m\v^ t POLITICAL SPEECHES THE RIGHT HON. GEORGE J. GOSCHEN, M.P. l'KINTI£D BY FRANK MURRAY, 9 AND II YOUNG STREET, nniX BURGH. POLITICAL SPEECHES THE RIGHT HON. GEORGE J. GOSCIIEN M.P. DELIVERED DURING THE GENERAL ELECTION 1885 EDINBURGH ANDREW ELLIOT, 17 PRINCES STREET 1886 Jc 507 0^7-^ CONTENTS. PllEFACE I. Speech at St. Leonards, Sussex, 18th September iJ The new Political Situation Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto The Position of Lord Hartington c^Heform of Procedure cr> Reform of the House of Lords . CO Local Government '■- The Land Question ^ Competition of Parties for Popular Measures '~^ Mr. Morlcy on Whigs and Radicals e/i Utopian Ideas .... •^ Achievements of the Old Liberals e/i ^ The Lidividual and the Community ^ Free Education .... t" Ireland ..... — Conservative Flirtation with Parnellites . CD An " Irish National Council " . CD II. Speech at Edinburgh on the 7th October 1885. The Contest in the Division The Irish Difficulty Attitude of Conservatives to Procedure Their Relations with the Parnellites The Policy of " Hard Cash " . Mr. Parnell and Protection Conservative Change of Front . Local Government Reform The Parish ... Shortcomings of Local Authorities Consequent Demand for State Interference / 8 10 n 11 12 13 14 16 18 19 19 ■21 22 22 23 25 26 26 27 isiJiiV) V 1 VI Contents. Disestablishment In England In Scotland Dr. Cameron's Motion . School Fees An " odious and alioniinable " Tax Possible Consequences of Free Education Solidarity of all Classes . III. Speech at Edinburgh on the loth October 1885. Lord Salisbury's Manifesto His Omissions .... His Local Government Scheme . Sale of Land held by Corporate Bodies . Present Position of Land Need of facilitating Transfer Multiplication of Small Holdings desirable But not through Local Authorities Municipal Socialism and its Friends Democratic Respect for Rights of Property Exaggerated Exj)ectations The Rolls of Pauperism . Breakages of Civilisation Depression of Trade Objections to the Commission . " Quit ye like Men " IV. Speech at Haddington on the 13th October 1885. Mr. Haldane's Candidature Conservative Appeal to Moderate Liberals Why to be rejected Disorganisation of Conservatives Their Attitude to the Budget Their Attitude to Free Trade Their Conduct in Office . Fallacious Claims of Legislative Success Lord Salisbury's Foreign Policy The Need of Continuity The Object of Liberal Unity A Troubled Future Conloits. Vll V. Speech at Glasgow on the 14th October 1885. Protest against Political Abstention A Programme better than a Cry " Kindling the Democracy " Taxation, Imperial and Local . Taxes on Land Taxes on Labour Taxes on Capital A Graduated Income-Tax Expenditure and Economy Vigilance in respect of Sources of National Wealth The Royal Commission . Foreign Competition and British Wages The Cheapening of Necessaries . Conditions of Future Prosperity Importance of Foreign Affairs . And of Close Union with Colonies Penal Taxation no Remedy for Distress PAOE 69 69 70 7t 71 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 79 80 80 81 82 VL Speech at Hendon, Middlesex, on the 21st October 1885. Mr. Milner's Candidature The Call for Liberal Unity Grounds of Confidence in Liberal Leader;^ Controversies within the Liberal Party . The Authorised and the Unauthorised Programme Common Sense and Utopianism Allotments ..... Position of Agriculture .... Condition of the Labourer Co-operative Farming .... Foreign Competition and Industrial Education Liberty of Trade essential Past Work and Present Accusations " Arm-chair Politicians " 84 85 86 87 88 90 92 93 94 95 96 97 97 98 Vlll Contents. VII. Speech at Brighton on the 4th November 1885. The Multitiuk' of Speeches Lord Salisbury in the Past and Present The Conservatives and Ireland Irish Loyalists deserving of Sympathy Real Meaning of Home Rule . A Distinct Issne for the Country The Revival of Protection The Fall of Prices and the Consumer . Inconsistencies of Fair Trade . How to meet Foreign Competition By the Jlaintenance of our Naval Supremacy By Continuity in our Foreign Policy . And in the Treatment of our Colonies . By Sound Finance By the Organisation of Secondary Education By good Sanitary Conditions . The Development of Co-operation A Practical Ideal PAGE 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 112 113 114 114 115 116 117 A^lll. Speech at the Rosebery Banquet, Edinburgh, on the 13th November 1885. The Empire ........ Interests, Sentiments and Duties ..... 119 120 IX. Speech at Edinburgh on the i6th November 1885. The Issue at the Coming Election All Classes interested in Local Government Reform And in Land Reform .... Depression of Trade .... 123 124 125 126 Contents. IX PAGE Criticism ami Entliusiasm .... 127 Instances of Criticism ..... 128 Recofjnition of Eiithusiasin .... 129 All Interests interwoven .... 130 The Mania for Pledges .... 131 Speech at Edinburgh on the lyth November 1885. Personalities of this Election . Fal.se Statements as to Religious Belief False Statements as to Jlission to Egypt Conditions of that Mission The Arrangement of 1876 The Control of 1879 . Our Future Policy in Egypt Dwellings of Labourers in Towns Objections to providing them at Public Expense P>etter Methods .... Dwellings of Labourers in the Country Proposed Fixity of Tenure in Cottages Compulsory Insurance .... The Best Conditions for British Industry 133 134 135 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 XL Speech at Edinburgh on the 23d November 1885. Proper Attitude towards Working-Classes National Expenditure . Fallacious Totals Automatic Increase of Expenditure Effects of "Grants-in-Aid" Jlisleading Tests of Expenditure Distribution of Taxation The Burdens of Land and Houses "Who Pays the Rates ? . And Bears the Taxes ? . All Classes interested in Economy And Efliciency of Administration Illusory Legislation 146 147 148 149 149 150 151 152 153 154 154 155 156 Contents. XII. Speech at Edinburgh on the 24th November 1885, Critical Character of Inipeiuling Election The New Parliament probabl}' Sliort-lived Definition of Personal Position The Authoritative Programme Procedure Local Government Land .... Ireland .... Our Duty to Irish Loyalists The House of Lords The Churches of England and Scotland National Economy Pensions Government Establishments Growth of Sentiment in Politics Triumphs of Public Opinion Foreign Policy . The Three C's . Continuity Clean -handedness Courage Our Duty among the Nations . 157 158 158 159 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 166 167 168 169 169 170 170 171 173 173 PREFACE. The republication of Election Speeches must always be a matter of some delicacy. The colour given to various controversies is generally laid on somewhat thickly in a period of political excite- ment, and topics of temporary interest are lifted into abnormal importance. But, in the late contest in the Eastern Division of Edinburgh, my own position, as a Candidate unopposed by a Conservative, relieved me to a great extent from the necessity of reiterating party common-places, and from taking part in the recriminatory rhetoric Avhich is unavoidable in ordinary elections. I was thus enabled to devote a considerable part of my attention to social and economic questions of general and permanent interest, and also to treat, from an independent point of view, the impending Irish crisis, the issues involved in which were not at that time directly submitted to the constituencies, but have since become of absorbing interest. The discussion of these subjects was naturally interspersed with matters of lesser moment, and with some warm polemics. But, in acting on the suggestion of friends that I should reprint my Addresses, I have felt that it would not be right for me to publish only selected speeches or special passages. If I published at all, it seemed to me that I was bound to reproduce practically all my utterances. I did not wish to make an ex post facto selection, retaining only what I might wish remembered, and omitting what I might wish forgotten. It woidd ha\'e been unfair to leave out prophecies, of which the ;iccuracy is already threatened, or expres- sions of confidence, which experience has shown to have been con- ceived in too sanguine a vein. Thus I present my speeches as I delivered them, only here and there omitting some obvious repeti- xii Preface. tions. Olio speech, made in a Ward Meeting at Edinburgh, was so iiuieh interrupted, that it eould not he rejnoduced as spoken, hut I have embodied tlie most important portion of it — a discussion of the Egyptian Question — in another address, in which, as a matter of fact, I had originally intended to include it. I will not deny that, in correcting these speeches for the press, I have sometimes smiled at the extraordinary change in the general political situation which has taken place since November last. I must ask those who read me, indulgently to carry themselves back for tlie luoinent to the circumstances of that day. G. J. GOSCHEN. London, Wi March 1886. I. Delivered at St. Leonards, on the 18th September 1885. Mr. GoscHEN said — I do not know hoAV many of you in this xhe New room I may address as In-other electors of the Rye Division of Political Sussex. I am here to-night in my capacity as an elector for this Situation. Division, and I am here to congratulate this Association on having taken an early opportunity of showing that the south-eastern parts of the United Kingdom are not behind the rest in their strong interest in the great controversy which is now being waged throughout the length and breadth of the land. AYe are some- times told that in the south-eastern and southern parts of the United Kingdom we have not advanced to the political intelligence which is displayed in Lancashire and the northern constituencies. Let us do what in us lies to disprove the charge. The south of England has lost some of its representatives, and the numbers thus saved in the representation have been distributed among more populous neighbourhoods. Let us look to it that we make the best use of the representation left to us. I do not know that there has been any more momentous time in the political history of this country than the present. Xot only has there been a new exten- sion of the franchise, but the electoral divisions have been re- adjusted, and a process has been going on in politics which might be likened to the breaking up of the regimental system in the Army. Still, we must not exaggerate. Much is said now about the transfer of power to the masses. I prefer to speak of the reparti- tion of power, because power must remain, and I trust will remain, distributed amongst cdl classes of this country. Some people talk as if certain classes had lieen disfranchised, because certain other classes have been enfranchised. If that were so, it would be a result which all would liave to deplore ; but it is not the case. 2 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. Power is still distributed among all classes of the country, notwith- standing the immense change which has taken place. But it is not only the new Reform Act which makes the present moment so important. New questions have come to the front, new problems are pressed forward for solution, and, above all, we have looming before us a danger of which it is almost impossible to exaggerate the significance. In the next Parliament, both of the old parties in the State may find them- selves — probably will find themselves — confronted with eighty determined men, Avith regard to whom it has been announced beforehand that, unless their demands are conceded, they will make all legislation impossible. This announcement by the Irish Nationalist party must be present to the mind of every elector and every candidate. This, then, is the situation at the present moment. We have new forces opposed to us ; we have to deal with new questions ; and in this new conflict on new ground we are confronted by menaces which threaten the very existence of Parliament. You will judge with me whether such facts do not call for steadiness. I do not propose to trouble you particularly to-night with any references to myself. In a few weeks' time it will fall to my lot to address a constituency in Scotland to whom it will be my duty to state my opinions upon every important political question in which they are interested, and I shall have to go through the process, called " heckling " by the Scotch, which consists in a very lively cross-examination of the candidate — a process which I expect a good many of those who arc here present will apply to my friend Mr. Inderwick in the various meetings which he will hold. Let me add, as an elector of this Division, that I wish Mr. Inderwick most cordial success. What I desire to do to-night is to address you on a few, but they must be a few only, of those many difficult questions which have lately been brought to the front, remembering that we have not only to deal with programmes, but with the enunciation of many principles, of many doctrines, of many views, some of which are of startling novelty. We are told that we must distinguish between the actual programme of the party, and those more general views which every Liberal is fully at liberty to put forward. Yes, I shall not fail to bear this in mind. It has been well said that every member of the Liberal party is at liberty to state his views. SL Lconai'ds, xZIJl September 1885. 3 But let it be distinctly understood that it is a right and a i)rivilege "vvhich will be equally claimed by all sections. I do not know whether all who are in this room to-Jiight -a^q Mr. Gladstone aware that we have at last a statement coming from our great ^^i^'fe^to. leader, j\Ir. Gladstone, published this afternoon. We have at last an authoritative statement of the main (questions with regard to which the Liberal party will be invited to act together. I have only been able to read Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto within the course of the last hour, and consequently it would be impossi])le for me to do justice to its contents. To-morrow throughout the length and breadth of the country, every politician, to M'hatevcr party he belongs, will be studying this important documcnit, clothed, as they will find it to be, with all the dignity of a statesman who numbers more than fifty years' service, with the deepest and most attentive interest. One thing I think I can say with regard to it at once. Those who have read the speeches of a statesman, who has been well The Position called by a Liberal paper "The Heir-apparent to the Leadership" <>/ ^-°>'^ — 1 mean Lord Hartington — will find that the four great questions '^'^ '"'^ °*^' which he has put forward in his programme, form the main items of the Manifesto which you all will read to-morrow. I would like to say one word with regard to Lord Hartington. Lord Harting- ton is a modest man — a great disadvantage in these somewhat pushing days. But I think that his modesty and his occasional self-eifacement do not justify shortness of memory on the part of the party wdiom he has served so well. Generals do not become great and earn the gratitude of their country only when they lead an army to victory. It sometimes falls to the lot of Generals to have to manoeuvre an army inferior in numbers in the face of a hostile army elated by victory. That was the case of Lord Hartington. After the disastrous days of 1874, when we were heavily beaten, and when for a time we had been deprived of the guidance and the presence of our illustrious chief. Lord Hartington led our shattered and disorganised force in a manner which commanded the confidence of the country and the respect of his very opponents. These are services which ought not to be forgotten, especially when one remembers that the patience and the bravery which he displayed when in command were equalled by the loyal self-abnegation with which he at once handed over, when the time came, the reins of power, and stepped down into the position of a General of Division. !N"o member of our party 4 Speeches by the Rigid Hon. G. J. Goschen. lias the riglit to deny that Lord Hartington is a veteran Liberal, fully entitled to the contidence of every one of us. But I saw the other day that his speech had been called a wet blanket. Well, it was not a wet blanket, and, considering what we have been told the authoritative programme of the Party is to be, you can judge whether it was fair on the part of my friend, Mr. John j\Iorlcy, for whom I have a great respect, to call it a wet blanket. But "entlemeii, after all there are some moments when a wet blanket is rather a useful article. If there is too much combustible material about, a wet blanket can have its uses, and I am not sure whether it is for those who are themselves accustomed to deal in combustible materials to complain that there are others who are standing by Avith a wet blanket in case of need. Xow, what are the points on which the Liberal Party is united ? In the first place, Reform of \ thiulc we are all agreed upon this, that there must be immediate Proceuure. rgfonn in the procedure of the House of Commons. The majority, whichever party they may belong to, must not be defrauded by the minority of their opportunities, not to serve themselves, but to serve the majority of the country, which sent them into the House of Commons to do their duty. Those who are not in the House of Commons cannot realise how the members must feel when, ni"ht after night, they see devices tried which entirely check their activity, and which not only defeat the measures Avhich are being proposed, but degrade the great assembly of which every member of the United Kingdom ought to be proud. The constituencies must understand that we shall not be able to carry out their wishes unless we have the mandate that the majority is to be supreme. But more than that, we must be able to ensure that Parliament shall be able to command what it has always done, the confidence and respect of the country. I say, then, that one of our earliest duties will be to i)lace ourselves in a position in which we can do our work well and worthily. If there are dangers and difficulties before us greater than any with which we have yet had to deal, we must feel that the nation is behind us, and deternnned that Parlia- ment shall do its work. Reform of A somewhat more critical subject is the reform of another the Heme portion of the Legislature, which, it is true, does not sufier of Lords. j^.Qj^^ obstruction as we sufi"er, but wliich is sometimes itself accused of obstruction. I am speaking of the House of Lords. Now, I have no hesitation in saying that I am myself strongly SL Leonards, iZth September 1885. 