Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

promoting, the introduction of the only substitute for that system possible in American Universities. A writer in 'The Times' of August gives an interesting account of the Fraternities in the young men's Universities, the object of which is to promote something like college life: nor do their sisters lag behind, for they have formed for the same purpose Sisterhoods, called by called by the charming though not classical name-Sororities.

It is probable that movements of this kind will have the sympathy of the numerous American Rhodes scholars who return to their country, all of them, I believe, with happy experiences of college life in Oxford. Mr Rhodes' bequest was the realisation of an idea, which few will deny, to be imperial in the largest and noblest meaning of the term. Whatever may have been the errors of that great man, the Rhodes foundation will atone for them in the judgment of all but vindictive partisans. He wished to bind together by knowledge of each other and consequent good-will not merely the subjects of the British Empire but Americans of the United States and Germans. It is possible that had he lived he would have sought Rhodes scholars in even & larger area, but he did what he could in the time allowed him. There are in Oxford 180 Rhodes scholars by the end of this century 3000 of them will have passed through Oxford, educated men and effective in every department of life, carry

ing with them kindly memories and the indefinable influences of the place. Surely Rhodes will prove himself a peacemaker, masterful and Napoleonic though he was.

The Rhodes scholars come from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, South Africa, Bermuda, Jamaica, Newfoundland, the United States, and Germany. The selection is made in the countries from which they come, on the grounds of intellectual and moral excellence, with much regard to physical and athletic prowess,

for in English-speaking communities at least, the last kind of ȧpérn is valued as highly as it was by the Greeks, who were not deficient in intellectual gifts. The Rhodes scholars have made their mark and held their own in the schools and in athletics. They have been cordially received by the young Oxonians, who have something to teach them and learn from them, both in views of life and in vocabulary. It was feared by some of the authorities that the new-comers might be less amenable to discipline than might be desired-there was no need for fear: they conform cheerfully to rules which, for them, have the charm both of novelty and old-world quaintness: they are happy in Oxford, and sorry to leave it, as the writer knows from frequent testimony: Rhodes' purpose is on its way to complete achievement.

But it is impossible adequately to describe the undergraduate: like the person of Cleopatra, he "beggars all description."

P. A. WRIGHT HENDERSON.

POLITICAL INTERLUDES-COMIC AND OTHERWISE.

BY SIR HENRY CRAIK, K.C.B., M.P.

DURING the Parliamentary recess a somewhat exaggerated amount of interest and discussion has been occasioned by two articles, which appeared in the months of December and January last, in the pages of a contemporary magazine. It is perhaps fortunate that the usual routine of political controversy is varied by some incidents of a ludicrous kind, and the prospects of the Unionist Party are promising enough not to be seriously clouded by any mists of misunderstanding that may arise from them. Personal gossip and the vague threatenings of mysterious combinations which expect to be taken by others at their own valuation, may always be trusted to arouse a little temporary excitement. But now that the first glamour has worn off, it may be well to subject them to a cool estimate, and to see what amount of serious consideration they deserve. By the experienced leaders of the party we may be tolerably certain that they are taken at their true value, and that they do not abstract an undue portion of that time and thought which are required for matters of real moment in the councils of the party. Statesmanship probably soon learns how to estimate the gossip of the Club and the Lobby and the theatrical threat enings of an obscure clique.

The first of these articles was entitled, "Mr Balfour's Sum in Subtraction," and purported to give to the leader of the party some unbiassed guidance as to those of his colleagues in the late Cabinet whom he might discard, or to whom he might assign merely ceremonial functions, in forming a new Government. With respect to the authorship of this anonymous essay in ultroneous advice it may be permissible to confess some embarrassment. It would be unjust, on the one hand, to the able editor of the magazine in question, were we to express any doubt as to the correctness of the clue to authorship afforded to us. The article professes to be written by one who is a member of the present Opposition in the House of Commons. But it is just as true, on the other hand, that to the honour of the present Opposition, be it said any surmise connecting the authorship with this or that member of that Opposition would be promptly repudiated by any one intimately acquainted with its composition. This is no matter for surprise. We do not easily attribute to any one, with whom we are in close or daily intercourse, action which would imply an abandonment of the ordinary rules of honour and of loyalty. Anonymous writing has, no doubt, certain very

manifest advantages; but no man of very strict honour will make it the vehicle for personal attacks which he knows perfectly well that he could not make in his own name without forfeiting the respect of those with whom he is constantly associating. The anonymous detraction of colleagues is a degrading task.

The article, by implication, if not expressly, excludes the hypothesis that its author assumes the title of "M.P." by membership, not of this, but of a former Parliament. But, by recalling incidents and personalities unfamiliar to those who have sat only in the present House, it gives indubitable evidence of having been written by some one whose Parliamentary experience is not at least confined to the present House of Commons. Further, there can be little hesitation amongst those who know the spirit which animates the present Opposition, in maintaining that in some very notable instances the verdict of the anonymous critic would be disavowed by an immense majority. To particularise further would be to imitate the methods of the writer himself; but it may surely be permitted to doubt whether the lukewarm praise accorded to one of the most devoted of Mr Balfour's lieutenants fitly expresses the ungrudging and whole-hearted loyalty which he commands amongst the rank and file of the party.

