MR. GLADSTONE AND HIS OXFORD CONSTITUENTS.
To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."
presume there is little doubt that Mr. Gladstone, like Mr. Disraeli, will accept Dr. Pusey's shibboleth, and bind himself to contend for a new Court of Appeal in matters ecclesiastical. If his opinions should be declared on that subject—and he is very unlikely to conceal any which he has deliberately adopted—it has been suggested that those of his Oxford supporters who are thoroughly convinced that any change in our present Court must be for the worse, and would lead inevitably to persecution, should withdraw their votes from him at the next election. I trust that you will warn them against so unworthy and suicidal a course. By adopting it they will endorse Dr. Pusey's doctrine that heresy in this point is to outweigh the greatest merits on every other. Such a theory is quite consistent in a man to whom all national ques- tions are indifferent, who cares only for the supremacy of his own order. But it would be shameful in those who appreciate the greatness and sanctity of those questions which no one en- counters more generously and ably in act and word than Mr. Gladstone.
That this desertion of Mr. Gladstone would ensure the success of a candidate ready to swallow any pledges which Dr. Pusey may demand of him,—ready to follow wherever Mr. Disraeli may lead him,—those who recommend it must be aware. That result they are probably prepared to face. ' What signifies," they ask, "the opinion of Lord A. or Mr. B. about this or any other subject? Mr. Gladstone's, even if he were out of office—much more being in it —will carry an unreasonable weight.' Certainly, and you give it great additional weight by compelling him to regard it as a high point of conscience and principle to which he must adhere. It will be. venerable in his eyes and in the eyes of other men because it has cost him his seat. Whatever constituency returns him, he will plead more strenuously and more effectually for the new Court, he will reinforce with his arguments the feebler ones of the repre- sentative whom Oxford may send in his place.
It was known to all the Liberal supporters of Mr. Gladstone from the first that he had certain ecclesiastical notions which were not agreeable to them. They accepted him in spite of those notions because they believed that he had a free and honest mind, and therefore they could trust him to work his way out of a great many conclusions Which appeared to him in the boyhood of his states- manship quite indisputable. He has certainly not belied their confidence ; he has proved that the stronger a man's convictions are the more he is likely to emancipate himself from notions which he has inherited or has formed. Surely it would be an act of extreme folly and great illiberality to punish him for not perceiving the dangers which must come to laity and clergy both if there should be an exclusive clerical tribunal. He fancies that as a layman he making an honourable concession to another class ; the notion of a free church has an attraction for him in his character of Liberal. That experience will show him how much more kind he would have been to withhold from ecclesiastics a power which they will only administer to their own disgrace,—how much slavery lurks under that name of freedom,—I am well convinced. But there are some whom experience cannot teach, some who know that they do not desire freedom for any man, laic or priest. I would not willingly exalt such persons by depressing Mr. Gladstone.
I have perhaps more interest in opposing an alteration in the existing Courts of Appeal thah most of those who think of rejecting Mr. Gladstone because he wishes for another. That is my reason for writing this letter. I have no influence with any Oxford Liberals. If I can induce those who have to exert it they may do something to secure the University from the infinite dis- grace of being sold to a Conservative charlatan for the support which he will give to a "Church policy."—Your obedient servant,
Previous page
