TOPICS OF THE DAY.
MR. GLADSTONE'S POSITION.
IT is high time that the Liberal leaders should give their anxious attention to the question of Mr. Gladstone's position in the country, and his relation to the Liberal party at the next general election. The canvas in Midlothian, which is to begin next week, will afford them ample opportunities of testing the popular power of his name, and the political significance which the general election is likely to assume. The question for them to decide is this,—Will it be better, if they have the means of insuring it, to fight the great battle under the old leader, or under the new ? Will they acquiesce without a struggle in the retire- ment of Mr. Gladstone, and rely on his help only as an amicus curiae, who may now and then come out of com- parative seclusion to throw his shield over an endangered friend ; or will they do all that in them lies to get Mr. Glad- stone, if only for a short time, to take the lead once more, and so proclaim to the country that it is the Government of Mr. Gladstone, the Government driven from power with something like contumely in 1874, to which it is now asked to restore its confidence, on a deliberate comparison of its policy with that of its successor. We do not, of course, suppose that the ultimate decision lies with Lord Granville and Lord Hartington. Whether Mr. Gladstone comes back to the head of the party or not, must rest, of course, with him. But it is certain that unless they urge it, there is no question to decide. Mr. Gladstone has retired, and if we are to have him back again, it can only be because the present leaders urge it upon him, in the interests of the nation itself in the first instance, and of the Liberal party in the second. If they see no reason to press this course, there is no opening for it. But should they be of opinion that a temporary return of Mr. Gladstone to the leadership, would place the true issue more clearly before the country, and greatly increase the probability of a right decision, the time is certainly very close at hand when they should let their mind be generally known. In our opinion, the difference between a battle fought under Mr. Gladstone and a battle fought under our present leaders, would be the difference between a battle fought with faith and enthusiasm, and a battle fought without ardour, not to say with languor.
In the first place, let us point out once more, as we have pointed out before, that no compromise in this matter is even possible. We cannot get the advantage of Mr. Gladstone's name, without his led. The dream of making him a subordinate member of a Liberal Cabinet, in case of a Liberal victory, is, we know, simply a dream, and not a very wise dream,
either. It will not be fulfilled ; and if it could be, no greater misfortune could happen to the Liberal party than to have its Cabinet furnished with two chiefs, one nominal and one real. That very unfortunate suggestion may be put aside, just as all proposals in practical life for both eating your cake and keeping it untouched for future eating may be put aside. If we want the power of Mr. Gladstone's name, we must show that we intend to use its power. You might as well pro- pose to get the full use out of a foil with a button stuck at the end of it, as to get the full use of a great Minister with an appar- atus carefully provided for confining him to a single department of State. Even if the thing could be done—which it cannot— it would not have the popular effect imagined. To restore to power a Ministry led by Mr. Gladstone, the people of England would do much which they would certainly not do to return to power a Ministry in which Mr. Gladstone was to be compre- hended indeed, but hidden under a bushel. We may dismiss, then, that unmeaning compromise as at once absolutely im- possible, and even if possible, worthless for the end for which it has been suggested.
But how would the hopes of bringing back Mr. Gladstone to power operate on the electorate of the United Kingdom ? It would substitute a personal for an abstract cause. Mr. Gladstone represents, to the Liberals, all, and more than all, that Lord Beaconsfield represents to the Conservatives, —and represents an overflowing personal energy as well, which it stirs the popular imagination only to conceive. No doubt, Mr. Gladstone himself, much more than the Liberal cause, suffered the defeat of 1874. Ho had attached too much importance to finance, and the people took a certain almost mischievous pleasure in showing that they cared nothing for the proposed repeal of the Income-
tax, with which he supposed that he should dazzle them. He had attached too little importance to foreign policy, and the people took satisfaction in showing that they did not. wish the United Kingdom to play too bumble a part in the great European drama. He had been subtle where the people thought he should have been plain-spoken, and it was a plea- sure to them to show that they did not like too much subtlety, but preferred plain English, without any cir- cumlocution, whenever England stood before the world:. So the people virtually declared that they were tired of Mr. Gladstone,—that of his honourable and prosperous. finance, they had had more than enough ; that of his pacific. and modest tone on behalf of England they had had too much ; that of his discriminations between shades of meaning between which they saw no difference, they were absolutely weary ; and that they would a great deal rather have for a Premier the clever and unscrupulous man who had never pretended to a conviction, than the great financier, the great reformer, and great political refiner, of whose administration they were then reaping the fruits. Well, but for the very reason that they rejected Mr. Gladstone in their impatience with these trifling defects, with the experience they have now had. of the great adventurer who succeeded him, they are all the more anxious to restore him to power. They were as weary of his good finance, as the Athenians were of Aristides and his good morality ; and now they have had, in place of: that good finance, a finance of extravagance and cowardice,. the finance of men who positively boast that they have too much regard for the taxpayers to pay for what they- spend, and who, in time of peace,—unless, indeed, an Indian war. for which England has paid hardly anything, and a South- African war for which she has not yet paid much, are to count for wars,—keep renewing their bills, and asking the nation. to admire them for their moderation in doing so. Of course, the people feel that it would be only by voting for Mr.Gladstone, that they could adequately express their regret for the folly and impatience of their former caprice. Again, they were irritated with the too great humility of Mr. Gladstone's foreign policy, with the wise self-restraint of his acqui- escence in the result of the 'Alabama' arbitration ; with the inevitable moderation of his concession to Russia in the case of an insignificant demand in 1870, when every great Power in Europe sided with Russia ; and with the general modesty of* the British Foreign Office under his rule. But they have now' had experience of a foreign policy which is nothing so little as. humble,—which waves the banner, and threatens, and brags, and orders about the Fleet, and shakes its money-bags, boasting that they are campaigns in posse, in the face of the world,— and they are far more sick of it than they ever were of the sincere and manly foreign policy which, if it were even a little too modest, in that respect certainly erred on the right side. Of course, then, the English people would like, by returning Mr. Gladstone to power, to profess publicly how much they prefer his foreign policy—the nearest policy we have seen in modern times to that foreign. policy of Mr. Canning, of which England is so proud, the foreign policy which strives to build up .liberty abroad and to strike down tyranny,—to the foreign policy of Lord. Beaconsfield's imperialism, and Lord Salisbury's cynical self-interest. And again, though the English people never. really understood the refinements of Mr. Gladstone's political mind, they have learned in the last five or six years how con- sistent these refinements are with a lucidity of vision of which, every year brings fresh proof,—with a courage which no tempor- ary fury of the mob could cow,—with a tenacity of purpose that: is almost a guarantee of success.
Everything allows that Mr. Gladstone's name is iden- tified all over England with the cause of Liberalism, and
that no other name is so identified. Great meetings,
recognise in a moment even the Watch-words of his fugi- tive writings. The desire of the English people is indeed, we believe, almost as great to do a great act of reparation for a signal ingratitude, as to restore to power the party whose principles, both abroad and at home, they most heartily approve. Without Mr. Gladstone, we might, perhaps, con- quer; with him, we shall conquer as only popular remorse for a great mistake, and popular enthusiasm for a great man who has been subjected to unmerited obloquy, can conquer. We, at all events, shall think our leaders gravely mistaken, if they do not do what in them lies to secure the triumph which only Mr. Gladstone's leadership could secure, for a great character, as well as for a great cause.
Previous page