5 in favour of the existence of a Second Chamber, an authorita- tive strong Second Chamber, commanding tlie respect of the country. You will find that J\lr. Gladstone has touched this topic in a very delicate way, in the Manifesto which you will read to-morrow, and it is clear that from him we have not to expect any attack upon what may be called the existence of the House of Lords. But I am not at all sure that, in the in- terest of the Lords themselves — in the interest of the maintenance of a Second Chamber — serious reforms, in the spirit displayed by Lord Rosebery, ought not to be accomplished. From what I read in the utterances of those who arc best authorised to speak for the Liberal party, I do not think that legislation of any kind will be proposed at an early date with regard to the House of Lords. I believe that the House of Lords, if so minded, might escape the necessity of such reform ; for whatever may be the views in certain portions of the country, I believe that the feeling which exists in the majority of the Liberal party Avith regard to the House of Lords does not arise so much from their being an hereditary body, or an aristocratic body, as from this, that they are a permanent Conserva- tive or Tory Committee. Why should that be so ? Why should the majority of the Peers always be Conservative ? The Peers are under a great advantage as compared with members of the House of Commons. They have no constituencies. The Peers are not bound — as most members are, through our party system — to swear allegiance to any Parliamentary chief. If there were a body of Peers in the House of Lords who were not prepared to, vote at the bidding of a Minister, but who were prepared to judge of questions as they came before the House of Lords, simply from a national point of view — if sometimes they would venture to correct the mistakes of their own friends — if there was a body of men in the House of Lords not influenced by the passing feeling of the moment, who would decide without regard to party lines — the House of Lords would enjoy a confidence which it does not enjoy at present, and which it cannot enjoy so long as there is a per- manent majority in it belonging to either ])olitical party. I am not speaking against a particular majority, but T say that for a legislative body to have a permanent majority belonging to one political party in the State is a danger to that body itself. I pass to another point, on which I believe the Liberal party Local Gorcm- arc absolutely unanimous — the necessity to proceed forthwith, and f'lent. 6 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschcn, with the greatest energy, to the reform of Local Government and of Local Finance. I think that we are not only all agreed as to the fact that this must be at once taken in hand, but we are also agreed generally as to the principles on which that reform should take place. I recently read with great pleasure the following passage in a speech of INIr. Chamberlain : — " I want to build up a system of local government from below, from small beginnings. I would like to see no parish, no village, without some kind of local authority. I do not want to crush out the germs of local life, however small and insignificant they may appear. I want to foster them, and to promote the political education of the people. Then I want to see local authorities witli wider areas and larger functions to deal with local matters in districts and in counties, and in this way I should expect to find the whole country covered with a network of popular representative bodies." Now, gentle- men, I am the more in accord with every word of that passage which I have read to you, because it fell to my lot, when I was a member of Mr. Gladstone's previous Administration, to embody the principles which are here enunciated in a bill which I had the honour to submit to Parliament. I was much criticised at the time; but I held, as Mr. Chamberlain holds now, that the smallest village should know who its chief man Avas. I Avas anxious that we should create a sense of local responsibility, and I am not enamoured of Boards. There is something about a Board which, to my mind, does not inspire so much confidence as the opportunity of dealing with a man who can personally be held responsible. And so I proposed that in every village there should be some responsible head man. I was extremely anxious that throughout the rural communities you should be able to develop some civic life, which, as is said in the passage I have read to you, "might promote political education." I trust that the Liberal party will go forward on these lines — on broad lines — and that they will look not only to excellence and economy of administration — thougli those are most important points — but that they will also look to the interest which shall be taken in local affairs, and to the creation of a sense of public duty in every village in the country. Yes, gentlemen, public duty — not only public advantage, not only class advantage, not only the hope of securing the power to draw some pecuniary gain, but the sense that all our citizens should have some share in the government of this Si. Leonards, iSl/i September 1885. 7 great Empire — public duty in civic life aiul public duty in political life, without too much care or too much talk about the advantages to be derived by particular classes in the community! r have spoken of Local Government. I now approach that The Land other subject, which is foremost, perhaps, in the minds of most Q^^^^o'^- men on both sides at the present moment — the question of Land. I entirely go with those who are in favour of making land as saleable as consols. I entirely go with those who think that the w'hole system of settlement and entail, and the questions resulting from the custom of primogeniture, must be dealt with in the direction of setting land free as much as possible. To make land pass as easily as possible from hand to hand, must be one of our lirst duties, and it must be the business of our lawyers to find means by which it may be done. We must not be told that it is impossible. It is difficult, but it has been done in other countries, where the tenure of land is almost as complicated as in our own. I am as anxious, I believe, as any man in the Liberal party, that the number of those who possess freehold property should be increased as much as possible. And I go so far as to say that, even if the aggregate produce of the soil, if the wealth produced should be less under a system by Avhich land is more diffused and holdings are smaller, the social and political advantages of land being held, ay, and farmed, by an infinitely greater number of people, would counterbalance and outweigh the economical considerations on the other side. I go forward, there- fore, with those land reformers who are operating in this direction ; and one of the first duties of the new Parliament will clearly be to take these matters in hand. Now, it is said by some critics who have seen Lord Hartington's Compdiiion of speech, and, possibly, it may be said by some of those who will Parties for read Mr. Gladstone's ]\[anifesto to-morrow, that in these proposals nj^^ there is not much to which Conservatives could object. All I can say is, that, if this is the case, so much the better. Then the Liberal party will be able to achieve Avithout trouble those ol^jects which it has so long had at heart. I do not object to the Conser- vatives coming over to our views. Why should we ? I saw that Lord Randol)ili Churchill said that he agreed with every word of Lord liartington's speech. All I can say is, that I doubt whether Lord Hartington would return the compliment. If he could, that would prove that Lord Randolph Churchill, and those who may fol- 8 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. low liini, liave made a very considerable advance. But this does not prove tliat Lord Ilartington's programme is not Liberal. I attach great importance to the consideration of this point. Surely I shall have you witli me in this view % Do not think that any proposal ceases to be Liberal because the Conservatives are at last convinced that it is a proper proposal. Otherwise, what would be the result ? The moment the Liberals proposed their measures, the Conserva- tives, ceasing to have many principles Avhich are opposed to ours, would say, "Oh, we are perfectly ready to introduce the same Bills." Then are we to say that Ave will go further? Are the two great parties in the State to set up a kind of auction % And is political power to be knocked down to the men who are simply prepared to bid highest? There is some danger of such an auction being set up, but I believe that the good sense and the straightforwardness of the constituencies will help them to see through any such manoeuvres; and I believe, notwithstand- ing the late great measure of enfranchisement, that the adherence of the Liberal party to the old traditions will still command respect and support amongst the great bulk of the population. But not only do some Conservatives say they approve of the Liberal programme. There is considerable truth in a remark made, I think, by Mr. Chamberlain, that the Conservatives not only favoured the measures approved by what is called the Whig section of the party, but that they actually appropriated a very large number of Mr. Chamberlain's special and favourite proposals, and carried them into effect during the brief period of three or four Aveeks while they enjoyed poAver. During those three weeks their development Avas considerable. But the point Avhich I am anxious to enforce is this, that the country must not think that, because the Conservatives say that they approve of certain proposals Avhich Liberals also approve of, therefore those proposals cease to be Lilieral. Mr.Morleyon But the advanced section say, "If you arc not prepared for Whigs and changes " — I think they call them violent, but at any rate they Radicals. ^re very great, changes — " if you are not prepared for very great changes, why did you enfranchise the masses? The average Liberals must have knoAvn Avhen they enfranchised the masses that they Avould not be satisfied Avith such measures as had been pre- viously proposed." My ansAver is that the argument has been com- pletely shifted lately. The argument used to be that the masses SL Leonards, iZth September 1885. 9 should be enfranchised because enfranchisement broadened the basis of the Constitution, because it was right tliat every man should have a vote, and because Parliament would be enabled to ascertain better the wants and desires of the whole community; but it was not put forward that this change was to be used as a lever for the reversal of the traditions of the Liberal party. Mr. J. Morley said the other evening, " If there is any difference between the Eadical section and the Liberal section, it is simjily this, that the former are now resolved that we can no longer trifle and play with questions which have been settled in the popular judgment for ten or fifteen years, but must proceed to deal Avith them practically and seriously." My friend Mr. Morley is entirely in error in saying that there is a difference between the Eadical and Whig section in this respect. I believe that the Whig section is as determined and as resolved as the Radicals that we should go forward, and that we should not tviile and play witli ([uestions which have been settled in the public judgment for the last ten or fifteen years. I am delighted to think of the additional impetus which will now be gamed, and which will promote the settlement of those questions on which the country has made up its mind during this period. But when absolutely new doctrines are put forward, while it is right — no doubt, perfectly right — that a fair hearing should be given them by all sections of the Liberal party, it is also right that those who do not accept those doctrines should be allowed to examine and try them by the light of history, of common-sense, and of common experience. And here I say that those who oppose or criticise and examine measures of this kind ought not to be taxed with different motives from those which animate the other section of the party. I believe that we all wish for the same result, and I protest against men being denounced as selfish, or apathetic, or callous, because they cannot believe in specific proposals which do not commend themselves to their judgment, and which the light of history has hitherto proved to be impossible, to be incap- able of realising the objects which their authors wish them to realise. I say it is unfair to accuse those who diller from par- ticular views as to the best modes in which to proceed, of any indifference as to the end to be achieved. We should be wrong indeed, those of us who do not assent to particular proposals which we may think dangerous to the class for which they are proposed, — we should be traitors to our consciences and to our convictions. 1 o speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goscheu. if we dill not venture to stand forward with llie same courage as the authors of those proposals, and say in the face of our countrymen how we regard them. Utopian I have said I am as anxious as any advanced Liberal to increase Ideas. the numbers of those who occupy the soil, and I want to see as many of the population interested in the possession of freehold property as possible. Now, I am told that this system can be brought about by a process of allotments to be given by local authorities. They are to purchase land, and then to let it out in allotments. I do not think such a plan will succeed, although the granting of allotments would doubtless be desirable. I am as anxious as any one that every labourer in rural villages should have an allotment; but I am not convinced as to the particular method which has been proposed. But even if it should succeed, while I believe it will increase the comfort and the happiness of those Avho have the allotments, yet to hope that by such a system confided to local authorities you will be able to empty the work- houses, and to raise Avages throughout the United Kingdom — I say honestly, I think that is a Utopian idea. If it is Utopian, I entreat electors and candidates that at this critical moment of our history they should not sow seed which must come up, if not at the present moment, yet must come up some day in expecta- tions which Parliament, even Avith the most anxious desire to promote the object, may not be able to fulfil. I may once more quote from Mr. Morley. He says — " Surely it would be wrong to place before constituencies this cause and that cause ; and that then, when it had served its purpose, it should be put back." I entirely agree with Mr. Morley, and therefore I say, do not let us be misled by generous but Utopian dreams to think that we can do what has been proved to be impossible — namely, by Act of Parliament to increase the happiness of the masses. The question is put in this way. What can we do to augment the material resources of the poor % That is a problem which has taxed the energies, which has taxed the minds of statesmen and philosophers for the last 2000 years. It is a question which has been studied in Republics and under despotisms ; it has been studied in Constitutional countries, and the problem has not yet been solved. It is a problem which must engage the attention and the sympathy of every politician, but we cannot think that the moment has come when, by one stroke of the pen, by establishing local SL Leonards, \Zth September 1885. 11 authorities who will give allotments to the agricultural labourers, wo shall be able to raise the rate of wages throughout the United Kingdom. But it is said that Parliament, and tlie classes who have been Achievements hitherto holding power, have done nothing to improve the condi- of the Old tion of tin; industrious and most numerous class. I ask old ' ^^"' ^' Liberals in this hall — I ask those who have followed the politics of this country during the last forty years — I ask those who remember the services of Cobden, of Bright, of Yilliers, and of Gladstone — has nothing been done to improve the condition of the most numerous class ? Is bread no cheaper through the action of the Legislature under the guidance of the Liberal party? Have we not passed laws which have helped to raise the status of those classes of Avhom I speak ? Are we to forget the Editcation Acts ? Are we to forget the abolition of the Laws of Settlement? Are we to forget that we have enabled — as we were bound to enable — the workmg-classes to combine together, in order to use their united strength, so far as they could, to raise their wages ? Have we not done our best to abolish the laws which laid fetters on the industry of working men ? I think there is a large reward to those who have laboured in this field, in the improved condition of the masses of this country. I do not know whether they have improved as compared with the fifteenth century, but certainly they have improved in comparison with forty or fifty years ago. Wages are higher, clothes are cheaper, food is cheaper, the working man is better remunerated, and sanitary laws have been passed of the greatest possible service. It is a libel upon the Liberal party, which has for so many years been able to wield the destinies of this country, to say that they have done nothing for the most numerous and most industrious class of the people. Certainly let us go forward ; we must all recognise that new needs have sprung up, and that the great complexities of modern civilisation constantly require us to modify our views, and by no hard and fast lines to refuse to consider new proposals, however startling they may seem ; but let us not libel the }«ist ! One of the most favourite opinions of the present day — and not The Indi- only in this country, but elsewhere, — not only in our Colonies and vidnal and the in the United States, but on the Continent of Europe— is, that the ^''""""'"(y- time has come when the State and the community and local bodies must more and more interfere, and when there should be a 1 2 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschcn. substitution of a corporate conscience for the conscience of the individual man. Now, I hold by the conscience of the individual man. It seems sometimes as if the idea were going abroad that all corporations are virtuous, and that all individuals are rascals ; but, for my part, I do not believe that human nature clothes itself with every Christian virtue the moment it assumes the robes of an alder- man or the uniform of a functionary of State. There are good cor- porations and bad : there are good landlords and bad. But in these proposals, when the local corporations are made the arbiters of the destinies of society, I hope the question will sometimes be put, Can these corporations be so implicitly trusted as to put our destinies into their hands % You know I am in favour of invest- ing them with as much representative character as possible. But I do ask my fellow-countrymen to pause before they go too far in the direction of believing in the immaculate virtue and gener- osity of local authorities in comparison with the efforts of the individual. Free Educa- There is another subject, discussed in Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto, tion. upon which I should wish to say a few words, and which illus- trates the difficulty of the problem I have put before you, and the arguments which may be used on either side. It is the ques- tion whether education should not be free. I will not call it exactly "free education" — because education cannot be given gratis. The point is, whether a different set of people should pay for primary education from those Avho are paying for that educa- tion at present. That is the fair way of putting the question. The arguments with regard to free education are discussed by Mr. Gladstone in his Manifesto, and I think no one will read his views without seeing that, while he is open to conviction, his mind is against the system of free education. I am not going to spoil his arguments by retailing them to you at second hand, but I should like to say one word to enforce them by an argument which I think he does not use. As I am anxious that the individual should not be lost sight of in favour of substituting local authority upon every possible occasion, so I wish to maintain, as strongly as possible, the sense of parental duty. If a portion of the working-classes cannot afford to send their children to school, that may be an argument for lightening their taxation, and for easing their condi- tion in every way. But I do not thirdc that to dispense with the payment of the school fees is the best mode of dealing with this Si. Leonards y i'6ik Sep/ ember 1885. most difficult and iimst (■(imiilicitiil (picslion. J'crsoii;il experi- ence, in this county of Sussex, where we liave to deal with some very poor agricultural lahoui'ers, leads me to believe that it is not the school pence which stand in their way so much as the natural desire to secure the services of their children on certain occasions when urgently required. The payment of the school fees, far from causing them to feel irritated against education, makes them anxious that their child shall get full value for the money. I trust I am the last man to think that if anything can be done to pro- mote the cause of education, it is right to leave it undone. I have laboured in that cause, as far as I have been able, with all zeal. But I do not believe that education will be fostered by the free system, nor am I convinced that in countries Avhere it exists, more value is placed on education than is placed upon it here ; and I am not prepared at the present moment to accept the arguments on the other side. Yet there is much to be done in the way of education still. There is a period, perhaps more in the towns than in the country — between fourteen years and eighteen years — which is quite a blank in the education of the children of the industrial classes. For young persons of eighteen years there are evening classes, there are lectures, and many other means by which they can im- prove their education. But after the age of fourteen, they fre- quently have forgotten so much, that they are unable to avail themselves of the opportunities otlered to them. I rejoice to think that there is a movement in progress in the Midland Counties which aims at establishing an organization to continue the educa- tion of the working people between the ages of fourteen and eighteen. \Ye must, indeed, labour at the education of our people. We must feel — all of us, Liberal and Conservative alike — that, in view of the increasing