TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE POLITICAL SITUATION. THIS Unionist Free-traders have won the first round in the fight against Mr. Chamberlain's proposals. That is, a Free-trade Budget, a Budget which not only frees the food of the people from taxation, but which also strikes out of the hands of the advocates of. Protection and prefer- ential tariffs based on taxes on food, their most formidable weapon, has been carried by a Unionist Government with only thirty Unionist dissentients. But though they have won the first round, and though all the signs point to the inability of the advocates of preferential duties to make any real impression on the mass of the people, the Imperialist Free-traders would be foolish beyond words if they did not make every preparation to maintain the integrity of their position. Mr. Chamberlain and his sup- porters may have failed to carry the position with a rush as they hoped, but they will not " stay beaten " if they can possibly help it. We may feel sure that they will at once begin to " educate " public opinion. Needless to say, we do not blame them. Considering the views expressed by Mr. Chamberlain, and his un- doubted sincerity in the matter, he would, from his point of view, be playing a cowardly and unpatriotic part if he did not do his best to use the discussion and inquiry which are to take place in order to further his projects. It is possible that for the moment he may think himself personally bound to keep quiet and not to engage in the struggle. But such a resolve, even if formed, cannot in the nature of things last. He can- not conceal his own views, for he has expressed them; and having expressed them, unless, of course, he with- draws from his position, he cannot pretend that it would be disagreeable to him if his supporters were to try to convert the country. But if once they begin such a campaign he is sure, directly or indirectly, and whatever may be his present intentions of reticence, to be drawn into the struggle. We may take it, then, that, short of a ' miracle, we shall almost at once be face to face with a political movement in the country which may be an inquiry in name, but which in fact will be a proselytising campaign in the interests, of Mr. Chamberlain's scheme. But that being so, the Free-traders of the Unionist and Imperialist party must organise, and must be prepared to meet a Protectionist with a Free-trade campaign. They must not be the first to strike, for on them must not fall the blame of breaking up the. Unionist party. If, however, the other side begin to work and to act, no matter how indirectly, they must act too. The first duty of Unionist Free-traders, then, must be to prepare, to arm, and so to get ready an organisation. Possibly it may never be necessary to use that organisation—and we sincerely trust that it may not be—but the batteries must be ready to unlimber and open fire the moment the necessity arises.
So much for the positive action required at the present moment. But negative action is also required. Free-trade Unionists, collectively and individually, must insist that the existing Unionist political organisations, both central and local, shall not be used in any way by either section. That is, Unionist Free-traders must insist that the central Conservative and central Liberal Unionist organisations shall not take sides inthe controversy, —shall not, for example, circulate literature advocating preferential tariffs. Again, in the constituencies the Free- trade members of local Unionist organisations must insist that those organisations shall remain neutral. If this can be achieved, as we believe it can, a great deal will have been done to prevent a split in the party, or rather to prevent the opening of a wound that cannot be healed. Rival ad hoc organisations may conceivably fight the matter out inside the party without destroy- ing it, provided that the official party organisations are not tampered with by either section. The natural impulse of the able officials who control the great central organisa- tions will, we feel sure, be in favour of maintaining a strictly neutral attitude. Their instinct will be to protect their machinery from destruction, and they will in this have the support of all prudent and far-seeing men what- ever their actual views. No responsible people will want to see the organisations smashed, and therefore only firmness is required by the Free-trade section of the party to prevent a state of things so deplorable. As to the duty of the Free-traders within the Govern- ment, we can only repeat this week what we said last, Their duty is to remain in the Government, and to hold the Free- trade fort. They, as Free-traders, have no possible excuse for leaving an Administration which, judged by its acts, is as sound on Free-trade as any Administration that has been in power these fifty years. We do not profess to know Cabinet secrets, bubit is obvious from the procession of events that the majority of the Cabinet are in favour of Free-trade. If this were not the case, it is clear that they would have retained the Corn-tax, or, rather, would have welded on to it Mr. Chamberlain's policy of preferential tariffs. Had the majority of the Cabinet believed in that policy, they could not possibly have thrown away the instru- ment for differentiation which they had already in their hands, and have consented to an uncompromisingly Free-trade and anti-preferential-tariff Budget, for such it is. In a word, there is no excuse for Free-traders leaving a Free-trade Cabinet. As long, too, as the Cabinet remains intact, it is always possible that Mr. Chamberlain may some day announce that he realises that the British elector will not reconsider his attitude towards Free-trade, and that it is therefore his duty as a practical and patriotic statesman not to distract the public mind by any further attempts to propagate an infructuous idea.
There remains the attitude of the Prime Minister to be considered. We confess that to ourselves it is not a little painful to see Mr. Balfour attempting to take the via media on this question, for we feel sure that in the end he will find such an attitude impossible for a man of his integrity of purpose and absolute rectitude of intention. The play of forces will soon necessitate an absolute declaration from him as to which side he means to take. Every hour that the controversy lasts the issue must more and more become purely one of Protection versus Free-trade. All the signs already point that way, and already the discussion in the newspapers is almost solely on the respective merits of Free- trade and Protection. But when Mr. Balfour is thus forced to make his selection we dread his finding that he has missed the essential function of a leader of men and of a great patriot, which is to lead the nation on all capital issues. We should deeply regret the loss of prestige that must ensue to Mr. Balfour, for he is a statesman whom we honour and respect in spite of our differences of opinion. Is it, we wonder, too late to remind him of this aspect of the matter, and to ask him even now to review his attitude, and to remember that his business is to lead, not to follow, —to decide, not to halt and balance between two conflicting views ? " Your fathers led our fathers at Crecy and at Agincourt ; why won't you lead us now ? " said a great Free-trader in the past to the Young England party. Would that the Unionists who think' as we do might say, and say with effect, to Mr. Balfour : " You led us and cheered us with no uncertain voice against Home-rule, and helped to save the Union then ; why won't you lead us now in the work of saving the Unionist Party from disruption ? "
Previous page
