THE PROSPECTS OF THE UNIONIST ALLIANCE.
MR. PARNELL has confided to the Freeman's Journal his hope that the Irish Members will facilitate the transaction of English and Scotch business during the next Parliamentary Session, instead of attempting to interpose any obstruction to the transaction of that business. He has given as his reason, that he thinks that, though the Liberal Unionists and Conservatives may hold together for the purpose of bullying and dragooning Ireland, they will never hold together when they come to legislate on important matters deeply affecting their own interests. Whether that be Mr. Parnell's real motive for this counsel, we venture to doubt. We have a strong suspicion that he has noted the rising tide of disgust with which Parnellite obstructiveness inspires Great Britain, and the reluctance with which many of his new English allies keep silence when they see the Parnellites blocking the whole business of this country. And he thinks it high time, therefore, to find his Irish followers a good Irish reason for relaxing their obstructive efforts. Very likely he may hope that his good Irish reason is a sound one, and that the Unionist alliance may break up on British questions as it has not been found possible to break it up on Irish questions. But we feel pretty sure that, whether he indulges that hope or not, it is not the principal ground of his action. He thinks that the time has come to relax the strain which the last Session put upon many of the Gladstonians. However much pride he may feel at dragging his captives behind his triumphal car as he did last Session, he is aware that he cannot urge that triumph too far without provoking a revolt. Like the wary leader he is, he now resolves to let them follow more freely their own wishes and those of their constituents, until the time shall come when he finds it essential to make them feel the reins again.
But our present concern is not with Mr. Parnell's private reasons for liberating his British allies for a short time from the heavy yoke of the Parnellite alliance, but with the prophecy by which he has ventured to sweeten the otherwise disagreeable prospect of comparative quiescence for his faithful followers. He suggests that the Conservative and Liberal Unionists are cemented only by hatred to Ireland, and that the moment they come to competing with each other on any great matter of policy on which British constituencies are likely to be strongly divided, they will begin to disintegrate at once. We are aware that all prophecy is dangerous, and that only time can show where an alliance is strong and where it is weak ; but so far, all the evidence we
have, goes directly against Mr. Parnell's prediction. We confess that we have a far greater fear of the Unionist alliance even now breaking up on the Irish Question than on any other. With a stormy-petrel like Lord Randolph Churchill flitting about the troubled waters, and a man of influence like Sir Michael Beach raising his voice in favour of conciliation to the Parnellites before the Parnellites have given up an iota of their monstrous claims, we cannot conceive that, in relation to Ireland, the alliance is as yet in the least assured. It is quite conceivable, for instance, that while the Liberal Unionists remain firm in their alliance, a section of the Conservatives may split off from their party, and so greatly endanger the combination. But while we cannot but be anxious on that head, we do not see the smallest reason to suppose that the Liberal Unionists will be tempted to desert the Conservatives on the Local Government Bill or any other British measure during the coming Session. In the first place, Lord Salisbury has warned all his followers of the danger, and has told them plainly that they must sacrifice a good deal to Liberal Unionist ideas, and must be prepared even to waive points on which they would otherwise be inclined to insist, rather than bring about a Parliamentary vote which must result either in a resignation or a dissolution. Forewarned is forearmed, and it is certainly to be expected that the Local Government Bill will not be introduced till it has received Lord Hartington's cordial approval. Of course, it may happen that a section of the Conservatives may disapprove, and dis- approve not because the Local Government Bill does not go far enough, but because it goes too far. Sir Michael Beach's speech at Bristol seemed to foreshadow some disposition to take this line, and we do not feel sure that his resig- nation may not have had some connection with his dis- like of a thoroughgoing Local Government measure. He certainly deprecated strongly the attempt to create active rural municipalities for which there is no demand, and threw a certain amount of cold water on the principal measure of the coming Session. But then, opposition of this kind from the right wing of the Conservative Party is not just now very formidable. What is formidable is any opposition which would reinforce the Gladstonian and Parnellite Parties ; but it is impossible for the Gladstonian and Parnellite Parties to unite with the right wing of the Conservative Party against the left wing and the Liberal Unionists. If Sir Michael Beach and Lord Randolph Churchill joined their voices to the Glad- stonians and Parnellites on any Irish question, or on any issue raised by the Radicals, the consequences might be serious.
But so long as they confine themselves to protesting that the Conservatives are too Liberal in their policy, they will be powerless, and cannot undermine the Government.
Of course, there is the question of economy, on which it is almost always possible for any party to take up any attitude. Even an ultra-Radical may say that efficiency is being sacrificed to economy, and therefore, if he chooses, may censure the Government for standing by Lord George Hamilton, and accepting the resignation of so popular an officer as Lord Charles Beresford. But we may be quite sure that no alliance resting on so strong a motive as that on which the Unionist alliance depends, will ever go to pieces because Lord George Hamilton wishes to be more economical than a popular naval officer thinks it prudent to be. Lord Hartington might agree in secret either with one or with the other, but he would certainly not state an opinion on so trivial a matter, if it endangered his understanding with the Government. And it would be impossible for Mr. Gladstone, with his strong bias towards economy, to throw himself into a struggle of that kind on the side of the man who approves expenditure, and against the man who wishes to curtail it. And besides, Lord Randolph Churchill has committed himself to the economical party, and would not have much influence if he deserted it again for the party which insists on efficiency first, and economy only afterwards. So far as it is possible to anticipate the course of Parliamentary discussion now, we see no reason to think that, on the question of economy, the Government will not go at least as fast and as far as it is probable that the country will follow it.
There remain questions of the kind which the public Press have recently been taking up so strongly, the questions between public order and the agitators. These are issues on which, of course, Mr. Gladstone and his followers will find no difficulty in supporting strongly the cry of the Parnellites ; but then, these are questions on which it is nearly impossible that either the Conservatives should split amongst themselves, or the Liberal Unionists should desert them. Order is one of the points on which the Conservatives not only have a strong popular feeling behind them, but are perfectly aware that they have it, and are therefore proud to act on the old Conservative tradition. Neither Sir Michael Beach nor Lord Randolph Churchill is at all likely to desert the cause of order and tranquillity. And as for Lord Hartington feeling inclined to desert it, it is the last question on which we should expect to see Lord Harting- ton vacillate even for an instant. Indeed, if a question could have been raised the discussion of which would tend to cement even more firmly the alliance between the Conservatives and the Liberal Unionists, this would be it. To our minds, the speech on " Remember Mitchelstown l" did more good service in welding the Conservatives and Liberal Unionists together, than any speech ever delivered by Lord Salisbury, or Mr. Goschen, or Lord Hartington. If the Radicals attempt to obstruct the Session by frequently moving the adjournment to discuss matters of this kind, the Closure in its simplest and most abso- lute form will be passed before the House has been sitting for a month. On the whole, Mr. Parnell's shrewd advice to the Irish Members to let the English business proceed without interruption, seems to us to be far better justified by certain reasons for giving it which he did not explain to his inter- viewer, than by the reasons on which he was so willing to enlarge.
Previous page
