(To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPRCTATOR.1 SIR, — It seems to
me that the Liberal authorities are about to commit an act of political unwisdom and of doubtful magnanimity. I believe it to be true that those Free-trade Unionists who are threatened with opposition by Chamberlain Unionists are also to be opposed by Liberal candidates. A triangular conflict will thus arise in which it is possible that the Liberal may win the seat. I do not know whether this policy can be changed, but in the hope that it may be, may I advance a few considerations P It is true that the Free-trade Unionists are on the whole not a very valiant section, and that when an opportunity has befallen of striking an effective blow at Protection their courage has not equalled their economical soundness. But we must not forget that they have held the Free-trade fort in the very heart of the Protectionist camp, and that they have so far prevented the Conservative paity from being hopelessly committed to Protection. It is difficult to exaggerate such a service. The great danger which the nation has to face is not so much the instant adoption of Protection as the ultimate issue. The Liberal party (I assume that we shall win the General Election) will not always be in office, and when the pendulum swings again it may bring back into power a Tory party from which all Free-trade opinion has been eliminated, and which is officially and practically a Protectionist party. Such an event will' be a disaster 'for
Liberalism and for the Empire. On the other hand, if such men as Lord Hugh Cecil, Mr. Elliot, and Mr. Gibson Bowles return to the next Parliament, they will form not only an effective counterpoise to the Tariff Reformers, but they will be a nucleus round which the saner and cleaner elements of the party will group themselves. This is a question which transcends the ordinary rules of party warfare. It is in the best interests of the nation that the Conservative party should be dominated by the nobler and not by the baser elements, and it will be a shabby victory that we shall win if a Liberal succeeds Lord Hugh Cecil at Greenwich or Mr. Bowles at Lynn. Magnanimity is often the best policy, and I hope it may be possible to persuade the Liberal candidate to with- draw in these and in similar cases. If this is impossible, I think that there are a good many Liberals who in such triangular fights will support the Free-trade Unionist rather than their own party, and I fully believe that such action will be in the interests of the nation, and therefore of Liberalism.
[Mr. Methuen writes with wisdom and in the true spirit of Liberalism. If the Liberals would only accept his advice, they would, we believe, gain the respect of the country as a whole, and immensely increase their weight and authority as a party.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
