleagues and to Mr. Gladstone shown by Mr. Chamberlain in connection with the Treaty of 1881. Lord Kimberley, after speaking strongly on the duty imposed on all Liberals to support the demands on the Transvaal to secure justice and equal rights to our fellow-countrymen, passed some perfectly legitimate criticisms on the inadequacy of our pre- parations and the damaging admissions of Lord Wolse- ley. We do not agree with Lord Kimbsley's views, but it seems to us monstrous to denounce such criticism, as we regret to see the Duke of Northumberland and Earl Grey have done, as unpatriotic and nnstatesmanlike. We should be loth to apply such terms even to the speech of Sir Henry Campbell - Bannerman at Manchester on Wednesday, in which, while professing the utmost confidence in Generals Buller and White, he declared that the "helm. man, the crew, and the captain" of the ship of State had steered her "right into the middle of the tornado," and that "amongst the advisers, instigators, backers, and instruments of the Government were men who did intend war." There is, however, a wide gulf between the frank and temperate criti- cism of Lord Kimberley and the innuendo of Sir Henry, who has only himself to blame for being made the target of the charge, which he so bitterly resents, of speaking with two voices.
Previous page
