TOPICS OF THE DAY.
MR. DISRAELI AT THE MANSION HOUSE.
" THERE is not much left of Dizzy, except his cheek." That somewhat brutal sentence was the commentary of an old Conservative who had voted for the party all his life after reading one of the Premier's speeches of this Session, and it would certainly not be modified by the address delivered at the Mansion House on Wednesday. It is not often that Mr. Disraeli excites anger in opponents outside the House of Com- mons ; usually they enjoy his humour too much, his rare, but delicious epigrams, and the dexterity with which he extricates himself from apparently hopeless dilemmas. They remember how on one occasion he, the sworn and daring advocate of Jewish Emancipation, was compelled by his position to go down to the House to speak in favour of Lord John Russell's Bill, yet resist its passing, and yet seem consistent to his own strongest convictions in getting through both tasks ; and how by flashes of epigrammatic genius he reconciled all these incompatible duties, and walked out stronger and more admired than ever. But there are limits to tolerance, and on Wednes- day Mr. Disraeli overpassed them. It is impossible for a Liberal to read without anger, or a Conservative without shame, those deliberate perversions of immediate history, those audacious efforts of imagination, those glittering sentences— glittering like stage spangles—with which the head of Her Majesty's Government strove to conceal the waste and the blunders of a Session, and to pose before the people like a man who had risen the higher because in running away he had run away up-hill. The audacity of the speech is positively won- derful. Long experience has so convinced Mr. Disraeli of the value of words, that he now half believes that any statement, if only it be daring enough, will extinguish the recollection of any transaction, however politically disreputable. There never was one, perhaps, more discreditable to a strong Government than the abandonment of the completion of the Judicature Bills. The Government had decided on a Court of Final Appeal, Parliament had twice voted the necessary abrogation of the Peers' jurisdiction, and nothing was needful but a formal Bill to complete the new arrangements ; when suddenly a few unknown Peers met in caucus, deliberated, and trans- mitted to Government their orders that the House of Lords should retain its jurisdiction. And thereupon the Premier, who always " falls with honour," who "never takes back a budget," who has a majority of fifty in the Lower House and a standing army of Mamelukes in the Upper, and who has, as he admits, no Opposition to criticise his acts, publicly abandoned his policy, and agreed to undo a work of years, which his own pet Lord Chancellor, his most confidential political friend, had cordially helped to carry out. These are the facts as they stand in history, and in the teeth of them Mr. Disraeli asserts in the Mansion House that his Government, which has done literally nothing in the matter but spoil the work of its predecessors and of its own hands,—" has reformed and reconstructed the Judicature of England." It is too bad, and yet it is scarcely worse than the Premier's account of his management of the Mercantile Shipping Bill. He brought in, through his lieutenant, Sir Charles Adderley, a lengthy and weak Bill to protect the lives of the sailors, con- voyed it slowly through the House, and then abandoned it, as matter of less importance than a Bill to enable Government to pretend to have improved the farmers' position. A private Member, furious at the prospect of the continued massacre of sailors, made on Thursday, 22nd July, a " scene " in the House ; the country suddenly awoke to what was going on, and the borough Tories signified that they could not face their constituencies. Instantly the Government turned round, and brought in a Bill which, bad or good, they could have brought in when the old one was abandoned, but which Mr. Dis- raeli, as he said himself, had rejected ; and after endless muddling succeeded in altering it till it became endur- able. That is history ; but this is Mr. Disraeli's account to his audience at the Mansion House. The Govern- ment which never, even during the scene with Mr. Plimsoll, had given a hint that it intended to obey him, had all along contemplated doing so. " While, then, giving up our Bill, we thought under this Act of 1873 something might still be done, and much might be done, to give energy and power to the Administration. It did appear to us that by increasing the staff of the Government, by issuing afresh more stringent in- structions, instructions more adapted to the circumstances and the information of the hour, we could have produced results highly satisfactory to the country. I think it was on the Monday that I announced that the Government would with- draw the Bill, but the Cabinet was to meet on the Wednesday, and—if I may presume to speak of Cabinet secrets—it would have to consider this matter. But in consequence of that dramatic scene which occurred in the House of Commons, which had a beneficial effect in eliciting some public sentiment which we had for six weeks looked for in vain, I asked them to assemble, and they unanimously agreed that we should ask for some further statutory powers. The Bill was introduced, and the feeling of the country was so great, that it assisted what was the policy of the Government, and we were enabled to do that in ten or twelve hours which otherwise we could not have done in ten or twelve days. We have been success ful." It " was not under pressure of public opinion, but by aid, of public opinion, that we have carried this measure." "Kicked, Sir ! God bless you, I was only hoisted on my journey from behind. I went along all the quicker." We doubt if Lever could have remembered, or Thackeray could have invented, of an Irishman a sentence rivalling in sub- lime impudence, that " We have been successful." We shall have Old Ocean next claiming the gold medal of the Royal Humane Society on account of the number of persons whom he has saved from drowning.