competition which foreign nations raise against us in almost every department of trade, we have to look to it, that our working men shall be educated np to the highest possible standard at which working men ought to aim, and are entitled to aim, in their respective vocations. I trust you will see in what I have said, that I heartily concur in Inlamt. most of the work which the Liberal party has set itself to do, and I agree entirely wath that portion of it which has been })ut forward, on authority, as the work with which the Liberal party must at once commence to deal. But now let me allude once more c 14 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. GoscJicn. to a point, with which I commenced my observations. It is this, How are we to pass those measures on which we have set our hearts if we are to 1)e met T)y the Irisli members with an opposition such as that with which they have threatened us % What is the attitude of Great Britain to be in view of the menaces which have been uttered by the Irish Nationalist party % I am sure that all of you will have followed these painful episodes, and I believe there is no constituency in England or Scotland which will not exact from its members loyal allegiance to the integrity of the United Kingdom. Some one has lately said that it would be indeed a disgrace to England if we were to leave Ireland to be the cauldron of revolution. It would be a disgrace to England and a disaster to Ireland. In his Manifesto, Mr. Gladstone speaks, in such terms as become him, of the necessity of maintaining this unity. I am not able, on a first reading of the Manifesto, to see what measures, if any, he proposes with regard to Ireland ; but I think that Ave may all be certain that he will lead the Liberal party to resist every proposal which will in any degree shake, not only the unity, but the legislative unity, of the United Kingdom. Unity is not enough, for there might be simply unity under the Crown. There must be legislative unity between the; two countries. Conservative A great deal has been said with regard to tlie action of the Flirtation Conservative party with reference to the Parnellite members, and '^1^^'' rr; *1^® greatest possible indignation prevails amongst Conservatives at the fact that it should have entered into tlie heads of any Liberals that there could be any kind of understanding, , or any kind of alliance, between the Nationalist members and the great Conservative party. Sometimes it is convenient to have a short memory. I do not wish to say anything olfcnsive, and there- fore, when I am told that there is no understanding and no alliance, I at once accept tlie statement. It Avould be a disgrace to the Conservative party if there were any such understanding, and I believe it would shatter that party into two. But short of tliat, I wonder whctlier the charge of coquetting with the Irish members would be disclaimed with the same eagerness by the Conservatives. All I can say is this, that if there was no flirta- tion, I certainly saw myself much that looked uncommonly like it. And what is more, there were a number of Conservatives who thought so themselves. I wonder whether the Conservatives have Pa7-nellites S/. Leonards, i'6th September 1885. 15 forgotten a little episode at Liverpool, when two higlily honourable and worthy members of the Conservative party refused to go to Liverpool to meet one of their chiefs ; I wonder whether they have forgotten wliat the Conservative press to a great extent Avrote after the famous ^Maamtrasna debate ? I was in the House that night, and as I stood at the door, some Conservative members rushed past me, saying of speeches wliich had been made from their front bench, "We cannot stand this." They did not understand it ; tliey could not understand the attitude of their leaders towards Lord Spencer. They could not under- stand how a man, who had come back having held his life in his hand in Ireland, having done a great service to the Crown and country, should meet with such cold praise, if praise it was, and with such sneers, for sneers they were, at the hands of different members of the Conservative party. And what said one of the most influential organs of the Conservative party after that? "We say, without the least hesitation, that it Avould be a thousand times better that the Conservative party were once more in opposition rather than that we should again be ex- posed to the humiliation of such a speech as that which Lord Randolph Churchill delivered. The national conscience has been shocked by the ungracious requital of the difficult and dangerous services which Lord Spencer has discharged with as much success as intrepidity." This was not the rebuke of a partisan. It was the denunciation uttered by the chief organ of the Conservative party. It was a humiliation which we witnessed that night, and this humiliation did not fall only upon one party — it was a humilia- tion of Parliament, of Great Britain, Avhich we witnessed that evening ; and so the Conservatives cannot be surprised if, under these circumstances, the country did look for some stronger answers to be made to the menaces of Mr. Parnell than those which were made by Lord Randolph Churchill in his speech at Sheffield. It was vicariously that he opposed Mr. Parnell. He did not say a word in answer to INIr. Parnell. All he said was that he agreed with wliat Lord Hartington had said. That is not what one would have expected from one of tlie chief loaders of the Conservative party on such an occasion. I have failed, too, to find in the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer last night, any such conviction of the danger witli which we are going to be confronted, as we have seen in the speeches of Lord Hartington and ^Ir. Chamberlain. 1 6 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. GoscJicn. An "-Irish The view has been piit forward that there should be an National elective National Council for Ireland — an elective central National Council'' Council. Such a body would be a political body. It would be, in a sense, a Parliament sitting in Dublin. I have no time to argue — I should exhaust your patience long before I had finished — on the subject of this proposed Central Council. But I will say that the establishment of such a Council would frustrate the one great object of the Liberal party, namely, the development of local life in Ireland. If local government is given to Ireland, if large powers are to be put into the hands of the Irish by means of County Councils, or other local Councils ; if you are going to satisfy their desire to manage their own local affairs, you will have called up a sentiment which will not be dangerous to the Em})ire. But a Central Council would check the very de- velopment of local life, which it ought to be our object to promote. You would have the same political men, who would endeavour to use their power in the Central Council for the purpose they have publicly announced — for securing an independent Legislature for Ireland. Let us have local bodies for local affairs, but do not let us commit the folly of erecting a Council which would be a miniature Parliament, and thus encouraging the Irish to hope for that legis- lative independence which I believe this country is determined not to grant. I have spoken with freedom to-night, and I trust that in the coming campaign all will use the same privilege. We cannot sup- press the convictions of the various sections of our party. There is no desire that they should be suppressed ; but there must be complete reciprocity ; there must be leave and license given to us all to speak from our hearts and from our consciences, undeterred by depreciatory epithets. I am not satisfied with some of the language which is used with regard to what is called some- times the Whig section of the party, sometimes the moderate Liberals. Our critics are apt to speak of us as the weaker brethren. To refuse to be pushed along by a crowd, is not a sign of weakness. I do not think it is a sign of weak- ness if you are determined to stand Ijy what you believe, and I could fancy no form of cowardice more contemptible than to swerve from duty lest you should be thought a coward. As for Liberal candidates on the moderate side, they will know whether pressure is put upon them or not. It is conceivable, I hope it is SL Leonards, \ZtJi September 1885. 17 not probable, that pressure ini;^'lit be put upon such candidates by an advanced organization and by affiliated caucuses. But there is a power in tlie country which cannot be affected by a caucus, — the voters in the constituencies ; and there are hundreds and thousands of voters, quiet men very likely, who are not so fond of attending meetings as those who are more advanced, who will be alienated from Liberalism, and who will not appear at the poll, if they are threatened with measures outside the programme of our leader, in language which is contrary to its spirit. I am doing a service to the party in speaking out. The danger exists, and it is well tliat it sliould be recognized. But as regards the moderate Liberals, if they are wanted in the next Parliament to assist in Government, in order to make Government possible and to meet combinations of the enemies of the Empire, they will be there. They will stand to their guns, and I do not think that they will be amongst the least useful de- fenders of the interests of the Empire. The great Duke of "Wellington was once about to give orders to storm a position, and two companies were told off for the duty. The one were young troops wliose eyes were flashing fire, and whose blood seemed to be coursing hotly through their veins. By them stood a com- pany of veterans ; their bearing was calmer, they knew well the danger of the duty tliey were to confront. On whom did the great Duke rely ? He trusted to the veterans to storm the fort. In both political camps there are young generals whose eyes are glistening with martial fire, but I do not believe the country will dispense with the services of the veterans, or that it will wish those veterans to be put into the hindmost place. II. Delivered at Edinburgh on the 7th October 1885. Division. The Contest IMr. GosciiEN said — Electors of the Eastern Division of Edin- in the burgh, I rejoice to see you here in such numbers to-night. Friends and opponents, critics and supporters, I am glad that you are all here. If it should be my good fortune to represent this Division of Edinburgh, I do not wish to enter by any back-door. I wish, if I am elected — as I hope to be — to be elected by the decided voice of the constituency. It is the first time during the more than twenty years of my Parliamentary lift; that I find nryself at a contested election not opposed by those whom it has been my duty to oppose during the last twenty years — by the Conservatives — Imt find myself in opposition to a Liberal candidate. I shall try to remember during the contest which will take place — and I trust my friends and supporters will also remember — that this struggle represents a difference amongst ourselves; and I hope that the contest will be carried on throughout by fair argument, and with good temper upon both sides. If I do not fairly represent the views of the majority of the electors of this Division, then I have no wish for the seat ; and I do not wish any services that I may have rendered in the past, of which the Chairman has spoken in too flattering terms — I do not wish that anything in my past career should have weight, unless I may feel, if I sit in Parlia- ment, that I sit there as the chosen representative of the views of the majority of the electors of this Division, I regret that those, who oppose me in this Division, put me, if I may say so, upon my defence. I shall be obliged not only to turn such arguments as may be in my armoury, against the political party to whom I have always been opposed ; I shall also have to defend my position against those who are running another Liberal Edindurgh, ylh October 1885. 19 against nic 15ut it shall be done throughout, as I said just now, with good humour and by fair argument. Gentlemen, after this preface, let me plunge at once into the 'J'he Irish heart of the situation — a situation grave indeed at the present i^ifficulty. moment. I do not know wliether you all have sufficiently thought out the perils with wliicli we are going to be faced in the new Par- liament after the elections. If we, the Liberal party, have a triumphant majority, as we expect to have, what will be the first difficulty that will loom before us, and in proportions that it would be difficult to exaggerate ] That difficulty Avill be Ireland. Already it has been announced that to the new Parliament the Parnellites will send a band of eighty determined men. Deter- mined to do what? Determined, unless the thirty millions are prepared to bow to the wishes of five — determined to make all legislation impossible. We are discussing some differences amongst ourselves ; we are discussing what we may include in our pro- gramme, and what ought to be excluded ; but first of all let the country make up its mind, that it shall be possible, in spite of all difficulties that may be opposed to us, to carry out some pro- gramme at all. We are threatened with obstruction such as has scarcely yet been seen before, unless we are prepared to give that which the Liberal party will not give, that which the Conservative party, I hope, will not give — namely, legislative independence to one portion of these islands. It is for this reason that the reform in the procedure of the House of Commons has been put into the forefront of the programme, because by such reform only may we be able to give effect to the wishes of the people. We must be in a position to be able to face with success and with credit the opposition with which we have been threatened by Mr. Parnell. And when such a reform is put forward in the INIanifesto of the Attitude of Leader of the Liberal party— wlien it is declared that it must be Conscn.^atives carried out, and when we who follow him, echo that determina- tion — how has the point thus far been met by the Conservatives % They have not seen, and apparently they will not recognise, this fearful danger before us. They say that we are putting forward the reform of the procedure of the House of Commons in order to stifle debate, and in order to ride rough-shod over other parties in the House. I have looked most carefully through every speech — and they have been exceetlingly numerous — which has 20 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. been nuule by various members of the Conservative party, and I have not found in one a declaration or a promise that, in reply to tlie menaces of Mr. Parnell, the Conservatives would co-operate with the Liberals in such measures for the reform of the procedure of the House of Commons as may be absolutely necessary for that purpose. I repudiate as a Liberal, in the strongest possible way, the notion that we — Ave of all people — are anxious to stifle debate. We have gained much in the past, and we hope to gain in the future, by the greatest freedom of discussion upon every possible political toi)ic. But what will be the position? May we not appeal to the Conservatives, that if we should have a majority in the House of Commons, they should loud their assistance, at least on this one point— to help to render legislation possible? Depend upon it, it is only by unity and strength — unity and strength in the Executive Government of this country, and unity and strength amongst its supporters — that we shall be able to meet the diffi- culties that are before us. We are taunted with the unity on which we are determined. Never mind. That unity must be effective for its purpose — which is, to enable us to conduct the legislation of this country. Well now, gentlemen, there is a far more — I am going to make this as a concession to my opi)onents and to my critics in this hall there is a far more interesting speech going to be made to-night than it w(nild be possible for me to make. That is the speech of Lord Salisbury. I wish I had had the opportunity of hearing that speech before I was speaking in this hall to-night. It would have been far more satisfactory, because in that speech we are bound to learn, what I think Ave have not learned hitherto, neither from Lord Iddesleigh nor from Lord Randolph Churchill, nor from the utterances of the present Leader of the House of Commons, Sir Michael Hicks Beach, Avhat the attitude of the Conservative party toAvards the Parnellites is really going to be. The Conservatives are extremely angry that Liberal speakers — (a voice, "Whigs"). No, not only Avith the Whigs, nor chiefly Avith the Whigs. It is most extraordinary, but it is true, that if there is one party Avhich has been more denounced than any other at present by the Parnellites, it is the extreme Radical party; and that is very unfair, because the Radicals have continually shoAvn, as I trust tlie Whigs also have done, sympathy Avith Ireland, if not Avith the Nationalist party. Edinburgh, Jth October 1885. 21 I am much oljliged for the interruption just made, because it has reminded me of a sentiment to which I Avish to give utter- ance — that it is a libel upon the majority of the inhabitants of this country, to tell them that, because they do not fall in with the views of Mr. Parnell and his followers, they are therefore indif- ferent to the interests of Ireland. If there is a man fit to take part in the politics of this country — if there is a man who has regard to its future — he must take the deepest interest in the sister island, tied as it is to this country in a union which I trust may never be dissolved. Well, there is this curious point about the Conservative speeches Their rela- that have been made about Ireland — they insist upon the fact that ^^°^^ "'^^^ ^^^ there is no agreement, that there is no understanding with the Parnellite party. I will accept this frankly, Avithout any sarcasm or irony whatever. I will put it as strongly as I can. I will say I do not believe that there has passed between the two parties even that invisible wink, which sometimes passes between an auctioneer and a bidder ; and I will believe that now they are doing their utmost — and may they be supported by all good citizens, — after a time of anxiety to a great portion of this country, including their own supporters, — they are now doing their utmost to put their foot down more firmly to maintain order in Ireland, I believe that is so, but what I want to know is this. The Conservatives are going to try to increase their strength — no, I won't put it so disagreeably to them — but it is a notorious fact that the Conserva- tives are going to be supported during these coming elections by the Irish vote. Well, I want to know what is to be the price 1 Is there any price at all ? The price has not been bargained for, but I want to know, is it simply for the sake of seeing the Con- servatives in office that the Irish vote is to be given to the Con- servatives ? Supposing, if such a thing is possible, that the Conservatives are placed on the Treasury Bench by the Irish vote, what is to be the consideration afterwards? I don't think Mr. Parnell is likely to say pleasantly to Lord Salisbury and his colleagues, " We leave that to you." Even if he did, you know there is nothing more disagreeable than when a man has rendered yoii a service, and instead of -naming his price says he will leave it to you. But we cannot suppose that Mr. Parnell does intend to leave it to Lord Salisbury. WeU, then, what is to be the attitude of those sitting on the TJreasury IJench, if they sit 2 2 Speeches by the Right Hon. G.J. GoscJien. there throui^li the Irisli vole, and tliruui^h the Irish vote alone, because without tliat I think they themselves admit they have not got the ghost of a chance of winning at the elections % Sup- pose they are there through the Irisli vote, what are they to do? Have they a policy 1 Have they shadowed out that policy % Will Lord Salisbury shadow out that policy to-night ; or will they drift on, waiting to see Avhat will turn up? Will they see the state of Ireland getting worse and worse, and then say, " Well, what can we do, except apply for the advice of Lord Kandoljih Churchill % " The Poliiy of But we have seen a shadow of a policy, It has been sketched ''Hard Cash.'" {■^ rather vague words by Lord George Hamilton, and there are significant phrases in Sir Michael Hicks Beach's speech which point in the same direction. It is a policy of what Mr. John Morley has called "hard cash." As if in the present crisis of Irish affairs it would ])e possible by contributions from