But, after all, apart from natural dislike of the personal appraisement of those with

whom we are closely associated, and doubts as to its good taste, is there any reason to think that the apportionment of office is any higher part of political discussion now than it was when it formed the engrossing pastime of Taper and Tadpole? The writer of the article is evidently a diligent student of Disraeli's novels, and enhances the brilliancy of his style by borrowing many of Disraeli's phrases. Has he failed to see his own picture in the mirror of Disraeli's sarcasm? Does he think that personal gossip becomes less degrading because it is not whispered in Lord Monmouth's waiting-room, or imparted with mysterious shakings of the head on the pavement of St James's Street, and is only conveyed through the medium of an anonymous article, to which an added piquancy is given by circumscribing its authorship within a comparatively confined circle?

To the great mass of the Unionist Party, whether within or without the House, the permanent interest of politics fortunately lies outside the range of these personalities. At this moment the questions at issue are of more vital and far-reaching importance than they have been, it may fairly be said, at any epoch since the earliest quarter of last century. Discussions about the leadership of the party have been disposed of, once and for all, by Disraeli's compendious epigram, which defined the leader as the man who leads. Amongst all the personal questions, that alone is of supreme interest,

and the answer depends on no passing whim, and no dexterity of individual appraisal, but on the spontaneous and inevitable verdict which is given by the Tribunal of Necessity, against which there is no appeal. Where the leader is to find his chief lieutenants, or, in other words, those who will help him in his fight in the country and in Parliament, is a question which will be decided by the exigencies and fortunes of that fight. The disposal of places in the official hierarchy is really of comparatively little moment. It causes excitement amongst those who have personal aims to attain, and on it depends the momentous issue as to which of different aspirants are to write themselves "Right Honourable." In the case of the great administrative offices the settlement of that matter must have powerful effects, but they are confined to the sphere of administration, and do not affect the general current of political feeling, whether in the country or in Parliament. Even within the administrative sphere, their importance is much mitigated by the steadying force of official tradition, which acts as a powerful solvent of personal idiosyncrasies.

Individual merit or demerit will always form an attractive subject of discussion amongst the members of a party, and within certain limits such discussion is not only natural, but inevitable. But that general consensus of opinion, which shapes itself insensibly amongst a party, forms the most valu

able, and probably the most correct, verdict. A leader who keeps in touch with his party cannot fail to be impressed with it, unless he lacks some of the most essential qualifications for his post. But such general consensus is made more difficult, and not more easy, by transferring such discussion to the pages of a magazine, by exposing its problems to the gaze of unsympathetic as well as of sympathetic audiences, and by advancing a claim on behalf of anonymity, to speak in the name and with the authority of the whole party within Parliament. To do so is an offence to political, as it would in other circumstances be to social, loyalty. That, in present circumstances, it involves a rather ludicrous inopportuneness of occasion is perhaps a matter fitted to stir the sense of humour more than that of indignation.

Whether it

In the January number of the same magazine the editor returned to the subject, and claimed, with regrettable truth, that the article had "excited lively interest." was, as he adds, "necessarily resented by prominent politicians scheduled for shunting from the next Unionist Cabinet, is open to doubt, if we take a reasonably respectful view of the calibre of such politicians. That, as he goes on to say, "it met with hearty approval among the Unionist rank and file," is a dictum which many, at least, amongst that rank and file will emphatically deny. We can well dispense

with the lineal descendants declaration of the Confederate

of Taper and Tadpole, even though they may barb the arrows of their sarcasm with a literary skill and a command of epigram to which their prototypes could not pretend.

The second article appeared in the same magazine in January, and bore the mysterious title of "The Confederacy," with an authorship as loftily assigned to "A Confederate. We are

not admitted very closely into the confidence of this all-powerful Camarilla: it rests securely upon its widespread fame. "Much," we are told in the opening sentence, "has been written and said of the Confederacy during the last few years, true and untrue." [The attributes of veracity and inveracity do not belong, we presume, as the usual rules of grammar would lead us to expect, to the last few years, but to what has been written and said.] It is sad to have to plead guilty of crass ignorance; but the present writer must sorrowfully confess that the volume of oral and written testimony has passed entirely over his head, and that he never even heard the name of this dread engine of political power until he read the blood - curdling revelations of "A Confederate." As the information would have been "mixed," he has at least escaped the untrue as well as the veracious; so there is perhaps the less ground for regret.

Against the youthful and ingenuous, although terrifying,

no such charge can be brought as was suggested by the other article. Its author in no way misuses his anonymity, and infringes no maxim of loyalty or good taste. He displays himself as a conspirator with perfect good manners, and his unruffled confidence in the secret power which reposes in the mighty councils of himself and his fellow Confederates is united with a genial good-nature and self-complacency that conquer our good-will. He is ready to bludgeon us: but at least he will never stoop to the poisoned weapons of personal gossip. We would rather breathe the same air with him than with "M.P." But did no other reader have the passing suspicion, which one at least must own at first suggested itself to his mind, that the whole of this melodramatic revelation was a wicked hoax, perpetrated by an orthodox Cobdenite for the discomfiture, by ridicule, of the Tariff Reformers? Only the conviction

that a sense of

humour was not a strong point with the orthodox Cobdenite cast a doubt upon that momentary suspicion. But better proof of its falsity was soon forthcoming. The frolicsome spirits and the boyish ingenuousness of "A Confederate" rapidly dispelled it. No astute snare lurks in these schoolboy periods and in that unconscious humour. The "M.P." of December has a pretty dexterity in epigram, a good turn of style, and no little proficiency in the art of rather biting sarcasm. His

« AnteriorContinuar »