THE " SPECTATOR'S " POLITICS.
[To THY EDITOR Or THR SPECILTOR."]
Srs,—There is a correspondence proceeding at the present time in the columns of the Lancashire Daily Post (Preston) as to the political opinions of your valuable paper. It has arisen owing to the editor of the Lancashire Daily Post having given an extract from a leading article in your recent issue, which article was considered derogatory to the Unionist cause, and especially likely to cause embarrassment to the Unionist Party at the present time otherwise the said paper would not have published it. The readers of the Lancashire Daily Post were invited to take note that the criticism of the Opposition was a criticism by a Unionist paper, and a correspondent has objected to that statement, at the same time alleging that the Spectator is Liberal in politics. May I ask if you will kindly inform me through your columns whether the Lancashire Daily Post or its correspondent is correct P—Thanking you for the favour of a reply, I am, Sir, &e., "NOT CONVINCED."
[It is not easy to take our correspondent's question seriously. We may point out to him, however, one or two matters of fact. The Spectator has never ceased to denounce Home Rule and to support the Union. It has opposed the Parliament Bill again and again as it opposed the Budget, and has only advised the Lords not to resist the passage of that Bill because they could not make their resistance effective. It has again and again denounced the present Government for their willingness to bow down to the Nationalists on theone baud and the Socialists on the other. Finally its editor has had the signal honour of being denounced by name by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in language of personal abuse hardly to be parallelled in the world of politics in recent years. If this constitutes a Liberal newspaper we know not how to escape that appellation. The Spectator is, of course, a Unionist paper and a loyal supporter of the Unionist Party, though it does not consider that loyal support is best rendered by servility and sycophancy to party leaders. If an absolute determination to resist Rome Rule under any alias, whether called Federalism or Repeal of the Union, is a test of Unionism, we venture to say that the Spectator will stand that test as well as any Unionist news- paper in the country. South, in his sermon on "Plainness of Speech," tells us how the false prophets spent their "courtly prophecy" on the King of Israel, and then "sent him in a com- pliment to be knocked on the bead at Ramoth Gilead." Jehoshaphat, however, South goes on, "smelt the parasite through the prophet." The preacher then describes how Ahab hated the man who would not prophesy smooth things. " Ah, that was his crime. The poor man was so good a subject and so bad a courtier as to venture to serve and save his prince [party] whether he would or no." We hold that every Unionist editor should take this lesson to heart. What,- ever may be the accusations of disloyalty brought against us we do not intend to send the Unionist Party "ii • compliment to be knocked on the head at Ramoth Gilead." Unionists we are, and Unionists we shall remain.—En. Spec- tator.]
Previous page