Scarcely less audacious, though not so palpably imaginative, were Mr. Disraeli's references to sanitary legislation. His Govern- ment, he says, came into power pledged to consider sanitary reform " the great object and need of the day." That is true, so far as that Mr. Disraeli was the man who said "Sanitas sani- tatum, omnia sanitas," and though we never heard that his party ever attempted to improve labourers' cottages, we are only too happy to accept the pledge ; but what have the Government done to redeem it ? They have passed an Act authorising municipalities, if they can raise the money, to pull down unhealthy rookeries in great cities, and to permit capitalists to build healthy houses on their sites. The Act is- confined to the great cities, and it offers few pecuniary facili- ties, but still it may be of some use, and is a fair beginning. Mr. Disraeli describes it as if it were the end, and declares his pledge fulfilled because Mr. Cross has passed it, because Sani- tary Laws have been " consolidated and reformed "—note the- insertion of that word "reformed," which is purely imaginary, the Bill having been specially introduced as a mere Consolidation Act, necessary as a preparation for future reform—and because Government has passed a Friendly Societies' Bill allowing those insurance companies of the poor to audit their own accounts ! The Government, it is true, did introduce a Bill to prevent the pollution of rivers, but they did it so badly—being apparently under some impression that a river, whether in Lancashire or Queensland, is still only a river—that it was first divided in half and then silently withdrawn, as the Artisans. Dwellings Bill would have been, had there been any opposition. We mentioned Irishmen just now as sometimes rivalling, at least in Lever's novels, Mr. Disraeli's displays of his great faculty, but the most typical Irishman would not tell his poor neigh- bours, " I'll improve your sanitary condition. If you'll buy a deferred annuity, and don't get it, I'll be sure not to complain ;" and that is what Government has done, and what Mr. Disraeli exalts himself for permitting it to do. The English people do not know much, and after the Tichborne experience one is tempted to think they will believe anything ; but they do subscribe to Friendly Societies, and will scarcely be convinced, even by bounce at a City dinner, that a law for letting unsound insurances.
alone will extinguish malaria, or purify water, or afford ventila- tion in crowded rooms. The Friendly Societies Bill a sanitary reform! Why not quote the Army Exchanges Bill as another, officers dying less frequently when they can choose climates for themselves ? Just imagine what could have been done in sanitary legislation, if a strong measure had been urged upon reluctant Members with the persistent peevishness displayed in thrusting forward the Agricultural Holdings Bill.
The same reliance upon audacity alone is exhibited by Mr. Disraeli in declaring that the Irish Coercion Bill—a mere Bill to continue Mr. Gladstone's and slightly weakening it—has "secured the tranquillity of Ireland for years," not one year having elapsed; in quoting Sir S. Northcote's well-intentioned, but rather feeble device for a sinking fund, as " the first frank and vigorous attempt to deal with the Public Debt of Eng- land," which Mr. Gladstone has been reducing by terminable annuities all his political life ; and in describing the new Contract and Conspiracy Laws, which were moulded by both parties in concert and are steeped in the democratic spirit, as Tory measures ; but we may pass over that, in order to discuss a final and supreme instance. Mr. Disraeli declares that one grand apology for any failures his Government may have made has been the absence of a homogeneous Opposi- tion. His enemies are so disunited and disorganised, that it is difficult to defeat them. There are three Oppositions, or rather four,--the members of Her Majesty's Government, " who want to be our successors ;" the Whig party, " whom we combat, but I will not say conquer;" the " powerful " Radical party ; and the Home-rulers ; and these four oppositions, each with their separate views, consume much time. That is a clever exaggeration of the disorganised condition of the Liberals, and justly called out cheers ; and it is no doubt true that a single Opposition is, for purposes of debate, more easy to deal with, as a regular army may be defeated more quickly than a guerrilla force. It is'also true that a single Opposition strong enough to assume office does strengthen Government, by calling out all its powers, enabling it to enforce discipline, and connecting its aversion to defeat with its stronger aversion to dishonour. But what has all this to do with the blunders of this Session ? When did these grand debates, which waste so much time, occur ? On what occasion have the four guerrilla camps made a combined resistance ? The Home-rulers fought the Coercion Bill ; the members of Her Majesty's late Government criticised the plans of the Exchequer ; the Whigs pecked sharply, if feebly, at the Agricultural Holdings Bill ; and the Radicals did their best to resist the reintroduction of Purchase ; but over what Bill did all four fight at once ? Has it not been the distinctive mark of the Session that they could not all four act together, even in separate groups ; that nothing was ever adequately criticised, and that the moment Govern- ment was in earnest, the proper attitude of opponents was ex- changed for a sulky or submissive silence? What great mea- sure has been stopped by Opposition waste of time ? Those promised in the Queen's Speech ? "No," says Mr. Disraeli, "not those, for of the eleven measures promised in that Speech we have carried nine." The accidental measures, then, such as the last Merchant Shipping Bill ? " No," says Mr. Disraeli ; " assisted, but not coerced " by the public, we made that our great success. Army Exchanges ? No, that was carried. What was it, then ? Did ex-officials and Whigs and Radicals and Home-rulers combine to talk out the Irish Bill ? No, that went through. Was there, in fact, any measure whatever, or any line of policy, or any proposal upon which the four factions agreed to waste Parliamentary time ? There was none, and the disorganisation of Opposition quoted as a reason for failure is an audacious use made of a casual fact, for a purpose with which it has no connection whatever. The four- headed dog has been more powerless than if it had one head, and Hercules yet stands up to complain that he has had four beasts to kill. He is a little too soon, for his audience, un- observant as it may be, still saw the fight, and know that the only difficulty of the Tory General was his own inability to inspire his overwhelming forces with either a purpose or a plan.
Previous page
