THE CHARACTER OF THE GOVERNMENT.
11 small, of human beings, be they large or small, passing or permanent, tend to assume a character of their own. The character of a Committee, of a town, of a party, is something different from the characters of the men who compose them. It is true of Governments as of other things. The most powerful Minister cannot fashion his colleagues altogether to his mind. The strongest colleagues have to yield something to their chief. Insensibly each borrows something from each, and the ultimate policy, and the methods by which it is carried out, may have no exact counterpart in any single member of the Cabinet. They represent neither the Prime Minister nor any other Minister. They breathe a character which has grown up no one knows how. This is true more or less of every Government, but it is very specially true of the Government under which we now live. It has a character which is not merely its own, but its own in an unusually marked degree. There has never, we are tempted to say, been a Government quite like it. Its relation to the House of Commons—and it is this more than any other feature that differentiates one Government from another—is something different from anything that we can recall. The forms of the House, of course, are observed, but the spirit which underlies them is dis- regarded. There have been Governments which ruled the House of Commons, and Governments which sub- mitted to it. But there has never been a Government which so entirely and consistently passed the House of Commons by. It counts for little or nothing with Ministers. They arrange and carry on their business with no regard to its convenience and no care for its dignity. What is occupying their thoughts is not this Parliament, but the next, or even the next but one. The present Parliament has its use, no doubt, but it is the use of a man who stands at a theatre door to keep a place in the line for another. The Government are not quite ready for a Dissolution, consequently their object is to keep the House of Commons harmlessly busy. It must not spend much time on questions on which the opinion of the majority is divided, since that might land the Government in a difficulty, and unintentionally precipitate 'a Dissolu- tion. Yet it must get through a certain amount of business, lest the majority should lose the habit of attending, and thus-the same catastrophe be brought about. So the busi- ness of the Session has to be arranged on a plan which shall give the House the sense of being employed without incurring the risks which accompany its employment to any purpose.
This triumph of the art of management has really proved very easy of accomplishment. It consists in one very simple expedient,—the postponement of all business until the period of the Session ensures that it shall be con- ducted under the " guillotine." If the measures of the Session were introduced in February and March, there would be a real danger of their being adequately debated. But in the circumstances in which the present Govern- ment are placed adequate debate is the thing they most wish to avoid. Discussion brings dangers. The true character of a measure may thereby be discovered, and in this way votes once counted as safe may be lost; or the Government may wish so to alter the contents of their own Bill as, by a long series of amendments, to give it a new complexion in some important particulars. But this is a delicate procedure, and therefore one to which it may be convenient to call as little attention as possible. The postponement of business is an excellent safeguard against both these dangers. Its value has been shown to perfection in the case of the Licensing Bill. If this had been intro- duced early in the Session, and pressed forward as the chief measure of the year, it would have been impossible to apply the Closure by compartments with so many of its provisions unconsidered. The approach of Augusi is the one conclusive argument that can be alleged for the " guillotine," and if the " guillotine " is to yield all the advantages which belong to it, it should be applied at an early stage of the measure. But to ensure this the Committee stage must not come too early. Otherwise the one justification of baste will be wanting. Put' off the work of the Session long enough, and all is sure to go well. Clauses and amendments will be disposed of with their real purport very imperfectly understood, and Ministerial reconstructions will pass unnoticed when the votes aro taken without debate.
Another feature in the character of the Government is the manner in which they treat the House of Commons merely as a Court of First Instance. Its judgments, on the rare occasions when it is allowed to give any, are merely material for the consideration of a higher tribunal. Ministers do not pretend to regard the present House of Commons as having the right or the ability to debate questions of policy. The most it is qualified to do is to mark time while the nation is preparing to elect a more competent successor. If it shows any disposition to dis- cuss the Fiscal question, it is reminded that it has no call to do anything of the kind. The Government have no Fiscal policy to lay before it. When the country has considered and adopted the suggestions they have dimly shadowed forth, then will be the time for Parliamentary debate ; but this time will not come until the country has examined the subject in the light of one or more General Elections. The present House of Commons is no more than a barrier set up to prevent the occurrence of a General Election at too early a date. Perhaps the most striking illustration of the extent to which this method has taken hold of the Cabinet is that even Mr. Arnold-Forster has been led to adopt it. He too appeals to posterity, to his successors, to the country,—to everything, in fact, except the present House of Commons. " Successive Administrations" must agree upon a scheme of Army reform. Large changes must be made in the territorial Army, but this can only come about " after much fuller discussion than has yet been given to it." The Militia ought to be amalgamated with the Line " for the purpose of forming a true territorial Army," but this can only be done " if public opinion will allow." The Government—. Mr. Arnold-Forster included—no longer regard the forma- tion of public opinion as any part of their duty. Other War Ministers, if they had entertained the large ideas attributed to the present Secretary of State, would have embodied them in a complete scheme and submitted that scheme to Parliament. They would have done their best to make it intelligible in the first instance, and attractive afterwards ; and when they had exhausted their powers in these directions they would have awaited the decision of the House of Commons. But Mr. Arnold-Forster brings forward a plan which settles scarcely anything, and leaves the composition and recruiting of the Home Army to the future handling of the nation. The Minister scarcely ventures to propose anything ; but this Is of no conse- quence, because he wishes to leave everything to the country. Between the two the House of Commons drops out of notice.
There is the same tendency on the part of Ministers to fix their eyes upon the future when the Unionist party is concerned. Mr. Balfour sometimes speaks as 'though his first duty were to keep his party together; and that, if not an heroic, is at least an intelligible, and in its way a useful, function. But in order to be useful this policy must be applied to the present condition of affairs, and the policy of the Government has put present affairs altogether out of consideration. Fifteen months ago the Unionist party was still united and still strong. It had undergone the partial loss of popularity which overtakes every Government in possession, but there was nothing to indicate that the next Election would do more than lessen its majority. But the Government looked beyond the next Election. They dreamed of a future Unionist party by the side of which the present Unionist party seemed no longer worth preserving. The vision grew in majesty as they gazed on it. Parties divided by no vital issue, Customs levied merely for revenue, manufacturers left to prosper by their own individual energy,—all this was too tame and colourless a prospect for Ministerial eyes to dwell on when a mighty future—Preferential, Federative, Protective—was awaiting them only a year or two off. The present was thrown aside as worthless. The in- strument which had won them their past victories was discarded. The Unionist alliance was broken up without thought or hesitation in order that what was left of it might serve as material towards the creation of the Pro- tectionist party that is to be. Whatever else the policy of the Unionist Government may achieve hereafter, it has proved fatal to the Unionist party as it was.,
Previous page
