LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
[Litters of the length of one of our leading paragraphs are often more read, and therefore more effective, than those which fill treble the space.]
NATIONAL LIBERALISM. [To TRI EDITOR or 2111 " Elezcssroa."l SIR,—Lord Heneage's letter of reproof addressed to the Spectator will, I imagine, " cut no ice " whatever with those who have intelligently followed the devious devices of Mr. Lloyd George's political career. This "eminent leader and great statesman" has scarcely put his hand to a single thing
that he has not muddled. Examined by the cold light of practical results—that is, the evolution of the promise into specific performance—his record is one of almost unexampled failure: and, not seldom, of national disaster. Prolific in pledges, fertile in promises, subtle in expediency, glib in sophistries—like a skilful conjurer he almost persuades one that the egg has become a watch, so ingenious his method, so ingenuous the " patter." It is not too much to say that a large proportion of the financial difficulties which confront us is due entirely to the Government's gross extravagance, childish ignorance of business, incompetent commercial methods, and their deliberate policy of indirect bribery and corruption.
The idiocy of the minimum wage has not only struck a deadly blow at the root of the principle that a man's value to himself and to his employer is in direct ratio to that man's productive capacity and mastery of his trade; but it is, unquestionably, one of the immediate causes of unemployment. There are thousands of small employers of labour who simply cannot afford to pay the cast-iron rates that have been fixed by Govern- ment authority. This fatal measure has not only swamped the " small " man, but has restricted our output, closed many of our overseas markets, reduced home consumption, and impoverished the consumer. - This is one of the deeds of " this eminent •leader and great statesman." In domestic politics, could anyone have done worse—except the pure-blooded Socialist? I very much doubt it. Recall the episodes of the Railway Strike, the Coal Strike, and every other variety of strike, and the Premier's attitude of feeble futility in dealing with them. These fatal blows at the reviving industries of the country were due in great part to the fecklessness, weak- ness, and lack of a definite, straightforward, eommonsense policy in dealing with the initial disputes. Take one instance —the earliest—the Railway Strike. Read Mr. Lloyd George's solemn adjurations on the madness and the iniquity of the strike. We were told in effect, if not in the actual words, that this " was a crime against the community." Later : that the men could not be treated with until they returned to work. But this attitude was abandoned. Further meetings were convened, and finally, to place the seal upon his words of • disapprobation and censure, "our great leader and eminent statesman" actually paid the men for the time they had absented themselves from work "to commit a crime against the community"!
Can any sane man or woman who has a nodding acquaintance with human nature be surprised that after this puerile exhibi- tion of Lord Heneage's approved statecraft that strike followed strike in bewildering succession? Yet it was to be expected by those who had eyes to see and ears to hear. I suppose everyone almost has forgotten an incident which happened during,or just before, the General Election after the Armistice. The direc- torate of the Albert Hall refused to let the building for a revolutionary meeting. The immediate consequence was an act of sabotage. The electric cable supplying current to the building was cut. If my memory serves me correctly, the
point where it was severed was actually guarded by the perpe. tratore! Anyway, this was a clear act of menace directed against the community, and should at once have been firmly met and severely dealt with. What course did our " great leader and eminent statesman" pursue? Vindicate tho authority of the law—establish the right of the law-abiding citizen to protection from an act of wilful aggression? Not a bit of it ! On the contrary, the directorate were.advised by the Government to withdraw their refusal, and the meeting took place. This simple incident is worthy of record. It is the real key to Mr. Lloyd George's character, temperament, and strange obliquity of political vision. It was a sinister pointer; a miniature of after events, which it prophetically and faith- fully portrayed. " Take the easiest way. Never mind the future or the consequences it will entail. Sufficient for the day is. the crisis thereof I " Yet, Lord, to see how men cheer when they should jeer, and crown where they should bind! Think of the indemnity and reparation pledges—the trial of the Kaiser stunt! Think of the Agricultural Act, of Mesopo- tamia, of Egypt, of India! Think of the Conferences, the Com- missions (the Sankey Coal Commission)! The Housing Scheme! The gross folly of the vast expense of the Education Act (pace the Spectator)! The Restriction of Rents Act (or the Gradual Destruction of House Property Act as it should be termed), and finally—think of Ireland! I often wonder. Sir, whether any- one reviews the past history and pregnant utterances of Lord Heneage's "great leader and eminent statesman"? If such there be, they must remember with some amusement and no little contempt the " Look at this " and " Look at that" speech of the " great leader and eminent statesman," delivered while he was a member of Mr. Asquith's adminis- tration.
This speech was indirectly an indictment of the Government of which the speaker was himself an integral part. It was couched in the ever-contemptible vein of "Codlin's the friend —not Short." It was, in my humble opinion, a flagrant out- rage of that unwritten code of honour which binds a man to support loyally his captain so long as he remains a member of his team. Alternatively, personal honour demands that he should resign his place before he loosens his tongue. In this deliverance we were invited to "Look at Ireland." Well, we did; and saw little in the prospect to gratify or encourage us. Inferentially, we were led to believe that were the speaker in the saddle, how different a scene would be displayed! Soon after our " great leader and eminent statesman " " weighed in," and then—? Why, he funked his fences—that's all ! He rode "Constitution" apparently for a fall—and got it. When the lamentable story of the despicable surrender to open rebellion, brutal murder, arson and terrorism comes to be written by the future historian—from its initial solitary crimes to its final decadence into open anarchy and indiscriminate assassination—the responsibility will rest upon the shoulders of him to whom it rightly belongs—our " great leader and eminent statesman."
The abject surrender, the feeble forcibleness, the halting between two ways—the right and the wrong; the drifting with the stronger tide—the descensus Averni to the last incredible example are written " in the abstracts and brief chronicles " of our time for all to see. The so-called " agreement " between the Government and the men whose cruel hands were scarcely washed from the blood of our countrymen and countrywomen is doubtless, in Lord Heneage's opinion, as in that of our Lord "Canceller " (the " h " is out of place), but an addi- tional bay in the victor's crown. If these are the fruits of " great leadership " and " eminent statesmanship " may God save the country from the one and give it quittance of the
Previous page
