TOPICS OF THE DAY.
A CONSERVATIVE ARGUMENT FOR A SPEEDY DISSOLUTION.
[R. GLADSTONE concluded his fine speech on Monday 111 with a hint which all moderate Conservatives, and indeed, all Conservatives not actually in office, will do well gravely to consider. They are all under a belief, often very naïvely expressed, that the Government is wise in postponing a Dissolution, and grow slightly sarcastic when any one hints that an election may be at hand. Why, they say, should a Government with a majority of seventy-three on a crucial division be ready to dissolve just because its enemies desire it, or why should it throw away an instrument so flexible in its hands as the present House of Commons ? The object of Governments is to govern, and the Cabinet is governing as it likes. Those questions convey an argument which, as far as the present Government is concerned, is sound, as nothing short of com- plete victory at the polls could strengthen their position in Parliament ; but the Conservative party will outlive this Ministry, and many Ministries, and we doubt in all sincerity whether, in accepting this excuse, moderate Conservatives are not running the risk of gravely injuring their own future prospects. They are damming up the waters, until they may break forth with a rush. They believe at heart that their chances will be just as good twelve months hence as to- day, but their grounds for that belief are of the least trust- worthy kind. Unless the Ministry achieve some great and striking success, which is most improbable, every month's delay in.appealing to the country will injure their position. Their prosperity is over, as they know, and the slow but sure recog- nition of that fact by the millions of the undecided is of itself undermining their strength. The contempt for their judg- ment always felt by the educated is filtering down among the householders, and the distrust of their successes always ex- pressed by the experienced is beginning to be felt by the body of electors. There are no public meetings to applaud them. Savage witticisms directed against them are received with laughter. The " topical songs " of the Music-halls express doubts of their wisdom, and regrets for their fiascos. The cheapest papers in London virulently accuse them, and attain, nevertheless, enor- mous circulation. The extreme difficulty with which 52,000 pennies are being raised to buy Lord Beaconsfield's laurel- wreath is not entirely due to the English appreciation of the humorous. The " glory " of the Premier has faded away, and his colleagues are slowly, but perceptibly, being for- gotten. Lord Salisbury is apologetic in Middlesex, and poor Sir Stafford Northcote begins to be regarded with a sense of pity, and described as a man whom bailiffs cannot catch. At the same time, the intense and-most unusual dislike with which the Government has inspired large classes—for example, the Scotch and the Dissenters—does not diminish, but in- creases, till at the next election the Liberals will be em- barrassed by the numbers and the zeal of their non-commis- sioned officers, who last time would hardly help them to keep order. The personal hatreds, too, are not becoming less numerous. Every Government accumulates them, and they become, as a rule, more formidable, instead of less formid- able, with time. The Ministry have, for example, this week added to the number of their enemies—by per- fectly unexceptionable though weak conduct—all the holders of Egyptian Bonds. The swing of opinion is always against a decaying Government, and so also, moderate Con- servatives may rely on it, is "the chapter of accidents." Acci- dent seldom saves a Government, but it often destroys one. Such Conservatives know perfectly well that if Ekowe had not been re- lieved the Government would have disappeared, as it would also if any one of our much divided corps were destroyed in Afghanis- tan, or if the recent Canadian " experiment " ended in a burst of querulous disloyalty. Even, however, without accident, time is against any Government once discredited, and in applauding the cunning which postpones dissolution the Moderates may, as Mr. Gladstone told them, be only " postponing a reaction which the longer it is put off the more complete it will be." Another expedibion, another bubble Budget, another " difficulty " anywhere in the world, and the nation will be so weary of the methods of the Ministry, that it will tolerate no Government whose policy is not the direct ref erse of that which has been pursued. Conservatives may measure the strength of the reaction by studying it in the instance of South Africa. The whole nation approved the annexation of the Transvaal, and now the Quarterly Review openly advocates the restoration of all South Africa to independ- ence, and a project for exchanging it for Java would obtain, at alit events, most respectful treatment from the British Parliament Imperialism has ended in lassitude, and if the situation does- not improve, the great pendulum may swing right across, and a Radical Government accede to power.