the Consolidated Fund to recover those loyal feelings from the sister isle which wc so devoutly desire to see once more restored to us ! By what nieans it may be possible once more to secure these affec- tions, I do not know ; but I do not believe that those affections can be bought with money. There are some men who, having become extremely rich, tliink that by tlieir cheque-book they can solve aU possible difficulties. If affection is to be bought, they say "cheque-book." If hatred is to be bought off, "cheque-book." If sorrow is to be assuaged, " cheque-book." Now, I want to know, do the Conservative party think, when they have got the national cheque-book in their hands, that they can write cheques simply in that way, and buy off hatred and secure affection ? Do they think it is by money that they will be able to settle the difficulty which statesmanship has hitherto been unable to solve? Mr. Parnell Gentlemen, there is one more point that I should like to touch and Protec- upon, and it is Mr. Parnell's view that the English hang to the ^'^"" Irish Union because of the commercial gains that they may be able to make out of the sister island. His last proposals in his speech in Wicklow seem to suggest that Ireland might ask to be allowed a certain period of protection to its native industry, but that that Avould be resisted by the greed of England and Scotland. It is not from any feelings of greed or cupidity that this island would oppose a policy such as that, but because in our hearts and consciences we believe that such a policy Avould be as disastrous to Ireland itself, as it would be disastrous to England and Scotland. Edinbtirgh, yth October 1885. May one without offence point out to the Irish, tliat if in many ways we may sup}ily them with some manufactures, they also have in this country a large market for one of their greatest and chiefest industries — and tliat is for the hibour of Ireland? Are our towns not full of Irish labourers, working with English labourers in harmony and with good feeling? But if Ireland should attempt to close her ports against English manufactures, might it not imperil those relations, which, I pray God, may always exist between the Irisli, the Scottish, and the English labourers? It is not for commercial reasons that we wish to remain tied — that we wish that Ireland should remain in the group which may we always be able to call Great Britain and Ireland ! but it is because we believe it to be essential to our existence as a nation, because Ave believe that this group of islands must hang together, and be closely united, if its history in the future of the world is to resemble its history in the past. Gentlemen, I really think I need make no apology for having treated at some length this Irish question, Avhich, whether we wish it or not, will force itself upon the attention of Parliament. And I am obliged to say — I was obliged to say in my Address, and I think I have explained it by what I have said to you to-night — that it appears to me that there is a cloud of uncertainty hanging over the Conservative policy with regard to Ireland. I believe conscientious!}^, that an uncertaint}'' exists which I hope may have been removed by Lord Salisbury's speech to-night. I used another phrase in my Address to which attention has been Conservative called, namely, that there was a change of front on the part of the Change of Conservative party. I have been challenged to say in what respect ^°"^' there has been a change of front. I thought that was notorious. I thought that every Conservative not only admitted there had been a change of front — I am not speaking of Ireland, but generally — I thought that he admitted it, and was proud of it, and believed that they had now found the solution of the riddle as to how Conservatives were to succeed in the future. I thought that that change of front had been accentuated and marked in many differ- ent ways, especially Avhen, at the dictation of a young noble Lord, of whom I may say it is a great misfortune that he has been compelled by indisposition to be silent so long, because Ave Avish to knoAv from him what is going to be the future of the Conservative party — Sir Stafford Northcote Avas metamorphosed into Lord Iddesleigh 24 speeches by tJie Rigid Hon. G. J. Goschen. Surely then a change of front took place, and the whole tone of the leadershij) in the House of Commons clianged at the same time. I do not believe that any Conservative who had had the misfortune of spending the last three weeks of the last session in the House of Commons would have ventured to put the question as to Avhat Avas the change of front on the part of the Conservative party. I did not intend to say anything upon this subject to-night if I had not been challenged, because I thought that it had been disposed of in many ways ; but I must confess that to see the Conservative party during the last tnree weeks of the session was a spectacle that did not make men glad. "Witness the way in wliich they rushed at bills, which they had opposed before. Witness the Medical Eelief Bill, and the celebrated race between two noble Lords as to who would be first at tlie House of Peers, in order to move some motion in regard to that bill, to which, I think, they both had been opposed before — typical of a general race at the end of the session between both parties to see how they could make most capital out of the most popular and democratic measures. I say it is one of the most noticeable features of English politics at the present day, that the Conservatives have abandoned most of their old tradi- tions, and are now following so erratic a course that it is impossible to know at what point they may at any moment be landed. I repeat that, in the last year, though it has been coming on for some time, there has been a change of front. There was a time when they used to oppose. A year ago, or two years ago, I think I said of them that they no longer opposed, but they only watched. By tliis time they have taken to inquire, and wlien they get into office, after having opposed, and watched, and in(]uired, then they propose, and take the measures of their Whig or Radical opponents. I believe they have just now said that they art; not pre])ared with a programme. We are. And this brings me to the programme which has been put forward in j\Ir. Gladstone's IManifesto. I have already dealt with one of its topics, and I am in cordial agreement with it — namely, the lieform of the Procedure of the House of Commons. The next subject upon the list is one in which I take so great an interest that, as I think I told you when T had the honour of addressing an E child, ho is bound to clothe his child, and the State will punish those who neglect and starve their children, but the State does not, therefore, pay for the food or clothes. I strike at that argument ; it is not a good one. There may be others that are better; but that is not a good argument. Will you accept that argument as regards the compulsory power of the State in other cases? If the State compels houseowners to keep their property in sanitary repair, is the State therefore to pay the cost? Certainly not. If the State requires wells to be kept in proper order, that the people may have proper drink, are the owners of these wells to be relieved by the State, and to be allowed to say, that as the State has issued its injunctions, let it pay the cost? It is a doctrine that strikes at the root of the obligations which rest upon individuals — sacred obligations which individuals ought to perform. Ikit, then, look at it from the point of view of the attendance at school. Upon that, opinions diifer. I know there are many who hold that fees diminish the amount of the attendance at schools, but there are others who hold the reverse. I am inclined to think that amongst the latter I must include Mr. Gladstone, from the terms of his Manifesto. But if you were to examine people in the country, you would find that many consider that the fact of these fees being generally paid in advance causes the parents to wish not to lose the schooling for which they have paid at the beginning of the week. Having paid their pence, they say, " Let us have the value for the money." It is impossible, I admit, except upon the most rigorous examination, to arrive at an opinion on which side the truth may be. There may be many cases, or some cases, where the fees impede the attendance at school ; and mind, I look upon attendance at school as a matter of primary importance. I am open to argument to see how the payment of fees operates in that respect. But I should regret if it should be proved that the fees are an impediment to attendance, and at this moment I am not prepared so to believe. Possible But let me put one more point before you : What will be Consequences the effect — it is a very important question — upon the quality of of Free ^^^ education, and upon the competition of schools amongst Education. Edinburgh, yih October 1885. 35 themselves, if you abolisli fees? The chiss of scliools just above the Board Schools must go. At present they hold their own, there being only a small difference between their own fees and the fees at Board Schools. Abolish the fees in the Board Schools and the dillerence will be too great, and you will lose the competition of the superior class of schools. I do not ask you, gentlemen, to accept these views ; but I think you will acknowledge that it is a fair argument to place before you, and that these are not the arguments of reactionary Liberals, but that they may be the views, and, I contend, are the views, of men as deeply interested, and as deeply committed to the cause of educa- tion, as any of those who pledge themselves for free education. Do not let us mix \\\) the question of tlie taxes. If the aggregate taxes on the working-classes are such that they cannot afford to pay these fees, it would be wise to look in other directions to relieve them, rather than to relieve them on this particular point — of the duty, that is, of paying for the education of their children. Again, in those countries where education is free, I should like to know whether the working-classes are not in most instances extremely heavily taxed ; whether, in the taxation imposed upon them, they do not find a heavier burden than in those pence which they pay here for the education of their children. But, in any case, I entreat those who may dilier from me, not to cast in my teeth that, if I cannot declare myself — and I cannot declare myself — in favour of free education, it is because I am one whit less anxious for the promotion of education amongst all classes of the community than any of those who are pledged to this new cause. Gentlemen, it is clear that time would fail me to deal with any further topics which would require extensive treatment at my hands. Let me only say a few more words, in conclusion, with regard to the charge that is sometimes laid against those who are said to hold moderate Liberal opinions — that they are indolent and careless as to the progress and prosperity of all classes of the com- munity. It would indeed be a charge against them if it could be proved, that, either by opposition or abstention from active effort, they stood aside from considering all measures of progress; but to catch at the first remedy which is suggested, is not a proof of sympathy for a patient. Sympathy with suffering does not com- pel you to think that the lirst medicine offered must be the correct one to effect a cure. 36 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. If you see remedies proposed which seem to strike at the patient's constitution, would it be right to be silent lest the particular physician who is prescribing at the moment should say that you have no care for the disease? I may Itc taunted tliat I am not so much in favour of experimental legislation as some others. I con- fess, I do not believe in statesmen bringing forward remedies as experiments, unless they have fairly satisfied themselves, and are convinced beforehand that they are remedies which will meet the disease. Was it as an experiment, think you, that Sir Eobert Peel brought forward the abolition of the Corn-laws ? Was it as an experiment that Cobden worked for Free-trade % No ; it was from the deep conviction that these were the remedies which were necessary for the improvement of the condition of the people. (A voice, " For the middle classes.") With regard to experiments, I remember the case of a distinguished French surgeon who said that he had made the most delicate experiment in the world, and he had found that his diagnosis had been perfectly correct A friend asked this distinguished surgeon what became of the patient, "Oh," he said, "he bled to death." I do not think it Solidarity of wise to try experiments upon the body politic of this country. I All Classes. caught a phrase behind me — " Middle-class legislation " — as much as to say that it was the middle classes in whose interest Sir Robert Peel abolished the Corn-laws. I am grateful for the inter- ruption. It reminds me of a point which I am anxious to bring out. This gentleman holds that the abolition of the Corn-laws was in favour of the middle-classes; In my opinion, if there has been one measure Avhicli has been to th(> advantage of the working- classes of this country, I take it to be that they have got cheap bread ; and I am surprised, I must say, that in a Liberal audience there should be any who hold tlie opposite opinion. Put what caught my ear was the word " middle-class." Gentlemen, don't let us conduct this election, don't let us conduct the campaigns that are coming, from the point of view tliat tlu' interests of classes are divided, and that you must therefore look to the interests of one particular class. That is one of the most dangerous fallacies that can possibly be taught. There are some who seem to look upon the wealth of this country as if it were simply money contained in a cash-box, and that you can give the key either to one party or the other party, to one class or the other class, to help themselves from that cash-box. The wealth of this country is not a fixed EdinbiirfrJi, jtk October 1885. quantity. It is one that increases or diminishes according as there is wise and stable and just legislation. It would indeed be a disaster to the country if we should simply adopt the principle : " There is a certain fixed anaount of wealth ; all that is wanted is to distribute it differently," forgetting that we must endeavour so to legislate that the prosperity, wealth, and well-being of all classes may be promoted and increased. Are capital and labour hostile forces, or are they not rather partners in the same firm ? You may wish that the profits should be more equally divided between them ; that there should be great progress in the co- operative movement, and in the great shareholding co-operative companies which are now found in the centre and north of England. Profits are now being made more accessible to working men by many means, and this is a movement entirely in the right direction. The more you can democratise capital, the better, so bringing capital and labour nearer together. But using that same illustration of partners in the same firm, if we are to believe that in this country the union of the two is necessary, why throw discredit upon one or the other ? Is it by endeavouring to denounce capital that you will promote the interests of labour? No. This country is not in a ring fence. We are not in such a position that we can arrange our industries, our manufactures, and our prosperity, simply by looking to ourselves. We are surrounded by competing rivals, by other countries who will watch for every mistake that we may make, who will gloat over anything that may separate the interests of capital and labour here, to the detriment of both, and to the detriment of labour as much as of capital. And let me not be told that this is a middle-class vieAV. It is the view which the working-classes of this country, I believe, will hold as strongly as others, because they know that it is only by the union of classes that wo can hope to maintain our past supremacy. I do not think it right, I confess, that the newly enfranchised classes should constantly be appealed to simply by suggestions to con- sider their own narrow pecu.niary interests ; nor do I believe it necessary that these electoral campaigns should all be conducted at a very high pitch of excitement. Kussian Generals used to send their soldiers into battle plied with the strongest possible stimulants, in order that they might come up to the mark. That is not my idea of the electorate of this count^)^ They will not require these intoxicating stimulants to induce them .'^9597 1 J S SpcccJics by the Right Hon. G. J . Goschen. to take an interest in public affairs. I do not think it necessary to galvanise them into action by a series of electric shocks. Appeals to their reason and ajipeals to their common-sense will succeed, if men will only still believe in the old British idea of independence, self-reliance, and common-sense. Let the old flag of I'jritish common-sense be firmly planted upon the ramparts of our Con- stitution, and let the latest recruits who have been taken into our political ranks be summoned to serve under its folds. III. Delivered in the Music Hall in Edinburgh, on the 10th October 1885. Mr. GoscHEN (after some preliminary observations) said — 1 Lord Salis- reminded you on Wednesday, in the course of my speech, that at the bitrfs same moment when I was addressing you Lord Salisbury was deliver- <^'"fi^'<'- ing himself of his expected Manifesto. I spoke of the intense interest with which the utterances of the Prime Minister were awaited. I wanted to know, and the country wanted to know, the ansAver of Lord Salisbury to two or three questions which were being very earnestly put. One was this — What would be the attitude of Lord Salisbury and his party in reply to the menaces which the Irish party had put forth? and the other— a question also of deep importance — Would the Conservative party co-operate wdth the Liberals in such a reform of the procedure of Parliament as would make legislation possible 1 On the last point I find no single sentence in the speech of the Prime Minister. We do not know what His the attitude of the Conservative party may be towards improving Omissions. and strengtlu-ning the procedure of the House of Commons, which must form the first subject of interest for the next Parliament, if we are to be able to legislate at all. And then, as regards Ireland, no doubt Lord Salisbury spoke as became an English Minister — to whatever party he might belong — with regard to maintaining order and freedom in Ireland, But as regards satisfying Irish aspirations, as regards the solution of the great problems before him, I am reluctant to say that tlu> impression which has been made upon me is that the answer of Lord Salisbury is not so clear and not so decisive, as I think the country might have had a right to expect. We heard nothing, it is true, with regard to the suggestion of some of his 40 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen, colleagues, who had said, " Gentlenu'U of the United Kingdom, are you prepared to pay up for the loyalty of Ireland?" On that point there was absolute silence. But with regard to the iiltimate answer to be given to Ireland, I do not think the speech of the Prime Minister was so satisfactory. And it is most important that we should be clear upon this point. "When I spoke last I said that a cloud of uncertainty still hung over the Irish policy of the Conservative Government. I think that cloud still hangs there as regards the future ; for this is what Lord Salisbury said — he had been speaking of the Imperial Federation of the Colonies, and continued, " But with respect to Ireland, I am boiind to say that I have never seen any plan or suggestion that will give me at present the slightest ground of anticipating that it is in that direction that we shall find any solu- tion of the Irish problem. I wish it may be so, but I think I shall be holding out false expectations if we avow a belief which as yet, at all events, we cannot entertain." Now, I want to know what is the meaning of this " at present," and those words, " which as yet, at all events, we are not able to entertain." And remember this is in the direction of Federation. " I hope it may be so," says Lord Salis- bury. Does Lord Salisbury hope that the solution of the Irish difficulty is to be found in the direction of Federation, and that Ireland is to that extent to be separated from the United Kingdom ? I cannot gather the ideas of the Prime Minister from this oracular sentence. His Local Then the noble Lord has spoken with regard to Local Govern- Governnient ment, and with regard to facilitating the Transfer of Land. And Schettie. ^^^^o\\ these subjects a large portion of the public have called his utterances extremely progressive and satisfactory. But let us look at this point of his programme a little more closely. On the subject of Local Government, it is claimed that Lord Salisbury is closely folloAving the Liberal lines. Some one said that surely his plans as to local government would satisfy men like myself. Well, they do not satisfy me. There is a great dif- ference between us, and I wonder that public attention has not been more directed to the point. You Avill discover the cloven foot, in the programme of Lord Salisbury, rather on the subject of Local Finance than of Local Government Reform. You will find that he speaks of the burden of local taxation being borne ac- cording to the ability of every individual. Yes ; but does not this Edinburgh, \oth October 1885. 