LORD ROSEBERY AND HIS CRITICS. [To THE EDITOR OD THZ
" SpEcraTop..1 Sui,—Having for the last two or three weeks been residing in the depths of the country where papers were few and far between, it was only on my return to town yesterday that I was able to acquaint myself fully with the comments passed by yourself and others on Lord Rosebery's recent pronounce- ments. By his letter, and still more, I gather, by his speech, to the City Liberal Club, Lord Rosebery, I read, has not only ruined and spoiled his own political career, he has treated his friends with treachery—" stabbed" them I think was the word used—wrecked the Liberal party, and thus done irre- parable injury to the nation. Sir, Lord Rosebery's future is in the lap of the gods—it will look after itself—I do not meddle with it ; it is not with the personal but the national aspect of the question that I wish to deal. So far from having by his recent action done harm, I believe that Lord Rosebery has done his country the greatest service which a public man has it in his power to render to the State he serves. He has come forward at a critical moment and spoken the truth,— that truth which, however inconvenient to some people at the time, is, in reality, great, and will in the long run assuredly prevail. After all, the matter, in spite of its gravity, is simple, and easily understood. What is the supreme test of the efficacy and usefulness of an Opposition? It is, as Mr. Balfour said the other day, "that if those entrusted for the moment with the conduct of affairs should lose the confidence of Parliament or of the country, there will be
found another set of men not greatly differing from them in experience or knowledge of affairs, having behind them an organised body of public opinion in the House and out of it, to whom the national destinies can be entrusted." That no such ideal Opposition exists at present is patent to everybody ; that the want of it constitutes a national danger, that the need of it is an urgent national necessity, none will dispute. Yes, but how are we get it ? By the Reform Club plan ? That is impossible. Peace when there is no peace ; superficial unity, while behind it deep, conscientious, and fundamental differences exist ; how is it possible that a party so circumstanced and constituted can ever furnish the country with such an Opposition as the country urgently needs and requires ? On the other hand, there is the Rosebery plan, which may be described as "strength through weakness." Under the Rosebery plan the party must be purged of its anti-national elements. It may be, it might be, for the moment numerically weakened. But what of that? What the country most wants in an Opposition at the present moment is " quality " not "quantity." Given the quality—let the quality be first-rate, what the nation requires—the quantity will soon increase. The two sections of the Opposition cannot really work together. That is plain enough now. Put into practice—in the event of the present Opposition being called upon to form a Government —it would be proved to demonstration. There are only two alternatives. Either the Imperialist section of the Liberal party must prevail, or the present state of things must continue. What is the present state of things ? A weak and inefficient Government confronted by a weaker and more in- efficient Opposition. That is a national danger. Lord Rosebery sees that danger; he points out its gravity; he suggests the remedy ; he calls upon us while there is yet time and opportunity to set our house in order ; and it is for this that he has been anathematised, criticised, and satirised. But for all that, his words, I firmly believe, have not been spoken in vain ; the seed sown will bear fruit in due season.—I am, [It was because Lord Rosebery's wayward and eccentric action makes an alternative Ministry not more but less possible that we disapproved of it. If Lord Rosebery had taken the chair at Mr. Asquith's dinner instead of ploughing the lone furrow, he might have done a good deal to bring about the consummation which we all desire.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
