We could not possibly express our general point of view
more clearly than by urging, as we did at the very beginning of the controversy, that the Ministers aspersed in so flagrant a manner
by the Eyewitness should bring actions for libel against their traducers, and so test the value of the charges in a place
where such tests would be final, and where, if the charges failed, those who brought them could receive appropriate punishment. Mr. Lloyd George followed this course in the case of a gross personal attack on his honour and with the best possible results. We have always held that he set an example for all public men and did a great public service. The issue, however, is more important than a question of personal attacks. As Lord Haldane well said when a Unionist Minister was once charged with failing to avoid the appearance of evil : " The right hon. gentleman seems to think that this matter can be dis-
posed of by being reduced to a personal attack. I would reply in the language of the Spectator . . . that the world cannot be run on the dilemma, either I am trustworthy or I am not. If I am worthy of trust then it is shameful and malignant not to trust me all in all.' He forgets that he must think of other people besides himself, and other genera- tions beside the present." The Liberal Nation of last week most sensibly recognized the real point at stake. It said :— " Meanwhile, we hope that the Committee will address itself to matters which really concern the mass of the people—e.g., the rushing up of the Marconi shares to four times their real value while the agreement was sub judice ; and the statements that members of the Government or relatives of Ministers dealt in these shares, either for themselves or for clients. These are questions of honour."
It is preposterous to suggest that those who make this
demand must share in the guilt of the accusers if happily such accusations are disproved or withdrawn.
Previous page