41 view ignore the hereditary hurdcns that have rested upon land ] and does it not involve this result, that uiidcv the shadow of the ratepayers, the owners of land would he saved from those con- tributions under Avhich, and subject to which, they have bought and sold and iiiliciitcd tluii' land ? That is an old conflict between us of the Liberal party and the Conservatives. They have pointed to the burdens on land, which they have said ought to be lightened, because other property ought equally to pay ; but so far the answer of the Liberal party has always been, that this argument might hold good as regards new burdens, but that, as regards the burdens of the past, land had always been subject to them, and that it Avould not be fair to take them oflf land and place them upon the community at large. Xow, examine the difference of Lord Salis- bury's manifesto in that respect with the declaration of ^Nlr. Glad- stone in his programme. Mr. Gladstone sees the point that must be kept in mind as to the hereditary burdens on land. Let us be perfectly fair. IS'o doubt, land at this time has more difficulty in bearing these burdens than, perhaps, at any time of our previous history. Let the question be fairly and impartially examined, but do not let us start with the idea that the burdens of the past are not an element in the case, which every reformer of local finance is bound to take into consideration. Well, then, there is another reform of Lord Salisbury's which .s-^/^ o/" Zawrt' he announced, and which has been taken up with some enthusiasm. J^el'i h' He has suggested that corporate bodies, such as the Ecclesiastical '-^^P^^'^ . . 1-11 Bodies. Commissioners, and trustees for various cliaritable purposes, should sell the land which they hold, in order thus to promote a larger distribution of land among the people. I cordially, very cordially, endorse that vieAV ; and all the more cordially because in 1874, now eleven years ago, I made a speech at Bristol in which I strongly urged this identical point. I thought that it was against the interests of this country that so large a portion of land should be locked up in the hands of corporate bodies. I thought that the sale of this land would be a matter of public usefulness, and it was my endeavour, when I was in office, to act upon this view ; and I had the opportunity of selling land which belonged to corporations, and which had been locked up. Now, ten years afterwards, Lord Salisbury comes forward with his brand-new idea. But I think there is one great difference between my proposal and that of his lordship. ^Nly proposal Avas made when land was high, and when 42 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. it could be sitM ; und Lord Salisbury's is made at a time -when land is low, and when nobody will buy it. Now, when the burdens upon landowners are so great that they scarcely know in what direction to turn — when that rise in the value of land is stopped, upon which corporations have so long nourished — Lord Salisbury says, " Let them sell." It is too late ; and it is just in this way that so frequently the rofdrms of tli(i Tory party come too late. In too many cases they are willing to sell when the hour for selling has almost gone by. Gentlemen, on "Wednesday I said, tl)at I would speak to-night upon the question of Land; and though you are an urban audience, I think the interest now taken in the Land question throughout the length and breadth of the country is so great that you will expect me to explain my views upon it. And you will hold, I hope, with me — I ventured to hint at it the other night — that the various interests in this country are not so distinct but that the one set of interests reacts upon the other. Disasters to af'riculture, uncertainty amongst landowners, bad crops, and unhappy farmers, mean also bad trade, cxirtailment of employment, and depression in many quarters apparently unconnected with land. Indeed, who shall say that this subject or that subject has no interest for a jnu'ticular audience because it does not directly affect their pockets % Present Well now, what is the position of laml ? The situation of land Position of has entirely changed during the last ten years. The position Land. qJ farmers has changed, the position of landowners has changed, rents have had to be reduced, the profits of farmers have been curtailed enormously — in every branch of agriculture there is a want of hope and extreme depression. Wheat, to the advantage of the consumer, but to the detriment of the farmer, is extremely cheap. Wool is cheap, and sheep and oxen have fallen in price extremely. (Cries of " All the better.") Yes, if only mutton would fall in the same proportion. That the fall in agricultural produce should be so great, and that the consumer should have comparatively so little advantage from it — that is one of those things, to use a common jihrase, "which no fellow can under- stand." Bat you know that agriculture has been depressed, and that the landowner is in a very difficult position. Now, at some meeting not very long ago, some orator belonging to the advanced school, I think — (a voice, "Chamberlain") — seemed to Edinburgh, \oth October 1885. 43 have got the liead of the landowners " in Chancery," if I may say so, and was pounding away at them, and there was a cry from one of the audience, who enjoyed tiie performance, " Go at 'em." AVell, unfortunately, it was neither tlie orator nor the school to wliich lie belonged, who had had th(! first turn at the laniUords, because bad crops had had their turn at them already. The competition of the foreigners had had a turn at them already, and the position of the landowners at present is certainly not an enviable one. Much property has been bought and sold to pay about 3 per cent., and if there is a reduction of 25 per cent, in the rents off that 3 per cent., I leave it to the arith- metical talent of a Scottish audience to decide what the remainder will be. But this is not the whole case. If there is a fall in the landowner's rent, it does not come off the whole of the rent, but it comes off that portion which is reserved to himself. For instance, if a man receives £5000 a-year in rents, and he has charges on the estate, payments to relations and others, of £2500, these must go on, and the fall of 25 per cent, on the whole becomes a fall of 50 per cent, upon the £2500 which comes to himself. And more than that, the out-goings must remain the same, for he must endeavour still to do his duty to the land ; still to go on with his repairs \ still to go on with building cottages where they are wanted ; still to go on Avith draining "where land requires to be drained. That is a difficult position ; it is a position which deserves the sympathy of the community ; and more than that, it is interesting to the community, because it cannot be to its advantage that through the want of capital, either on the part of farmer or land- owner, large tracts should go out of cultivation, or into second- rate and bad cultivation. It is most important that the land- owners should still be induced to put their hands into their pockets, even if funds are running low, in order to do justice to the land ; and it would be an unfortunate policy by any proceedings so to shake the confidence of the landoAvners that they should fold their arms and say, " The seasons are too bad, competition is too great, the uncertainty of my tenure is too great, for it to be right for me to go on spending money on my land." That is not a position into which it would be wise that the land- owners should be forced. Under these circumstances, for my part, I cordially endorse and sympathise witli, and have always sympathised 44 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. Need of with, every facility being given to the hindlords to sell ; and every Facilitating gj^gp t,hat would (quicken the transfer of land, the cheap transfer Transfer. ^^ land, and that would prevent the locking up of land under primogeniture and entail, would have my most cordial co- operation. Some people say that the abolition of primogeniture and entail would not have a very great effect. Well, I do not know how that may be. That remark applies, however, more especially to England. I am told that in Scotland there are limitations to the power of bequest — to the free })owers of testators — which do not exist in England, and that part of wliat in England Ave call personal property must, by law, go in certain de- fined proportions to the heirs and to the widow of the testator. Now, supposing that land were put on the same footing as personal property in that respect, would not such a step have a tremendous effect in breaking up the very large estates^ I do not wish to embark in the intricacies of the law, which are as great as the intricacies of some other interesting subjects into which I ventured to put my foot on Wednesday. But I do hold that the abolition of primogeniture and entail would have a very considerable effect in this direction ; and at all events it will be done. The time has come when it must be done, and it will be the duty of the next Parliament to do it. One word with regard to the cheaper transfer of Land. ISTothing can be more important, not only in the interest of landed property, but in the interest of house property, than that it should be possible to transfer it quickly and cheaply, and that no impediments should stand in the way of men acquiring property in land or houses. I have long since advocated a system of easy registry. Since I addressed an Edinburgh audience last winter, I have learned from personal inquiry and through the kindness of some of my friends, that in Edinburgh — and in Scotland generally — there is a com- pulsory system of registration, which acts, so far as it goes, with comparative smoothness ; but still, if more can be done in cheap- ening transfer still further, either by the reduction of the stamp duties on the smaller properties, or by the reduction, if it be possible, of other charges, that I won't specifically name, I consider that a great object will have been gained. Lord Salisbury says that there are no s(|uires wlio would not be glad to have cheap lawyers' bills. That may be so now, but, mind Edinburgh, \olh October 1885. 45 you, it has not been always the view of the Tory party that it was desirable that land transfer should be cheap. The old view was that it was desirable to prevent the dispersion of land in order to keeji together the great estates of the territorial aristocracy. Now, wisely, that view has been abandoned, and the Conservatives hold — as I believe every sensible man now must hold — that the dispersion of landed property and house property amongst a much larger number of the population would tend to the advantage of tlie community at large. And so I hope that all may be agreed to go forward in the direction of endeavouring to multiply the number of the holders of house property and of landed property. T have gone myself so far as to say that, even if the produce of Multiplication land under a system of smaller holdings were less, nevertheless the of Small social advantages of the tn-eater distribution of land amongst the ,''."f'P , . ,. , PI desirable, population would outweigh the economic disadvantage of the smaller returns from the land. I have received remonstrances upon this point. I have had remonstrances from people who have studied the system in France, and who have told me that if I could see the poverty, the misery, which these very small holdings in France brought with them — the infanticide and other evils — I should change my views. Well, these are serious questions, but, for my part, though the letters I received were striking, they did not convince me, because I believe that, even in the extreme poverty of the working-classes of this country, they do not hold, taught by their various Churches as they have been, the tenets of the French peasantry upon some of these painful subjects. And for my part I say I am not frightened to go forward with the multiplication of small holdings, even though it be true that the aggregate produce may be less. So let us be agreed upon this point before we possibly part company at another stage — that it is for the advantage of the community to increase the number of tlie holders and the tillers of the soil. Now, how shall it be done? I am not one of those who believe that this matter can be forced ; I am not one of those who believe that by substituting artificial means for natural influences you will be able to force such a system upon any part of the United Kingdom. I hope you will allow me shortly to argue the principles underlying the Allotment question in the same spirit in which I ventured to argue the question of Free Education on Wednesday night ; that is to say, to put the argument fairly E 46 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. before you without wishing to dogmatise in any way wliatever. But vot The proposal that is made is this— and mind, it is made ahnost through Local -^yith a kind of suggestion that unless one accepts that particular Authorities. p^Qp^g^i it is impossible to be a sound Liberal, tliough to that I demur entirely — the proposal is this, that municipalities should have the power of purchasing land compulsorily at a fair value, and then of letting it out in allotments to the working-classes. Now, I am entirely in favour — remember my words — I am in favour of the system of allotments, and I rejoice to think that under the influence of public opinion, under the advancing views of the day, great progress is at this moment being made with the whole system of allotments. But let me put a practical case before you of which I heard the other day. A landlord Avishes, and is carrying out his wishes with determination, to give 100 labourers an acre or half-an-acre holding. What does he do 1 He breaks up a fluid — in this case of 26 acres — and it costs him £3, 15s. per acre for the acts of husbandry necessary to make the allotments. Besides that, he has to spend £25 or £35 for barns ; he has to erect fences, and to conduct a number of other similar operations ; and in the result he charges £1 per acre, which gives scarcely any percentage Avhatever upon the outlay that he has incurred. Now, fancy this being done by a municipal authority ! Suppose they buy the land. Then comes the surveyor, then comes the inspector, then comes a discussion as to the kind of barns that should be erected, then comes the erection of the fences, and then comes the selection of the men for the allotments ; and Avhen all this has been done, what rent is to be fixed? Is it to be a rent which will charge on the community the difference between the expense of the outlay and that which the tenant can fairly pay? Is that difference to be borne by the Avhole body of ratepayers, including those who have no particular interest in the allotments ? I want to know, if the work cannot be done gratis, from wliose pockets is it to come? Let us, if we possibly can, pursue the system of allotments ; but when we come to details, let us know what we are about. Well, then, the municipality is to take the land — to take it from the owner. Ay ; Init supposing the owner is not in occupa- tion. Supposing it is the farmer who is occupying the frontage which is to be taken ; supposing there are fields which fall in with the general rotation of his crops. Are these to be taken Edinburgh , \oth October 1885. 47 without compensation to liim for tlio deterioration, the necessary deterioration, which his farm will suHer'? There is not a single man in this hall who would not say that the farmer was entitled to compensation under such circumstances. You may say that the owner is not entitled — few, I hoi)e, would say that — but the farmer distinctly Avould l)e entitled to compensation, AVhat posi- tion would he be in if the local authority were to come and break up his farm without compensation to him for the injury which he would suiler'? But then there comes this further ]K)int, — I call your attention to it, because it bears on so many of these various projects. It is this. They say, "What harm will come of it if it is not suc- cessful ? Give the municipality powers. Let us try the experi- ment. What harm will it do if they do not let these allot- ments'?" I tell you what harm it will do. It will discourage the landlords, who, at the same time, might themselves be pro- moting this system of allotment ; it will discourage the farmers who, having property on hand, will not know at any time whether the municipal authority may not come and take it away. And landlord and farmer will say, " How can we work these fields, how can we put capital into these fields any more, how can we employ agricultural labourers on these fields, if at any moment we are likely to have them taken away at a so-called fair value by the municipal authority % " Now do me the justice to believe that I do not wish to deal with this matter in any other way than to promote the object that we have at heart. But I take leave to say that it is not fair on the part of any school of politicians to assert that because a man does not accept such proposals as these, before they are examined and before they are thrashed out, therefore he is an indifferent or a cold Liberal. I protested on "Wednesday that there might be good Liberals who Avere opposed to free education, and good Liberals who were in its favour. I protest to-night that, as there may be good Liberals in favour of the system of allotments in the form suggested, so there are equally good stout Liberals against these proposals. And amongst those stout Liberals who would be opposed to them, I wish we had at this moment still in our midst a man whose premature death was an incalculable loss to the com- munity — I mean the late Professor Fawcett — a man whose head was as strong as his heart was sound — and who was consumed witli 48 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. Muiiicipa! Socialism and its Friends. a burning desire for the welfare of the -working-dasscs. You should liave seen Professor Fawcett standing before an audience of working men — you should have seen the man, with a brave heart and a strong intellect, facing a crowd and telling them stern truths. He was a man, as I say, whose death has been an irreparable loss to this country. But it is sometimes said that those who are opposed to tliis new system of municipal socialism are the weak men, and that its advocates are the strong men. Now I should like to know why it is a sign of strength to rely upon a corporate body to do certain duties, rather than to rely upon the individual himself to do them. I should like to know what there is in this system which so entitles it to the credit of being "advanced." I do not know how far it is a point in their favour, but as a matter of fact these new views recommend themselves very considerably to the approbation of Prince Bismarck. 