TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE NEW GOVERNMENT.
WHATEVER else the new Government may be, it must certainly be a Government of combat. For it is not only formed to combat the rising tide of Liberalism, but it was formed amid the throes of combat between the different shades of Toryism. The "agonising travail" of last Monday, to use Lord Macaulay's language, has certainly resulted in a "portentous birth." Not only is Sir Stafford Northcote to be transformed into the Earl of Iddesleigh, with a nominal First Lordship of the Treasury, though he is not to be Prime Minister, but the more solid authority attaching to the leadership of the House of Commons is to be the reward of the man who gave official sanction to the mutiny of Monday last, though he did not lead it ; and as Chancellor of the Exchequer Sir Michael Hicks-Beach is to be nominally second, but really superior on all matters of finance, to the shadowy First Lord of the Treasury in the Peers. The real leader of the mutiny, Lord Randolph Churchill, as Secretary for India, will no doubt endeavour to pull the strings in the House of Commons, though we shall be much surprised if Sir Michael Hicks-Beach,—the stormy-petrel of the Conservative Party, as he has been termed,—meekly submits to his dictation. We look, therefore, for a Government which will not only have to struggle for life with the rapidly-growing Liberal power, and so to struggle that it may, if possible, make its mark in the course of a six-months' Administration, but for one which will have to pass through many serious internal struggles also,—struggles between the new men in the Commons and the old men in the Lords ; struggles between the adherents of coercion in Ireland and the adherents of a policy of hope ; struggles between the advocates for a showy foreign policy and the advocates of prudence and forbearance ; struggles, above all, between the squirearchical ideal of policy which is dear to Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, and the ideal dear to the Tory-Democrat who has just succeeded in giving the black veil of a Peerage to the man who had termed him a " bonnet,"—a Tory-Democrat who will probably leave no stone unturned to drive his new leader to the same fate, unless that leader follows his inspirations as implicitly as he did on Monday night. We are heartily glad that Lord Salisbury has at least contrived to give honour where honour was due in the new dignity he has contrived for Sir Stafford Northcote. Though the conspiracy of the new men was to succeed, it was yet only fitting that the confidence and respect of the old Conservatives should be decently expressed ; and that the leader who has so long been the mark for the slings and arrows of outrageous Churchill, should be transferred with something of special honour and dignity to the sad seclusion of his new rank. We only wish that Sir Stafford Northcote had had as much buffeting power in him as he has shown power of dignified endurance. If he had, the fortunes of war might have been reversed, and Lord Randolph might have been a suitor for the favours which he is now lavishing on others. A truly Conservative Government is a Government which would command a certain feeling of respect everywhere, even amongst those who strongly prefer a Liberal Government; and Sir Stafford Northcote's sympathies and creeds have been all genuinely Conservative. We only hope that there may arise others to inherit them who are stronger in the rough battles of life than he has been, and that their sympathies and creeds may not all vanish into that world of dignity and decorum in which the Earl of Iddesleigh will for the future breathe. There is nothing which we supposed to be more thoroughly indigenous in the political soil of England than a genuine Conservatism of the militant order, genuine Conservatism that could hold its own in a world of rough-andtumble, of blows and buffets. But at present we must admit that it is not very common in the House of Commons.
