In a letter to the Times of Tuesday Sir Henry
James makes some important statements as to the debate on the Cotton-duties. In the first place, he denies most positively that the Unionist leaders were the promoters of the motion. "It is the fact that the motion was never favoured by the Unionist leaders and that they never had any intention of making use of it for the purpose of attacking the Govern- ment." Sir Henry James was asked to undertake the work of bringing the question before the House by a mixed com- mittee representing Lancashire interests, on which sat four Gladstonians and only three Unionists, but he only did so on the understanding that the matter was one quite outside party politics. This is, of course, the fact, but it does not excuse Sir Henry James's conduct. He should have remem- bered that he is a Unionist leader as well as a Lancashire Member, and should have refused to lead the attack on the ground that to do so would be sure to cause misunderstand- ing. But, regrettable as it was, Sir Henry James's action can be far more easily excused than the tone of his speech. His cruel insinuation that the Anglo-Indian officials wanted to tax the necessaries of the Hindoo peasant to keep up their own salaries may have been based on quotations, but that did not render it any the more justifiable. The speech, we cannot help thinking, is one which Sir Henry James must now regard with no ordinary amount of regret.