'J'he Iron Chancellor likes these ways well. He likes regulation ; he likes that regulation of labour, and that interference in many branches of industrial life, which are involved in all these schemes of socialism — whether municipal socialism, whether State socialism, or any other kind of socialism. But the National Liberals of Germany, the great Liberal party in Germany, are opposed to this socialism, as striking at the freedom of the working-classes of their country. They see that this patronage and these paternal ways have indeed the approval of a certain class of socialists, also of the Koman Catholics, also of the despotic forces of the country ; but they do not command the ap- proval of the independent labouring men in the country at large. It is interesting to remark that Lord Eandolph Churchill has quoted Prince Bismarck as an authority, and that a very dis- tinguished leader of the Liberal party lias also quoted him as an authority, in respect of changes which might be introduced in our system of taxation. For my part, I am against Bismarckian socialism, and I am against Napoleonic expenditure. I know the new Kadical programme bids us abandon the old economic doctrines as regards expenditure. The taxes are to be merrily spent, provided they are only put upon new shoulders. That is the modern doctrine ; but if this country is going forward in the direction of Napoleonic expenditure and Bismarckian finance, well, all I can say is, that it may be a wise, a progressive, and an advanced procei'ding, but I do not call it truly Liberal ; nor do I Edinburgh^ \oth Ocioder 1885. 49 admit that a niaii can be denounced as a weak Liberal because he does not agree Avith it. Again, taki; tlie question of respect for Property. It is supposed Democratic that a man holds advanced views if lie is not jiarticular aVjout ^'!<:^p<:<:i for the rights of property, but that one. is "unsound" if one is par- )'■•''■ ^V ^ r r J' , . , Property. ticular. "Well, but that view is not general m what one may call democratic countries. In many democratic countries the sanctity of the i)n>pri('tary rights of individuals is considered to lie at the very foundations of society; audit would be a strange thing indeed if in this country at this day we should have to go to the United States for i)recedents as regards the protection of property. The fact is, that the Constitution of the United States offers extra- ordinary guarantees against any compulsory transfer of property, by any legislative power, from one individual to another. The laws are perfectly clear with regard to expropriation for public pur- poses ; but as for transfer from one individual to another, even though it should be considered as a social good — if a law sanction- ing a compulsory measure for that purpose were passed by the Legislature of any State in America, it would be quashed by the Supreme Court. Again, I say, I do not wish to dogmatise. But if that is the view in the United States — a democratic country as we have always till lately regarded it — I do not think that Liberals who are tender with regard to such points can be denounced as laggard Liberals on that account. Now, I trust that I have established that if there are differences Exaggerated amongst us — and there are — they are differences of opinion amongst E-^/'^ciattons. men Avorking forward for the same object, wishing to deal with the same social problems ; wishing alike to lift the condition of the masses ; Avishing alike to promote the prosperity of the country at large ; and that Ave shall not be denounced — those of us who some- times exercise our privilege of criticism — we shall not be denounced as indifferent to the Avelfare of the masses because Ave look these pro- blems in the face. To go back for one moment to proposals that seem scarcely adequate to meet the object they have in view — such a proposal, for instance, as the proposal for increasing allotments through the action of municipalities — if you create expectations by them, which expectations you cannot fulfil, I say you are doing damage to the State. It has been suggested that, by this system of allotments, you might so raise the Avhole status of the working- classes as effectually to deal Avith pauperism. I Avish it Avere so. 50 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. But, it may be said, you are not fair in arguing that it has actually been said. No, but it has been implied. You have seen men pointing to the hideous mass of pauperism which exists ; you have seen them pointing to our system of land tenure on the other side, and suggesting a close connection between the two. Well, there are other countries where tlie land tenure differs in toto from that which exists here, but which are not exempt from that fearful distress which rests on a portion of the inhabitants of those islands. You see this pauperism elsewhere, where the land tenure is dif- ferent. It was my fate at one time to be President of the Poor- law Board, and I made it my business then to examine and to probe to the bottom as far as I could this most sorrow- ful subject of pauperism, to gauge its causes and to look into The Rolls of its extent. When men talk of there being three-quarters of a I'aup.rtsm. j^iiHion or a million of paupers, they speak as if they were so many men or women out of work, as if they were men who ought to be employed, and women who ought to be emjtloyed, but who, unfortunately, cannot get employment ; and their non- employment is laid at the door of oiir social system as a blot. I do not know how it is here ; Init I can tell you that there are workhouses in London containing one thousand or two thousand inmates, in which there are not forty able-bodied men or women — in which there are not one hundred Avho come from what may be called the Avorking-classes of this country. It is not the working men from the towns, whether they are in employ- ment or out of employment, who mostly fill our workhouses, and who swell those fearful rolls of pauperism. (A voice, " Who are they*?") You want to know who they are. I will tell you who they are. (A voice, " Free education.") Yes, I agree education may do much. (Another voice, "Whisky.") I am not sorry for these interruptions, because you will see that you are exactly upon the same lines as I am. I heard in one part of this room the word " whisky," and I heard in another part of the room the word " education." I was going to say — and I will say it now — that I believe if Sir Wilfrid Lawson's movement were capable of being carried to the end, it would, do more to empty our workhouses than all the schemes of Mr. Jesse CoUings. Sir Wilfrid Lawson's scheme may be Utopian, but depend upon it — and I will answer the question of the elector in one moment — it is by temperance, by education. Edinburgh, lotk October 1885. 51 and by religion, that you will do more to reduce this hideous state of things in parts of our great cities tliaii ])y any sj-stom of muni- cipal socialism. Who are these paupers, did you ask 1 They are, if I may use Brcakaocs of so sad a word — they are the breakages of civilisation ; they are Civilisation. men with broken hearts and broken fortunes, coming from all classes of society. If you were to look into the registers, you would find there not only working men. No \ you would find paupers who have come from a different class. You would find some of them to be tradesmen ; you would find some to be educated men ; you would find men who had been broken down in life ; you would find there the innocent victims of crime ; you would find the children of criminals and the children of shame. It is a tale that ought sometimes to be told, but which is not a cheerful one to have to tell. It is the waifs and strays of the vast Metropolis who are there gathered together. Men marry at an early age, perhaps on good wages. They have six or seven children during the first eight years of their marriage. The man dies, and the widow and children are reduced immediately to pauperism, and at once go to swell that ghastly list. I know of no laws by which you can arrest that state of things ; I know of no system of division of land, or of the distribution of wealth ; I know no means by which you can check such a state of things, except by doing all in your power to raise the self- esteem of the population ; and to develop that feeling of charity, that feeling of independence, that family feeling, which would make men and women turn rather to their kith and kin, than to the favours of any municipal corporation. It is thus that we will endeavour to fight this foe, not this advancing foe of pauperism, because pauperism is retreating, but to fight this foe to the death. I admit there is business here for the Legislature, but there is business, too, for every citizen — for the clergyman, for the reformer, for the minister, for every man who cares for his country. Gentlemen, I said on Wednesday that those took a false view of the prosperity of this country who held it to be a fixed pros- perity, and who held that there was a certain quantity to be distributed, and that the chief consideration Avas how to distribute it, rather than how to increase it. Let me use another simile with regard to this point, to show you what I mean. It is not only im- 5 2 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. Trade. portant to tliiiik of the distribution of a crop wlicii it has been grown, or of what it will fetch. You must consider first and foremost how you may produce the largest crop for the benefit of all. Thus I conceive that those men are wrong who are concen- trating their attention simply on the existence of a certain amount of wealth, without looking at the same time to the causes which Depression of affect the aggregate product. Xo inrpiiry is in itself more proper than for every statesman to consider what are the reasons why trade is now depressed, and Avhy there is that general feeling of discomfort amongst the industrial interests, tlu; trading and manu- facturing interests. 1 know what will be in some of your minds ; you want to ask me wdiy I did not serve upon tlie Commission appointed to inquire into the depression of trade? Well, I will tell you. I have not said anything about it in public before, though we have been much attacked upon the subject. The Commission has been appointed, a number of honourable and clever men are serving upon it, and I did not wish to say anything against it. But those of us who were asked to serve, and declined, have been somewhat severely handled by Conservative speakers, as if it were from party spirit that we had refused, I can assure every one in this hall that, speaking for myself, the idea of party could not enter into my mind; and it is ridiculous to think tliat it did. Most men would have been perfectly content to sit and serve with Lord Iddesleigh, who is a very reasonable man ; and I only wish he had not spoken of Fair Trade as a " pious opinion." But why did we — I will not say we, I will speak for myself only — wliy did I refuse 1 Because I did not believe that the Eoyal Commission would do any good — and I have had some experience of Commissions. Commissions are very excellent things to inquire into certain definite points involving much detail, but when you come to inquire into economic first principles, then I confess I have very little confidence in a Com- mission constructed on the principle of balancing a number of interests, and selecting men who have given attention to this or that particular point, but not necessarily to the main points that may come before that Commission. And then if you knew the paradise that a Royal Commission is to all the faddists and fanatics in the kingdom, you would understand how some men may be reluctant to have anything to d(j with it. 1 do not mean that there are such on Objections to the Co7ninis- sion. Edi7iburgh, lotk October 1885. 53 this Commission ; but, as a rule, if thero is a man who has been for years going about with a theory in his pocket, who has tried to button-hole all his friends, who has bored you at the club, from whom you have been scarcely able to escape, that man, as sure as anything, will come before you as an early witness in the Royal Commission. The orthodox men do not care to come, because they think there is a great deal of nonsense about the whole thing. But the man who has got a particular theory of his own that he cannot persuade his friends to accept still thinks he will get the members of a Royal Commission to accept it ; and so the waste of time is fearful. But there is something worse than that. These Commissions lift fads and crotchets much too much into the same kind of prominence as those first principles of economy which have been accepted almost by all schools. Then there is the drawing of the report. jS'obody agrees with anjdijody else. How is it possible upon a Commission that is going to inquire into silver, into foreign competition, into Fair Trade, into Bank Acts, into every industry in every town in the United Kingdom, including England, Scotland, and Ireland, — that is going to examine not only the industries in this country, but all the industries in every other country, the wages in every European country, and so on, — to produce a report within any reasonable period? You ask, when will it do so? Well, not while the Conservatives are in office. I won't detain you on this point any further ; but I could show, and will show if I have the opportunity on other occasions, what I believe to be the mischief of this Royal Commission, apart from some of those difficulties which I have enumerated. And now, gentlemen, you have given me, as you gave mc on Wednesday last, a most patient and indulgent hearing. But before I sit down I Avish to take a bull by the horns. Many questions have been put into my hands, and into the hands of the chairman, some of which I will deal with when they are put to me; but on one I will say a word in this address. It is the question, whether I do not think that I was wrong in having opposed the bill for the extension of the franchise to the agricultural labourer. I am asked whether I do not think I was wrong. I wonder Avhy that question is put. I wonder whether it is put to elicit information, or whether it is ytut to have a kind of controversial effect upon those who hear me. But 54 Speeches by the RigJit Hon. G. J. Goschcn. let inc plainly say that, if those who framed this ([ucstion think that they will see me on this platform fumbling for excuses or mumbling apologies — (cheers, with some liisses) — would you respect me more if I were to mnniblc apologies, I wonder*? — T say that if they expected that, they do not know their man. I have said in the face of an audience in this town, I have said in my place in Parliament, that I will do my utmost to assist in falsi- fying my own predictions. I have said that I will do my utmost — accepting the situation to the full — to serve my country in the new circumstances in which it is placed. It is well known that one of my main reasons for acting as I did was my view that the agricultural labourer had not had that preparation through * civic life which his fellowdabourers and artizans in the towns had enjoyed. Well, I say that through the views I take on Local Government, and through the efforts which I will make, and which I trust I shall be allowed to make in concert with my party, for the reform of Local Government, — that civic education will now be given him at the same time that ho will be exercising the fran- "Qtiitye chise. But if there are men here in this room Avho think that I like Men" ought to have recanted, I say not only that they are mistaken, but that it is less disparaging to the working-classes to tell them straight out what you mean ; — to tell them what you think can be done, and what you think can not be done ; — to spare them the spectacle of men making impossible promises ; to spare them the spectacle of men standing on platforms and indulging in Utopian dreams — I say that that is a fairer attitude to take to the enfran- chised classes in this country than to lead them to believe that there is no demand that they can make upon you that you will not be willing to comply wich. To those who dissent from that view — to those who dissent from the attitude that T take up, to those who think that in this I do not fairly go forward, I say, Give other ukui, then, your votes, but give me your respect. Responsible men in the party have, I believe, niade use of the expression that, if I could not honourably swim with the stream, I ought to stand aside. I shall not stand aside. I shall not stand aside so long as there is a group of my countrymen who are will- ing to accept my services in the State. I shall not stand aside ; and, at this time of the nation's history, they would indeed be craven skulkers who would be prepared to take their places amongst the non-combatants. T shall not stand aside, and I shall not take Edinburgh, \oth October 1885, 55 as my motto, " Swim with the stream." That is not my ideal f)f perfect statesmanshi]>. There is another [ilirase that I should prefer, a plirase of more ancient origin and of higher authority. It is, " Quit ye like men." IV. Delivered at Hadding-ton on the 13th October 1885. Mr. Haldants Mr. GoscHEN said — The Marquis of Tweecldalc has introduced Candidature, j^y ^voavlQ to you in very kind terms ; but my errand here to-night is not personal in any way. It is to advocate the Liberal cause. I stand here to ask you to return Mr. Haldane to be the repre- sentative of this constituency, I see that in this meeting, as in others which I have addressed, we have the good fortune, which does not always fall to the lot of political speakers, not only to discharge the tame duty of speaking to those who agree' with us, but the more exhilarating duty of speaking to a miscellaneous audience. It is easy, in these electioneering times, to rouse one's own friends to enthusiasm ; but there is a duty at least as important, and that is to bring home to one's political adversaries, or to the neutral body in the various constituencies, the truths which we hold to be right, and the doctrines for which we claim sup- port. And so I assume here that I am not only speaking to Liberals, but that I am speaking to a representative Scottish audience, taking a deep interest in the many questions which are now to be decided by the electorate at large. I envy Mr, Haldane one point in his candidature. He has the advantage of being opposed by a Conservative candidate. He has not to fight front and rear. He has to face as his political opponents only those who are the opponents of the party to which he belongs. Tliere are no cross issues here ; and I hope that wc may assume that this contest in East Lothian will not be a mere personal contest between two honourable gentlemen, but that it will be a contest between two political parties, fairly waged. I have read, and read with some amusement, the speeches which have been made by the young and able candidate who Haddington, x^^th October 1885. is opposed to ]\Ir. Ilaldane in this constituency. Lord Elcho made some observations with regard to the supporters whom Mr. Halilane has asked to assist him in this contest ; he has likened Mr. Broadhurst and myself to two big guns, one of which had been placed at one side of the camp and the other at another, but which were so situated that they fired rather more into one another than into the common enemy. 1 will oblige Lord Elcho, and I will endeavour to lower my gun ; I will endeavour not to fire over the head of the enemy, but to get his range this evening. We are asked — a great many of us who are not ashamed of the Conservative name of motlerate Liberals — we are summoned to assist the Con- Appeal to servatives on this present occasion, and I would ask your atten- f .''