Yesterday week, Mr. Shaw-Lefevre attempted to explain the Conservatism of
London to a meeting organised by the Bermondsey Liberal and Radical Association ; but Mr. Shaw- Lefevre's explanations seem to us to make the question rather more obscure than before. In the first place, he said that London has no healthy discipline in local self-government, which is true ; but it is also true that when local freedom is denied to people who cry out for it, the sense of grievance is very great, and that the people who are not listened to become more Radical than ever. Then he said that -certain districts of London are the haunts of the rich spending classes, which is also true ; but is it not true that many of the very poorest districts have returned strong Conservatives and rejected the Radical candidates ? Then, again, he said that local -questions are often much more important in determining the political opinion of London than general politics ; but if it be so, -why is it that those who on local questions hold the views which Londoners most favour, hold strong Conservative opinions on -the larger political questions ? For our own part, we believe -that London is less interested in local policy and more interested in general policy than almost any other section of the Empire, -and that it is because London has shrunk with something like horror from Home-rule, that it has returned so overwhelming a majority against Home-rule.
Previous page
