DISCIPLINE IN THE EMPIRE.
"ATE do not often, except on Free-trade, see eye to eye V V with Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, but we are convinced that he did a truly Imperial service in protesting as he, did. on Tuesday night against Lord' Milner's unfor. tunate explosion in regard to expressions of public opinion hostile to his views. The Liberal leader in the Commons is quite right to put on record his protest against the dangerous practice of allowing representatives of the Sovereign in the Empire to engage in wordy warfare with those whose criticisms annoy them, and to ask that it should be conveyed to Lord Milner that he was not doing a good service th the Empire by declaring that he does not care twopence about the opinion of people six thousand miles away, or by describing those who oppose his policy as " wiseacres." The fact is that the weakness and want of decision displayed on occasion after occa- sion by the present Government is relaxing the sense of discipline throughout the Empire. The knowledge that the Government dare not call anybody to order, and dare not let anybody resign, has, as was sure to be the case, made certain of the ablest and most zealous men who hold-rule in the Empire feel that they may indulge in a latitude of language which twenty, or even ten, years ago none of them would have thought of claiming. We have •named Lord Milner as his case • is the most con- spicuous, but of late Lord Curzon has exercised a freedom of. speech which shows a great weakening of discipline, and which would certainly have been checked by the Home Government in former times. Take, for instance, Lord Ctirzon's speech reported in Thursday's papers. %Whether we agree or do not agree with its conclusions, one cannot bat. note that it is the speech of a man who is asserting the possession of semi-independent powers, and not that of a public servant who is under the control of the Home • Government. Observe the passage in which Lbrd Curzon speaks of the " glacis" which lies beyond the walls of India. " We do not want to occupy it, but we cannot afford to see it occupied by a foe. We are quite content that it should remain in the hands of allies and friends ; but, if unfriendly influences creep up and lodge under our walls, we are compelled to intervene; because danger would thereby grow up and menace our security. This is the secret of the whole position in Arabia, Persia, Afghanistan, Tibet, and Siam." This may be per- fectly true in theory, but we can well understand that the Government would prefer that they, and not a subordinate, should choose the moment to announce such a policy, and that while they are carrying on delicate and most important negotiations with France the problem of Siam should not be dealt with so crudely and in so aggressive a- context. Fortunately the French Government and people are too wise to see or imagine a menace in this language ; but that does, not alter the fact that if the bonds of discipline are relaxed in the case of our great Proconsuls, the carrying out of • a firm, consistent, and well-thought-out Imperial policy will be rendered extremely difficult. If " Go as you please" is to be the rule of the Empire, we may find that while the Government at the centre . are building up -a particular policy, the rash and often uninformed; or only half-informed, subordinates at the extremities are tearing it down through their bold and • ill-considered utterances. But unless we are to ignore the voice ' of rumour altogether, the want of discipline shown in ,the case of India has by. no means stopped at embarrassing speeches. On one or two occasions in the last year or two it has been whispered that, though the Home Government have wanted to take a particular line, they could not take it. because the Government of India would not allow them to do so. In the case in question the Government of India may have been right ; but that is no proof that the danger of a lack of Imperial discipline does not exist. An in- coherent Empire is not less dangerous than- an Empire which takes a false step now and again. Nay, it is more dangerous, because the false step can be retraced.; :but when confusion takes the place of leadership, dangers open. in the path from which escape-may be impossible. ..