/ ^^"^^^ 1 • 1 1 Liberals, tion this evening to consider the grounds on which that appeal — that futile appeal — is made. Lord Salisbury has issued a pro- gramme which is exceedingly sober for him ; Lord Randolph Churchill has issued a manifesto, in which there appear the words "common-sense" and "political economy;" and on the ground of these documents, but especially on the ground of the manifesto of Lord Salisbury, we are invited to join in the statesmanlike pro- posals of the present Prime Minister. Now, I intend to ask your attention to some points of Lord Salisbury's programme; but I wish to know, before I go to them, whether, supposing his present programme were entirely satisfactory, whether, even if it were nearly equal to the programme put forward in the Manifesto of our own Leader, we should therefore be bound to prefer the programme of the later convert to the programme of the author of so many reforms. It has happened to me when I have travelled abroad, that foreign friends have most hospitably tried to make me at home by offering me English fare ; and, with the best intentions in the world, have produced a plum-pudding, according to a strictly orthodox English recipe. The plum-pudding was made according to the recipe, possibly of the right ingredients, but it did not have the flavour which it would have had had it been made by an orthodox English cook ; and so it appears to me that Liberal reforms, even though dressed with a Conservative sauce, will not have the same flavour, and will not be so satisfactory to the Liberal party, as if they had been prepared where they ought to be prepared, in the proper Liberal kitchen. I say frankly, it is not enough to have our own Why to h: reforms otl'ered to us by our opponents. But how far is it a fact rejected. that the programme which is offered to us by our opponents is so 58 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. satisfactory as some at tirst siglit wisli to make out] I acknow- ledge that in Lord Salisbury's programme there are sentiments nobly expressed, with which I cordially agree, with regard to Imperial Federation ; but these are the views which were expressed long before Lord Salisbury's manifesto by Mr. Forster and our Scottish friend Lord Rosebery. Then we hear proposals for the sale of land belonging to ecclesiastical and other corporations, which only have the defect, as I said at Edinburgh a few nights ago, that they come so late that it may be almost impossible to give effect to them. Then you have the proposal for the reform of Local Government, which Avould, however, probably embody a particular kind of local hnancial reform, for years advocated in the House of Commons by Sir Massey Lopes, but whicli has continu- ally been resisted by Mr. Gladstone and his colleagues in the Liberal Government. Therefore I confess I do not see that this document is one which is likely to seduce Liberals from their allegiance to their own leaders, and from the principles whicli they have hitherto advocated. But supposing this document were entirely satisfactory, would it be right on that account immediately to accept the invitation which has been addressed to us by many organs of Conservative opinion % There is a kind of irritation in the Conservative press. They say, " "What more can you want ? Here is a most sober programme; why don't you at once declare your adhesion to it?" Before I do so I wish to consider the past of the Conservative leaders, — I wish to consider the past of the Conservative party ; I wish to consider all the various methods which they seem to have followed. And I confess, whether I look to the past or to the present, I see nothing much to encourage any one of us to give that kind of support which is now asked at our hands. In what way are we to look on the tone and temper of those who now offer us what is called a sober and statesmanlike programme ? I want to know, can it be claimed that you may indulge for a certain number of years in any vagaries, and then that the first moment you put forward a sober document, it ought to be accepted witlx absolute confidence? I would ask, supposing some of our own most advanced leaders put forward high Utopian views wdiich are absolutely impossible of execution, and then tone them down and minimise them into certain practical proposals, can we entirely forget what has gone before % You cannot judge by a single docu- Haddington, \^/h October 1885. 59 meiit, iKir l)y a sin^^lc proposal. Yon must look at the tone of t]i(iiiL;iit ; ymi iiiiist look at ]iast actions; yi)U must look at the "\vliol(3 of the circumstances 1)y wlii(-ii tlie men whom you are judging have been surrounded, and at tlie temptations to wliich they have l)een exposed, and see liow th(;y have resisted these temptations. And only when you have done all this, will you be able to gauge what is the true temper and tone of a political party. Now, our Conservative friends talk a good deal of our want of Disors^av union. Well, I do not know to what extent I may assume that ^^^^^"'^ of those who are listening to nui have read contemporary newspapers, ^nservatives; but for my part I remember that it is not so many months ago that even the Conservative press was filled with every kind of letter, from Conservatives themselves, showing the utter disor- ganization of their party, and the degree to which they had lost confidence almost in every leader whom they possessed. There were letters from Conservative agents, throwing up their appoint- ments because they no longer saw their way ; and later on there were refusals in large towns to attend at political banquets — because it was impossible for the steady Conservatives to accept the latest development of Tory democracy. And these are the men who now, pointing to differences among Liberals, say that, on their account. Liberals ouglit to rally to a cause which its own agents have lately denounced ! But let us look more ch)sely at the titles which they attempt to ^establish to tlie confidence of men who do not belong to their own political ranks. I wonder whether people still remember the events of 1867, when a certain number of men, who were afraid of the pro- posals which had been made by Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet at that time, denounced his Reform Bill, and, in conjunction with the Conserva- tives, ultimately defeated and turned out Lord Russell's J\Iinistry. "What happened immediately afterwards % The Conservatives brought in a bill which went much further than Lord Russell's bill, and entirely threw over all the nu'u 1)}' whose assistance they had managed to defeat his Government. History rejjeats itself — and I am bound to say — I regret to say it — but it seems to me that the Conservative party at this day rather resembles a rival eleven challenging the eleven which is playing on behalf of the Liljerals, than a great part}' with principles of its own. As a similar instance, let me, with your permission, put before you what happened in the case of the late Budget. Mr. 6o Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. GoscJien. the Budiret. Their Gladstone's GovcniiucMt, on the eve of a general election, when Attitude to \^ ^yj^g extremely critical and difficult to propose taxes to pay for what had been an unpopular expedition, had stood by their prin- ciples to this extent, that they determined that all classes of the community should contribute to the expenses. It would have been almost criminal in any administration, just l^efore a great constitutional change, such as that in which we find ourselves at present, not to have acted on the principle that sacrifices should be shared by every class in the community. They thought that, having greatly extended the representation, the old doctrine of taxation and representation going together should be maintained nevertheless, and that, while by a large increase in the Income-tax they would tax the Avealthy, by a very moderate increase in the spirit duties they wouhl ask the working-classes to do their part in raising the funds which were necessary in the circumstances. They were not afraid to face the electorate with an appeal that all classes should bear a share of the burden. And this was not only a patriotic, but it was a sound, and an eminently Conservative, appeal. How was it met % The Conservatives might have taken this ground — they might have objected to the increase in taxation beincT only put upon the class which consumed alcoholic drinks ; they might have said — it would have been a Conservative and a rational view to take — "You ought to spread this charge over a greater surface." But what did they do % They saw an election in prospect, and they raised the cry, " You have taxed the poor man's beer and whisky; you have not taxed the rich man's wine." The rich man's wine had not been taxed, but the rich man's income had been taxed by a very heavy addition to the Income-tax. The wine-drinking class had been made to pay its share, and there- fore it was a false and unjust argument to raise this class prejudice in reply to the Government proposal, and to cry out that the Government had spared the rich while they had taxed the poor. It was an electioneering objection taken at a moment when it eminently behoved the Conservative party to join in the declaration, "It is right that all classes should contribute to the national need." And then, what happened in the House of Commons? This Budget was proposed, and Sir Michael Hicks Beach got up and made a very rational speech, in which he pointed out some objections to the Budget, and then — entirely accepting the view that taxation to a slight extent should be put upon all classes Haddington, I'^th October 1885. 6r of the community — mentioned the tea-duty as a duty that might fairly be imposed. IJut no ! One of his colleagues saw that electoral cajjital would he made out of this suggestion, and immediately sprang up and threw over Sir Michael Hicks Beach, rebuking him for making what was an eiiiinciutly Conservative proposal. It was thus that these gentlemen who claim to be so Conservative attempted to catch the popular breeze. The result has been, as was declared in a speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, that, tlirough the fear of both parties to raise taxes before the election, on the principle that all should contribute to the common need, a heavier blow has been struck at indirect taxation than has been struck during all the previous years of our political history. And for this I hold that party, in great measure, responsible, who ought to have felt, if they had been true to the instincts and the traditions of their past, that the moment was one in which they ought to have interposed on the side of orthodox finance ; and that the country would respect them more, if they stood by the doctrines which they had always upheld, than if before an election they yielded to the desire for popularity. I must frankly say, I have sat in front of the Conservatives for many a year, and I have not been inspired, by anything I have seen, with any confidence in Conservative finance. You will observe that, in the programme put forward by Lord Their At: itttde Salisbury, upon the strength of which it is assumed that a por- ^0 Free Trade. tion of the Liberal party ought to support him, very little indeed is said with regard to finance. But, let me ask, what would be the Conservative view as regards matters equally important, perhaps more important even, to the community than finance — economic doctrines 1 What is their attitude towards Free Trade and other questions of that nature? "What do we know with regard to the attitude of Lord Salisbury on thc^ question of Free Trade % I am one of those who believe, and I hope there are few constituencies in Scotland in which the belief does not exist, that, whatever happens, this country must stand, without any hesitation, and without any qualification, by the doctrines which make food cheap, which make all the first necessaries of life cheap, to the consumer. That is my view ; and I confess that I have not seen such utterances on the part of the Conservatives as would inspire me with any confidence that they are sound on that point. On the contrary, I cannot see into some of their mysterious minds, F 62 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. and I must admit that T think Lord Salisbury lias got a very mysterious mind, and I do not feel that I have the key to it. By some he is considered an out-and-out Conservative. >Still there is a dash of recklessness in the constitution of Lord Salisbury, of which I do not know Avhether it is alarming to his friends, but it is somewhat startling even to his political opponents, and I say frankly that I do not feel that I have got a key to his mind. But I do think that there are considerable grounds for suspecting that the mind of the Conservative party, as regards Free Trade, is not in a sound condition. They have appointed this celebrated Commission on Trade. They have spoken much of the depression of trade, but I have not found that they have done what many Liberals, what many economists, what many writers have done, and that is, stated beforehand, publicly and frankly, their own views and convictions as to Avhat are the causes of the depression. I do not think that these causes are so very far to seek. Some lie on the surface, and others may lie deeper down ; but the Conservatives seem to have some difficulty in stating their own belief on the matter, because they wish to reserve it to their Com- mission to give utterance to what I believe in their hearts they have some suspicion of being the cause — namely, Foreign Tariffs and our Free Trade system. I say again, that on this second point I have no confidence, notwithstanding the introduction of the words " political economy " and " common-sense " into Lord Ran- dolph Churchill's manifesto — I have no confidence whatever in the political economy of the Conservative party. Their Conduct Well, but have I confidence in their power of resistance ? in 171 Office. their appreciation of the forces of the day ? Have I confidence in the degree to which they will stand by the convictions to which they have given expression ? I am bound to say — and I wish to say it without any violence, and without any party spirit, but simply in reply to the challenge that I am not to fire my guns over the heads of the Conservative party — that I see an extraordinary contrast between the views which they have held when they were in opposition and the views which they hold when they are in office. I will forbear to-night from speaking on a point on which I have spoken on one or two occasions before — namely, the attitude of the Conservative party towards those Irish questions which at present are the most im])ortant that can be placed before the con- stituencies. I am speaking of other matters, and amongst them is Haddinoton, \ith October 1885. 63 one incident which happened at the end of last session, to whieli the Conservative papers say I attach too great significance. It was in connection with a Poor Law question, and I call it one of great importance. The Conservatives had taken an entirely opposite view of the ]Medical Eelief Bill a few weeks before, but the nionient when the last days of the session saw them in office, their attitude changed. To the intense surprise — for 1 kudw it myself — and to the indignation, of some of their own supporters, they changed their front entirely, and passed a Bill which, whatever may be the arguments to be adduced on our side, had just before met with their determined opposition. Now, I wonder what Lord Elcho would say to that ? But I know what he says on another incident which occurred about the same time. There was a Bill in these unfortunate three weeks at the end of the session which displayed the extent to which the Conservatives would yield to the popular feeling the moment they were in office — a Bill which concerned the position of the Police. The Police are, as every one of us will admit, as a body, as capable of exercising the franchise as any other body of their countrymen; but, at the same time, they hold this extremely delicate position, that they are a force entrusted with maintaining order, not only in ordinary times, but also during heated electoral contests; and it has always been held that for this reason the Police should be kept clear of poKtics, and should not be put in this position, that, while they side as individuals with one political party or the other in the electoral contest, they should then have to interpose as officers of the State when one side or the other commit excesses. I do not wish you to give any opinion on this particular point. That is not the question. It is an emin- ently difficult matter, and one upon which great caution should be exercised. But the enfranchisement of the Police was proposed at the fag end of the session, and just before the general election ; and when Sir Richard Cross, the Home Secretary, was appealed to, he said with the greatest blandness, and with a kind of jaunty readi- ness, " Oh, the Police are a capital body of men ; let us enfranchise them like everybody else ; why not % " And so question after ques- tion went, I may almost say, by default, and this under leadership, and under circumstances which we remember but too well ; and yet we are asked to place our confidence, by preference, in the men and in the party who are now in power ! That is a confid- ence which I for one am not prepared to give. I see nothing in 64 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. the past which has justified it, and I see nothing in the present which justifies it. I must ask you to allow me to submit two more short arguments on this point. We have not only to look, as I have said before, to the manifesto, but we have to look to the general condition of the party. I am not going to-night to denounce either the recklessness, or the versatility, or any of the various attributes of Lord Randolph Churchill; but I do venture to say that the position which Lord Randolph Churchill has taken in the Conservative party is a matter which cannot be ignored by the country. He was treated by the Con- servative candidate for this constituency in rather a light manner. He said, "Oh, it will be said that Lord Randolph Churchill is somewhat too Liberal." Well, I have not confined myself to any statement of that kind to-night. I have not confined myself to the criticism of Lord Randolph Churchill, but I have carried my criticism to Lord Salisbury, whom I do not trust as an econo- mist, as a financier, or as a general manager of our home affairs. But we cannot ignore the position which Lord Randolph Churchill has acquired in the Conservative party, partly by his undoubted talents, partly by his aptitude for catching the ear of popular audiences. He has to a great extent — it cannot be denied — revolutionised the tendencies of the Conservative party, and I pity the good country squires, who will be educated by Lord Randolph Churchill in a school which will be more severe, and will make an even greater tax upon their intellectual capacities, than the school in which they were educated by the late Lord Leaconsfield. I could instance one point, a point upon which the Liberal Party are divided. A Bill was introduced with regard to Leasehold Franchise. This bill, introduced by a prominent Radical member whom we all much respect, Avas denounced by the Attorney- General of the Liberal party, but the bill was ouUrumped by Lord Randolph Churchill, now the co-leader with Lord Salisbury of the Conservative party. And these are the gentlemen, this is the party, who appeal to us and say, " We are so steady, we are so sober, tliat you must leave the flag of the greatest financier of the age,— that you must leave the flag of Mr. Gladstone; that you must desert him who has been the staunch upholder of the Liberal political economy to which this country owes so much, and rally to the new flag of the Tory Democracy." But then it is said, " Look at the Conservative success ; see Haddington, I'^ih October 1885. what they have done during three or four weeks in the way of passing Acts." Dear me ! If ever an unfortunate pretence and Fallacious pretension has been put forward by a political party, it is to appeal Clai»is of to the successful legislation of those last three weeks as a proof of -'-^V'^'^'/z'^ . ^ Success. statesmanship and capacity. Nearly all these Acts had been elaborated and prepared by liberal statesmen, or were the common product of Commissions, but not one of them had what one may call a spontaneous Conservative origin. And why could they pass them, as pass them they did % Why could they pass those bills, to the passage of which they now point with pride, asserting that through passing these bills they prove their superior capacity as statesmen % Because the Liberal opposition behaved in a totally different way towards them to the way in which they themselves had behaved to the Liberal Government ; and because in a memor- able debate — which I can never forget — they had so satisfied the Irish Nationalist party at the expense of Lord Spencer that the Irish no longer obstructed the business of the day as they had ob- structed Liberal legislation. And it is to success so achieved that they point, and say, " See, we passed the Bill for the Housing of the Poor, — we passed this bill and that bill, — we were able to do more in three weeks than the Liberals were able to do before, and we establish this as a claim to the consideration of our country- men ! " There is no foundation whatever for a claim of that kind. "We assisted them to pass those bills. They were bills which we considered necessary for the good of the country, and the Liberals co-operated with the Conservatives to pass bills which had a com- mon origin. Is it fair of the Conservative party to claim credit for legislative achievement thus acquired ? Gentlemen, I trust that in all I have said I have remained Lord Salis- entirely within the bounds of fair controversy and argument. I '''"'>' ^ Foreign have answered a challenge that has been thrown out, antl, — in order to show that I am in no way guided in this matter by any party feeling, except