The critical office in the new Government must, of course, be that of Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, who is to combine responsibility for finance with the leadership of the Commons. His will be a very difficult position. Sir Michael has force and character ; unfortunately, he has also a good deal of temper and a deficiency in tact, and this is likely to show itself in leading a Government in a minority. No one ever displayed the qualities specially requisite for such a position as did Mr. Disraeli, and we doubt whether any man at all like him in those qualities exists. If Sir Matthew Ridley had ever thrown his heart into politics he possibly might have filled such a position well ; for he has not only as large an apprehension of the true weight of Liberal ideas as Mr. Disraeli, but he has—perhaps unfortunately —that half indifference to political considerations which would give him the requisite coolness of observation. However, he is no longer in the running, and in Sir Michael Hicks-Beach the Conservatives probably have the only man of power whom their party could trust, for thank God they are not yet educated enough to trust Lord Randolph. Still, precisely on this account Sir Michael will have a hard time of it. He will have to wrestle with the Liberals first,—not, we suppose, in any very fierce struggle,—and to that he is quite equal. But whether he is equal to keeping his familiar spirit down, is a very different question. If we understand Lord Randolph well, he will try to impose his will on his leader, and if he fails,—as we trust he may fail,—he will at once contrive little pits into which Sir Michael may fall in order that he himself may come forward to his rescue. How Sir Michael Hicks-Beach will bear that ordeal we have great doubts. Even in the present Session he has abandoned himself more than once to the wrath which possessed him ; and whether he can fight three running battles at once without losing ground,—one with the Liberals, one with the Irish extremists, and one with his own most tricksy colleague,—is, we think, extremely doubtful.
The mention of the Irish extremists reminds us of Lord Carnarvon's gallantry in accepting the post of danger and obloquy in that country. To be attacked as Lord Spencer has been attacked, and to bear it all in stoical silence, is not easy to any one except Lord Spencer. But Lord Carnarvon has bared his bosom to the same sharp ordeal, and we doubt not that he will endure it with the same fortitude. We cannot say that we should not have preferred an Irish Lord Lieutenant, if any Irish Lord Lieutenant of equal weight had been attainable. We suppose that Lord Waterford's recent and serious accident had rendered this burdensome post impossible for him. But in any case, we hope that an Irish Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant may be appointed. Mr. Plunket, if he would only take it, is as likely as any Conservative in the party to fill the post honourably. It would be better still if a Conservative Roman Catholic could be found, for he has access to a great many sources of information which are not open to the most moderate Protestant ; but we are not sure that the temper of the Irish Conservatives is not even now too bitter against the Roman Catholic Church to admit of their placing any confidence in a Conservative Roman Catholic,—which is a pity, as Roman Catholicism certainly has far closer affinities with Conservatism, than it has even with Liberalism. But even if Lord Carnarvon obtains the help of Mr. Plunket, of course Ireland must continue to be the chief difficulty of the Administration. If the Government abandon all thought of renewing any part of their Crimes Act, their Conservative supporters will be justly dismayed, disgusted, and scandalised. If they propose to renew any part of it, however frankly the mass of the Liberal Party may support them, they will have at once to face a storm of poisoned arrows, which it will take no little equanimity to endure.
But the difficulty of the Administration will undoubtedly be its foreign policy. With Lord Salisbury at the Foreign Office, and Lord Randolph Churchill at the India Office, both men who have lavished insults on Russia and insults which, in Lord Randolph's case, at least, it is absolutely impossible to explain away,—with the craving for a coup which is almost inherent in any merely ad interim Government just holding on for the elections,—and with the further knowledge that in finance or anything depending on finance, a coup is impossible while the Government remains in a minority,—the craving to make a hit in foreign affairs will, of course, be extreme. Yet the difficulty must be increased by the astounding rashness of the two men on whom our foreign affairs must in the main depend,—by the extraordinary character of Lord Randolph Churchill's former professions concerning the right policy in Egypt, and by the bitter animosities which both of them mast have excited amongst the statesmen of Russia. With a fiery Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, and a political Puck responsible for the Dependency which is most deeply interested both in our Russian and our Egyptian policy, it is very hard to conceive either that if any coup is attempted it will not be a mighty failure, or that none will be attempted as every sane politician must hope.
But in any case, the new Government must be a most interesting experiment. Its very essence is an attempt to combine strong and, in many respects, very repugnant, personalities,—the personality of an English Coriolanus, of a would-be Gracchu.s, and of a short-tempered Cato,—in the same
Cabinet ; and to see which of them wins the day. Perhaps none of them may win it ; but the three forces acting at the same point will hardly result in equilibrium. We may probably have as a result a very odd political zigzag, and we can only hope that the zigzag will not be prolonged.
Previous page