If we were ta, attempt to . apportion the blame for this loosening of the- bonds of discipline in the Empire, we should be inclined to place it almost entirely on the Apple Government: It is an extremely hard task for-, a: man -of great ability, who feels very,strongly, and wholias a very definite scheme of policy in his mind, not occasionally. .14 lash out in speech and smite the fools and :wiseacres; as he considers them, six thousand miles away: What will restrain him most effectually will be the .knoii- ledge that his chiefs at home would regard such action as a grave indiscretion, would feel that the beat -tradi- tions of the public service had been Violated, would censure him strongly, and finally, would be supported in that censure by the better opinion of the Empire. When; however, a man feels, as our Proconsuls are evidently beginning to feel now, that he can speak out as much' as he likes without incurring rebuke or censure, we can well understand that the temptation to shake a :lease oratorical leg becomes almost irresistible. We blame the schoolmasters far more than the boys when, owing to-the relaxation of discipline, the boys get out of hand. So now we blame the Colonial Secretary and the .Prime Minister far 'mere than we do Lord Milner when, forgetting that he is an Imperialist; and becOming for the time a very violent Little Transvaaler, he denounces public opinion , which opposes hini,—a cOndemnatiOn,- remeMber, which covers not merely, the Mother-country, but Australia, New Zea- land, Canada, and even half South Africa. In his eager, nese he may be partly excused if he misuses the freedom of public controversy so injudiciously allowed to public servants who represent the Imperial. sovereignty. .But though we miv.find excuses for Lord 'Milner, we can find none for the dovernment who allow, and so-:encourage,- this dangerous license.
Though . we wish to see the former reticence and dis- cipline, restored to the Empire, it' must 'not be supposed for an instant that we desire to see our Governors and Viceroys subserVient or :sycophantic to their master, the Home GovernMent, On the contrary, we desire to 'see • them ready to take responsibility, to act on their own initiative,' and even; when they deem it necessary to the welfare of the Empire, to disobey orders, and risk being un- able to show their chiefs later that they were right. Again, we want to see them, ready to maintain their own positions in private official controversy with the Home Government, and to show an independence of view and of character which will lead to .resignation rather than :to the carrying out of a policy Of , whiFh they fundamentally disapprove. But between this tree independence and - the , shouting of general vituperative allegations across six. thousand miles of land and ocean there is a vast difference. We like to -see Viceroys and Governors strongly impressing their views on the Home Government. What we do not like, and whatt'We are sure cannot go on without the most serious consequences :to the discipline of the Empire, is to see our Proconsuls either descend into the party arena and; belabour their opponents, or else make public speeches on general policy which may prove gravely dis- tracting and embarrassing in the management of, our Imperial and foreign relations at the centre. But though we want to restrain the -oratorical exuberance of our Proconsuls, we do not want to muzzle our Colonial states, men. They, like our statesmen here, are party politicians, _ and their freedom of comment is perfectly well understOod. The men who must consent to be muzzled are the Vicerois and Governors who represent the Sovereign and the nation.- Perhaps. it -will be 'said that we are laying down impossible conditions of reticence, that the strong men whom -every one agrees we want as' our • Viceroys and Governor& will not consent to -keep silence, and that in order:to get the best men we must relax a discipline which, however desirable in theory, is not practicable. - To such a suggestion we give the most emphatic denial. Who is:the strongeit man in the Empire ?- Lord' Cromer. 'gas, be ever shown this desire to throw off the bonds of diecipline, and to-fight in words and in public with those who differ from-his policy ? On the contrary, his reticence has been absolute,—as complete, indeed; as that-which the apologists of the' Imperial rough-and,tumble system. tell us -cats:- only be expected from lower-division clerks. Lord Cromer has always known his own mind, he has generally had his ()tat* way, and he has never hesitated to advise his chiefs frankly-..and freely when he thought them 'adopting a Mistaken policy. But while gradually building up the position which he no* holds in the Empire and in the bearts.of its cititens, he has .never thought it necessary to engage in public controversy with the opponents of his schemes, and to call those who differ from him in matters of policy by opprobrions names. He has set an example of. perfect discipline to those below him by preserving a perfect discipline in the case of the many and varied Goiernments he has served. And he has shown also that the preservation of discipline is absolutely consistent with independence of attitude and strength of opinion. No man has influenced. Imperial events more, and impressed his personality more strongly on the Empire, than the man -who .has made it a rule never to infringe the discipline of the Empire.
• .
Previous page
