THE POWERLESSNESS OF THE PRESS AND OF THE " MACHINE
" TWOpoints come out in the history of this Election which hitherto have attracted but little attention. One is the powerlessness of the Press, more especially in London, whenever the struggle of the parties rises above a certain point in the political thermometer. The Unionist newspapers in the Metropolis very greatly outnumber the Liberal journals, but those which possess the largest circulations, like the Daily Mail, or which, like the Times and Daily Telegraph, have " educated " whole generations of readers, have all been vehemently Protectionist and anti- Free-trade. Yet London, outside the City, has decided for Free-trade and Liberalism. This was not expected, we believe, by either party, the continuous roar of the daily journals drowning the under-growl which might but for them have been audible to others than those who, like Mr.
John Burns, were in direct touch with the people. In truth, the daily Press has lost, with the gradual reduction of the franchise, much of its political influence. Just fifty years ago, in 1855, Mr. John Delane, the editor of the Times, was described as" ruling England," and the statement, though, of course, a broad one, was but slightly exaggerated.
As the newspapers are much more widely read than they were, and as, though the force of their " leaders " has abated, there is no reason to believe that they have become in any way unpopular, it is a little difficult to assign a convincing reason for the change. For ourselves, we believe it to be due to the wide diffusion of education, which tends to increase both self-confidence and independence of opinion, and to a greater width in the fissure between the minds which manage newspapers and the minds of the multitude who read them. The latter find their guidance either in their own perception of their interests, which is very keen, and is often misread by party journalists ; or in advice from leaders whom they believe to be capable, and who are often not visible to the writing class. We doubt whether the latter knew so much as the name of one Labour leader who has practically seated thirty Members,— certainly they did not report either his speeches or his letters. It must not be forgotten that every profession has its own intellectual bias, and journalists' instincts are not the same as the instincts even of educated work- men. They fail at the point so clearly revealed by a poor woman who said last week to a canvasser; "We have only sixteen shillings a week, Madam, so we feel we must vote Liberal,"—a most illuminating remark. We doubt whether they even clearly perceived the special grip of the Chinese labour question upon the working mind. They thought it only an appeal to hereditary anti-slavery feeling, whereas the toiler, though he acknowledged that feeling, felt also that the rich employers, and the Tory Government behind them, were promoting an unfair form of competition. We must also repeat, what we pointed out years before the present uprising of the industrials, that the English are less carried away by writing than any population in Europe, and that newspapers are constantly read by those who do not sympathise with their policy in the least. The spread of education promotes the prosperity of the Press, but does not promote its power, while it does to a singular degree promote the power of that aristocracy of workmen which, scattered as it is over all England, gives tone and bone to the otherwise fluid thoughts of the working crowd. Everybody reads the papers ; but not everybody swallows them. This loss of the Press influence is, of course, greatly increased by the fact that the general body of the well-to-do derive their impressions of popular opinion from newspapers which, as they fail to perceive, have lost touch with those masses whom they are assumed to represent.
The second point is the failure, or comparative failure, of the "machine." Mr. Chamberlain has " captured " most of the organisations of the Conservative Party with- out in the least benefiting his own special following. He succeeds in Birmingham as America's "bosses "do in their own cities ; but the greatest" bosses "fail when they attempt to influence national councils. Had they seriously tried to defeat Mr. Roosevelt, they would have been crushed like snails under a motor-car. Organisation is, of course, very useful to any party, especially in choosing its representatives, its lecturers, and its reporters ; and we dare say in times of quiet it may secure small majorities for many Members; but when, under the stress of some grave emergency or some strong feeling, the body of the electorate exerts itself to vote, the " machine " is almost as powerless as the Press. The numbers of the constituency and the ballot between them break its sword. You cannot bribe a really great con- stituency, for you cannot get the money, and you cannot intimidate it because of the secrecy ensured by law. Whether the law is assisted by a good deal of lying we do not accurately know, but we are strongly tempted to believe that that is the true moral objection to the ballot. There are very few of the rougher class who hesitate to ride in Mr. Swellington's motor-car, though they have no intention of voting for him. In fact, if you will consider, it must be so. Under our present laws, all the voter, however humble, has to do is to walk perhaps a mile, record his vote, and fence with all inquiries as to its direction,—an effort of the imagination in which, as a rule, he takes exceeding delight. "Who did I vote for? Well, it's the ballot, you know ; but I like your man very much." Voting has been made too easy for the adroit managers who fifty years ago used. to threaten in the counties and bribe in the boroughs without much fear of being caught out. When they were, it was by means of a rather discreditable method of cheating practised by the other side, who often sent witnesses to take bribes in order that they might testify to corruption. The dreadful amount of bribery and intimidation which seems to baffle the ballot in American cities is based upon a system of minute patronage which as yet does not exist in our boroughs, and is fostered by a foreign vote which, except in districts like the East End, can never be very heavy, and which even in such places is in " great " Elections beaten down by the tidal rush of conviction or prejudice, call it which you please. The strongest organisations are those of the working men, and this for the simple reason that they are maintained for other purposes than the seat- ing and unseating of local Members. This derogation of organisation always produces, we notice, a quantity of irritated denial ; but we suspect that those who feel that argument most keenly generally belong to one of two classes. Either they want to satisfy those who have supplied the party funds that they have done their very best, or—and this is commoner—they are irritated by answers to the only apology for their failures which they are able to produce. "We were only defeated because we were careless," is a pleasanter thing to say than "We were beaten in fair fighting" or "Our followers deserted us."
We have pressed our argument about the newspapers because we regard with a certain disgust and alarm the practice of buying them up for party purposes, and we press the argument against the value of " machinery " because we see evidence every day of its horrible effect in the American cities. We fear its adoption in our great towns, and exult therefore in any evidence of its in- applicability to our national elections.
Previous page
