TOPICS OF THE DAY.
-.■011.■■
TORY ELECTIONEERING.
IT is not difficult, after the recent speeches of Lord Iddesleigh, Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, Lord George Hamilton, and Mr. Stanhope, and the declaration published by Lord Salisbury on Tuesday, to discern the line which the Tory tacticians intend to follow during the campaign. They have evidently decided to consider their party as still in Opposition, to put forward no programme, to criticise the Liberal programmes as effectively as they can, and up to December to conciliate every
interest," every group detached in any way from the great parties, and every wavering or apparently wavering fraction among the Liberals. The evidence as to the resolution to abstain from a programme is to be found in the speech of every Tory chief. Even if Lord Salisbury had not officially repudiated the intention of putting one forward, the gentlemen we have named are not so much alike either in their ideas or their methods of electioneering as to have hit by accident upon formulas which are practically identical. They all disown any design of laying down a programme. They all declare their future policy in words so vague and so general as to admit of any interpretation their audiences may prefer. The proof, again, of the resolve to criticise is in every Tory speech. From Lord Iddesleigh down to Lord Cranbome, all speakers assail Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto, they denounce Mr. Chamberlain's proposals, or they repeat over and over again the old stories about the mismanagement of foreign affairs. It would be natural, at least for the more erratic members of the party, to suggest at the close of their speeches alternative lines of action ; but that has evidently been prohibited. The cue given is to criticise freely, and to stop at criticism ; and they do criticise, very freely, and do stop at criticism. And, lastly, the courtship of all interests, groups, and fractions is patent to every onlooker. For the Irish, the most important group in the industrial cities, there is the attempt to govern through the ordinary law, supple- mented by Lord Carnarvon's honeyed words and Lord G. Hamilton's promises to strain British credit in supporting Irish projects. As Mr. Morley tersely put it, Ireland is to be won by a policy of "soft words and hard cash." The depressed trades are granted a Commission of Inquiry. The farmers are told—not by the chiefs, but by the free-lances and the journals—that foreign corn may yet be taxed, and that foreign cattle shall be. The shipowners are comforted with abuse of Mr. Chamberlain. The lawyers are assured that the Liberals accuse them of arresting land-transfer, and intend, in revenge, to make them poor. The publicans are cautioned to beware of Local Option. The Jingoes are bidden to wait and see what Sir Drummond Wolff will send them. The Clergy are urged to believe that only the Tories will stand by the Establishment. Above all, the Moderates are cautioned, advised, persuaded, flattered in every conceivable way, being even assured that if they will only come in they shall have the first place in the counsels of the party, that the tail shall wag the dog. Every one, in fact, who it is hoped may rat, is offered something, if it be only a promise, as a reward for ratting ; while Conservatives are kept in heart by an assumption that the verdict of the country must be given in their favour, each leader in succession assuring them, with a confidence which, if we thought it real, we should feel to be pathetic, that Government will "next Session" do this or that.
We feel no irritation at these tactics, for we hold the result of the election to be already past discussion. The greatest difficulty Mr. Gladstone will find will be to drill a majority almost too numerous for discipline, and to prevent its indulging in freaks in the very wantonness of strength. The new Parliament will resemble the Parliament of 1832, and need the curb far more than the spur. Moreover, the Tories have a full right to persuade all the voters they can, and can hardly be expected in fairness not to be conciliatory--at least, up to the point at which prin- ciples are in danger. They have passed that point about Ireland ; but, for ought we know, they may think the shipowners wronged, may hold that publicans are in danger of unfair restraints, and may sympathise from their hearts with the woes of conveyancers onto! work. They certainly are sincere in their liking for Estab- lishments; and no being merely human can assert that they do not expect something of some kind to result from the artistic patience Sir Drummond Wolff is displaying on the
Bosphorus. But looking on as spectators with a purely historical interest in the struggle, we cannot compliment the Tory leaders on the ability of their strategy. They do. not see, as we view the situation, where power lies, and are pursuing with household suffrage a policy only wise whex. the suffrage was a limited one. With nations in move- ment they are trying to bribe clans. When voters were few, it was worth while to propitiate classes, or families,. or even individuals ; but when they are millions, even thou- sands are scarcely worth cajoling. Suppose the Tories win all for whom they are angling, and what difference will their winnings make ? They are, for instance, quite sincere about the Moderates. They really wish to gain them, for reasons not affecting this election only, and would be more than just to them, would even concede to Mr. Goschen at least the second place in their councils. They will not allure the Moderates, who, whatever they may do, are not going to swallow Lord Randolph Churchill ; but suppose they did, how many votes would that, make ? Five thousand ? Ten thousand ? A hundred thousand Grant even the largest number—which is preposterous—and what is that among a people ? Is it even as 'many as the number they will lose by their departure from their old Irish principles ? How many publicans are there when the bitter teetotallers are deducted ? or what is the number of shipowners as compared with that of sailors ? We do not say that shipowners ought not to be won, or that Tories, if they think shipowners right, are not bound as well as entitled to give them protection ; but to talk of that protection as able electioneering strategy is absurd. Those who say it are or may be quite sincere in their congratulations when a class goes over to them ; but they no more understand the facts than the silly journalists who parade the conversion of Mr. Dundas all over the Kingdom. Mr. Dundas may be a loss to the Liberals or a gain to the Tories from his abilities, or his eloquence, or his character ; but except for those attributes, what is the value of his conversion ? Suppose every Peer's heir-presumptive in the Kingdom. went over, and what would it matter to the result ? It is the people the Tories have to win, not this or that man, even if he can " influence " a hundred votes. One idea from some humble person, say a Primitive Methodist with something of Cobbett's gift, may influence a million. In avoiding pro- grammes, in suppressing principles, in softening differences, above all, in addressing "interests," " classes," " sections," instead of the Nation, the Tories seem to us to be wilfully throwing their chance away. That chance is not, and in the nature of things never can be, a hopelessly bad one. There is no people in the world with a history in which Conservatism— the genuine impulse of disbelief in change, of liking for what is, of reluctance to break with the past—does not lie deep among the very springs of its being ; or if there is, it is certainly not the English. There is no people in the world which has not a respect for determined rulers, for men who make of law a religion, for statesmen who tell the multitude that they are incompetent to judge, and are but deceiving themselves in judging. And there is no free people in the world which does not include masses of men convinced that the system around them is good, deserves praise and not contumely, and is, because it exists, in harmony with some general law. Yet Tories appeal to none of these feelings, use neither the self- distrust, nor the self-complacency, nor the immobility of the nation, but go about, when they touch general principles at all, talking of the evident need of progress, and the evident badness of social arrangements, and the evident good of marching, and only profess that they can innovate, and con- demn, and march better than the other side. Consequently, the half of the people who are by mental structure inclined to listen to what they say are utterly unmoved by them, and they have no more support from the masses than if
they were Moderates themselves. Clever electioneering 1 Why, any Lord Eldon, by simply saying, "I am unwilling to change the history of England," in an effective way, would touch deeper chords, and therefore secure more votes than these men do. Clever electioneering I Just remember what Scotchmen really are, and what their history proves them to be, and then remember also that Scotland in this Election will probably return three Tories.
Previous page