But, say thoughtful Conservatives, better that, perhaps, than a most probable alternative. A speedy Dissolution, they argue, might, as matters now stand, result in an equipoise of parties ; and if parties were in equilibrium, the balance of power would. be in the hands of the Irish Home-rulers. They would make their own terms, and govern almost as completely as O'Connell did, for a short space of time. That is a fundamental error of the most deluding kind. Not fearing perpetuity of tenure in Ireland, and quite convinced that Home-rulers, whether they like it or not, must ultimately fight for that revolution instead of their own dream, we are not ourselves afraid of the suggested con- tingency, but we do not believe it would arise. A majority of both parties believe the Home-rulers dangerous, would view their importance with disgust, and to rescue themselves from their ascendancy would support a Medium Government,—a Cabinet of Old Whigs, with a few allies, with a policy of strong- but tranquil government, a foreign policy favouring the Eastern nationalities, and a home policy mainly of sound finance, and of making all armaments and establishments moderate, but effective. It would be a Cabinet of Administra- tion. We dare say we should not like it, believing that it would awaken too little enthusiasm, and be at times too squeezable ; and we are quite sure the advanced Liberals would not like it ; but what is there in such a result which should dismay moderate Conservatives, the men who distrust change, and distrust the preseilt Cabinet nearly as much ? The prominent men of their party would not be in power, but their own leading principles would, and under circumstances which, if the list included even one Administrator who made a striking success, might give them_ power for another seven years. We do not pretend to say what the people are longing for. We do not believe they quite know themselves, the electoral body having grown so vast that reasoned thoughts have been superseded by almost instinc- tive aspirations. The electors, for instance, want im- portance in Europe, not this or that measure leading to importance. But we do believe that if an elec- tion resulted in what used to be known as a Peelite Ad- ministration—an Administration of competent men, not intent on change, and not inclined to spare abuses—the country would acquiesce without anger, and still more without any sense of despair. It would wait to see what it had got, and if it had got efficiency would enjoy a sense of relief, and be patient till still better things came round. People are sick of seeing battalions and companies squashed like flies on a pane without result in victory. The fact that the new Government, like the Peelite Cabinets, consisted only of leaders would make little difference, for a majority of both parties, without coalescing, would give it a fair chance. It seems to us that this is a prospect at which Liberals like Mr. Chamberlain should revolt, not Conservatives like Mr. Hubbard, and the rest of the quiet men whose endurance rather than support of Beaconsfield policy and Northcote finance—a policy of fireworks and a finance of bill-drawing—gives the Cabinet its apparently " solid " majorities.
But why these sugar-plums from enemies ? Why should the Spectator, of all papers, urge dissolution, if this is to be its result ? We will answer frankly,—Because, though we ardently desire a Liberal Government, we should prefer any reasonably competent government to government by the pre- sent Premier. While Lord Beaconsfield retains power, there is no security against a catastrophe, against some measure in- tended, at infinite risk, to fire the imagination of the ignorant and to make them believe him a Heaven-sent pilot, or against some daring and dangerous coup, the result of which may embarrass the Empire for a generation. He is capable to-morrow of attempting to defend the Balkans against Russia without a corps d'arm4e at his disposal, or of demanding, in the interests of the Multitude, that the prin- ciple of Free-trade be applied to the issue of Bank-notes. Every hour of this Government is an hour of danger from disaster, risked by a tumid imagination, unsupported by prac- tical administrative power. The supersession of such a rule, even by an imperfect alternative, is, in our judgment, better than its continuance, and its supersession by an Old is Cabinet is the worst we have to expect. Whiggery Is not good, but it is better than Tory-Democracy.
Previous page