so far as I wish to establish the claims of my own party to confidence, and to deny the justice of arguments which have been put forward on the other side, — I will frankly say I do not agree with the attack which has been made upon the Conser- vative party — on the ground that they are carrying out certain arrangements in foreign policy, Avhich had been initiated by the Liberal party, but which they had themselves previously opposed, I mention this in order to establish a point to which personally I 66 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. attach the greatest importance in the interest of the country at large — namely, the necessity for continuity in our foreign policy. I hold that, if this country changes its foreign policy with every Administration, we give too great an advantage to those foreign statesmen who are ahle from year to year, and from five years to five years, to carry out steadily their aims and their objects. And I hold that the situation of this country is such that it cannot, even The Need of if it wishes, change the whole of its foreign policy at will. An Continuity. Administration cannot reject the acts of its predecessors. You remember when the Liberal party first came into office in 1880-81, how it was continually urged, and in acrimonious debate, that, after having denounced the actions of their predecessors Avitli regard to foreign policy, they were themselves carrying out the same policy. Mr. Gladstone and his colleagues were denounced over and over again ])y the Conservatives for doing certain acts in foreign politics which, it Avas said, they had condemned in Opposi- tion. They could not help themselves. They found the country tied to certain obligations ; and an Administration, when it comes into ofl&ce in this country, must tliink first of maintaining the word of tlie country to other nations, and only in the second place of its own interests and its own consistency. It must maintain the plighted Avord of the country. And so it has happened again. The tables have been turned ; and now the Conservatives find themselves in the position that, having denounced the Afglian arrangement, and having denounced the financial arrangements in Egypt, they have been obliged to carry them out. No blame rests upon them for having carried them out. The criticism is not fair that, though they condemned these acts in Opposition, nevertheless they now give effect to them. They must give effect to them. The necessary continuity of British politics compels them. It was said, for instance, that the Financial Convention with Egypt, which they had denounced, was nevertheless carried out by them. But they could not alford to offend all the nations of Europe, to whom the late Government had plighted their word. And so with Russia. What would be the position of this country in future negotiations, if it were known that a change of Administration would immediately bring about changes in the engagements which the country had undertaken % Where should we be ? How would this country be able to carry on its great international negotiations, and find its way through those increasing difficulties by which we Haddington, iT^t/i October 1885. 67 see ourselves surrouud(;d, if at any luonient the overthrow of a Minister meant the overtlirow of the policy of his country "? And I draw this moral, — I know many do not share my opinion, — but I trust the day will soon return when the foreign questions in which English duties, English interests and responsibilities are concerned will once more be lifted beyond the reach of our party struggles, and be treated simply in a national spirit. We cannot compete Avith foreign diplomacy, — we shall con- tinually find ourselves thwarted everywhere, if in negotiations foreign countries begin to speculate, not on the will of Great Britain, but on the will of a party or of a Minister. They must know that Great Britain is unanimous on certain points; and I hope that the difficulties with which both parties — the Liberal party and the Conservative party — have had to contend through foreign ques- tions having been dragged within the area of party criticism, may prove how important it is, if possible, to reunite upon questions which need never divide parties at all, and that both parties together may work for maintaining the reputation and the power of the Empire at large. For my part, I have no sympathy when I see men on either side expressing satisfaction with the failure of an Administration in its international negotiations with foreign countries. I never Avish to forget that it is my country, our country, which is ranged on the one side, and that if the Administration succeeds — to Avhatever party it may belong — its success should be Avelcomed by all patriots. Gentlemen, I have shown you, as I proposed to do, the claims — The Object of as I consider the futile claims — Avhich the Conservative party are Liberal Unity. pressing noAv, for the support of a portion of the Liberal party. Those claims Avill be pressed in vain, because I believe that the Liberal party are noAv thoroughly convinced that to face the great difficulties that are before us — difficulties to Avhich nearly all speakers to Liberal audiences have called attention — tlie unity of our OAvn party is essentially necessary. It is not necessary for the purpose of securing — it is not Avith the object of securing — power, or place, or supremacy, but it is because the situation is such that individual differences must be sunk for the common good, in order that a Parliament may be possible Avhich shall be strong enough, through the mandate Avhich it Avill have from the people, to maintain its dignity and its character in the face of the unox- 68 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. ainpled difficulties wliich it will find before it. I expect that we A Troubled shall have a troubled future. I foresee — perhaps I see too darkly Future. \^^ ^jjig matter — I foresee that, in the very first months of the newly-assembled Parliament, it will be necessary for the statesmen of all parties to display a firmness and a courage Avhich have scarcely ever been so indispensable in the whole course of our political history. I foresee that we may have scenes and difficulties whicli the country M'ill deplore — which every single individual in the country will deplore — and I do not think that under circumstances of that kind any symptoms of faint - hearted- ness should be shown. Xo symptoms should be shown that either party would be likely to yield to the temptation of buying votes that are not fairly given — fairly given for the pro- tection of the interests of the Empire at large. No such party ought to succeed. I know the responsibility which rests on all those who appeal to men to sink their diff'erences upon points on which their own opinions are strong. Eut we have a distinct programme before us. We have work to do wdiich has been pointed out — we are summoned to do that work — we are sum- moned to do that work together, with a large majority, with a powerful majority, conveying the confidence of the people ; but I think that there ought to be, at the same time, a distinct under- standing that, having sunk our differences for one object, no advantage should be taken of the majority thus acquired for purposes beyond the common programme upon which we are all agreed. That common programme involves legislation which you know ; it involves the four points which are put forth in Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto; but it involves more than that — it involves, above all things, the maintenance of the dignity of Parliament, and the maintenance of the integrity of the United Kint^dom. V. Delivered at Glasgow on the 14th October 1885. Mr. GoscHEN said — I thank you for the welcome which you have just given me. Glasgow seems to me to be eminently a political city. You listen to the views of statesmen belonging to Protest against various schools of thought, and it seems that you are glad Political Ahs- to see in your midst the representatives of various opinions. At *"^f^°"- no period of our Parliamentary history has there been more interest taken by all portions of this country in an election ; and indeed there has been no previous election which, for good or for evil, is likely to have so great an effect upon the destinies of this country. I trust that in that election all classes will take part, the newly enfranchised class and the old classes, and that none will say, " Our time is past ; we will fall back from the ranks." It is the duty of all, if they wish to give to the history of this country the same character which it has had in the past, to take their part in those political struggles and those political move- ments by which the destiny of Great Britain and Ireland is deter- mined from stage to stage. Let none exclaim, "Power has passed from our hands ! " It has been said that any person would be hooted from a Scotch platform unless he were able to go beyond certain legislative pro- posals which were first put forward by Lord Hartington, and which have since been embodied in Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto. I have not found that to be the case. So far, I have not been hooted from any platform in Scotland because of my refusal to endorse some vieAvs which form, not the authoritative programme, but possibly the A rrogramme supplemental programme, of a portion of the Liberal party. A ^"'^^'^^ '''^" '^ little time ago we were told that the Liberal party must have a '^ ' cry. We have something better than a cry ; we have a pro- yo Speeches by tJie RigJit Iloyi. G. J. Goschcti. granime. A cry may Ijo more takini,^, may be more stimulating, but remember tluit a cry, by concentrating attention on a single sub- ject may have this drawback, of crowding out the programme of the party at large. For my part, I think the country does not wish to go forward in any especially sensational manner ; and for the Liberal party it is enough to work out the programme proposed by its leader. "We Avish to go forward in support of that pro- gramme with all the resolution of which the party is capable, and with all the common-sense which characterises the British people, whether Liberal or Conservative. AVe have been told tliat we wanted a cry in order to kindle the newly-enfranchised class. (Hear, hear.) Yes; but I would ask that gentleman who says " Hear, hear," to look out the word ''Kindling the '■'■Wn^Q" in Johnson's Dictionary, and I will tell him what he Democracy:' y^--y\\ fin J there. He will find that kindling means " to inflame the passions." That is the first meaning given under the word "to kindle," in respect of its metaphorical meanings — and, in order to illustrate it, quotations are given according to the method of that dictionary. Here is the quotation to illustrate the word " kindle " — it is from an old English poet — " Kiiidhng each other's fires one by one, Till, all inflamed, they all in one agree." No bad description of an electioneering process perhaps not unknown in these modern times. But to me there is something which is more important at this crisis of our country, than to " inflame the passions " or to kindle enthusiasm, and that is to look to it that all classes shall unite together in a sober sense of what are the interests of the United Kingdom. We want enthusiasm, but we also want common-sense ; and this English, this Scottish quality of common-sense has distinguished the history of the United Kingdom, and has brought us forward progressively and peacefully, to the envy of Continental nations. I trust that it is not at this moment, because we have summoned to our ranks another numerous class, that we are going to abandon the spirit in which the Liberal party and all parties ought to act. Gentlemen, you will readily understand by what chain of thoughts I have been led to speak to you of common-sense. I have in my mind not only the special programme on which I think I may say that all Liberals are practically agreed, but I remember that we Glasgoiv, \^th October 1885. 71 have also to deal with a supplemental or unauthorised programme. And, again, we have not only to consider the proposals on this supplementul list. We cannot ignore the language used in recom- mending them, and the spirit in which they are put forward. In speeches which it has been my fate to make elsewhere, I have discussed in some detail the suggestions thrown out, the lan- guage used, and the spirit displayed in the controversy about Free Education, about Allotments, and other cognate subjects. One question I have not dealt with yet to the same extent. It is one of very practical interest to many in this room ; it is the question of Taxation. It will clearly be the duty of the coming Parliament to overhaul and thorouglily to examine the taxation of the country ; and it appears to me that it will be right and necessary to throw the two great branches, the two great depart- ments, of taxation together. I mean Imperial taxation and local Taxation, taxation. You will have to add them together, and then examine Imperial and hoAv the total ought to be redistributed. A certain class may be °'^°' ' paying too much as regards local expenditure, and may claim to be relieved in that respect, but the claim cannot be decided without reckonhig how much that same class pays in respect of Imperial expenditure. There are three great interests Avhich contribute to- gether to taxation. Imperial and local. They are land, capital, and labour. Land claims at this moment to be relieved of a portion of its local expenditure, because it is alleged that a number of new burdens have been placed upon it. On the other hand, it is con- tended that land has had certain immunities from Im})erial taxation, and that land ought to be put upon the same footing as all other property with regard to the death duties and other taxation. These claims, it appears to me, must be considered together. We must consider whether land is paying too much as regards local taxation, and whether it is paying too little as regards Imperial taxation. No question wiU more interest the next Parliament than what are Taxes on to be the burdens upon land % I see already that great expecta- ■^««'^- tions are formed. Looking to the projected increase of expenditure for many purposes — upon which I will ask you to let me say a word presently — looking to that increased expenditure, great expectations are raised as to the share of our aggregate taxation which land may be able to bear ; but is it not open to question Avhether land will be able to bear the same burdens now which it was able to bear when rents were 25 per cent, higher, and the selling value of land 72 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. was at least 30 per cent, above what it is at this moment] We have all a common interest in this. If we are not landowners, we expect land to contribute its fair quota towards general needs. "We are interested, therefore, in the taxal)le power of land ; and any measure, or any language, or any arousing of public sentiment, which would lower to any great extent the value of land, will be lowering a property to which we look to bear its share in Imperial and local taxation. Let us take care that we do not get on a wrong scent in this respect. Land must now, in the opinion of all of us, be treated like move- able and personal property. But, at the same time, it is said that land must be exceptionally treated as being a monopoly. Then, are we going to treat land exceptionally in both, respects, as regards taxation and as regards expropriation ; or are we going to say at one time that it is like any other property for taxation, and at another it is unlike any other property for expropriation % I do not ask you to answer that question, and I do not intend to answer it myself; but what I wish to do is to place this consideration before you and before the country — that if we are to look to land to bear a great portion of the burdens of the country — and I should be glad if we could thus look to land — we should remendjcr at the same time that we wish — and I believe the Liberal party are almost unanimous in wishing — that our land should be a more common possession, and should be held by many more thousands, and tens of thousands more, than it is held by at the present moment. Therefore I say in the interest of this movement, with a view that land may not be simply the rich man's luxury, but that it may be also the poor man's hope and the poor man's home, with a view to encouraging all classes — the striving middle class, the rising artisan class, and the agricultural labourer — all to hold and to possess land, let us not commit the imprudence of trying to place so great a portion of the burdens of the country on land that the poor man will be unable to pay the taxation on it. I wish, by these remarks, to show how necessary it is to probe these questions to the bottom. It is a popular cry to declare that land does not pay enough and that land must pay more, and that those are retrograde, selfish, and cold Liberals who say a word on behalf of the land. But I point out to those who hold that opinion, what they seem to ignore, that, while land must pay its fair share, its full share, its hereditary share, of taxation, it Glasgow, \/^th October 1885. ^2) must at the same time be treated with e([uity, if we wish it to be held as a desirable possession by men belonging to all classes of the community. And now one word with regard to the taxation of Capital and Taxes on of Labour. We know that the main point which has been put ^'^^'^"''■ forward as the first object of political solicitude at the present day, is to raise the material resources of the poor. That is an object in which we may all combine ; but in combining for that object, as I trust we do, let us remember that there is a certain confusion about the word " poor " which may lead to much misapprehension. "When we speak of the poor, do we mean those who are on the verge of pauperism ? or do we mean the bulk of the working-classes of the country] I find that political speakers jumble up the two ideas too much ; that occasionally they mean the proletariat — the pauperised element of the community — while at others they mean a body who would themselves repudiate the name — they mean the bulk of the working-classes, who, however much they may have to struggle, nevertheless have an independent spirit, and are not going to be pauperised or patronised by any other class. Well, we have to consider how taxation ought to bear upon the working-classes, not only on the poor, but on those who constitute so large a proportion of our force and power — our thriving and strong artisans. If, in the examination of the dis- tribution of burdens, it is found that any one of the three factors which have to contribute — namely, land, capital, and labour — have to pay too much, let the balance be restored ; but I venture to say to this meeting — I would say the same before an audience composed exclusively of working men — that it is essential to the general prosperity that all classes should make some contribution to the burdens of the Empire. We cannot look only to their means. It has been said that the Avorking-classes have become the masters of the State. How that may be, I do not know, if all classes con- tinue, as I hope they will continue, to take their share in the government. And let us hope that in this country Ave may never see a horizontal division, a division which leaves one party above a line and all those below it belonging to the opposite party. In this country we have hitherto seen that political parties have been divided vertically ; that there have been Conservatives and Liberals among the upper classes, and Conservatives and Liberals among the working-class. It would be an evil day for us if all Conser- 74 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. vatives were in future to be found above a certain line, and if all Liberals were below a certain line ; and if British politics should take a shape which, thank God, they never yet have taken— the shape of a conflict of classes instead of a conflict of principles. Well, I have asked whether the working-classes should not con- tinue to contribute a portion of the Imperial revenue. At present, they contribute in three forms ; they contribute through the tax upon drink, through the tax upon tobacco, and through the tax upon tea. I would not be content, as I trust you would not be content, to rest the taxation of the working-classes simply upon the consumption of drink, and thus to put the whole of their taxation, if I might thus express myself, upon a side issue, flattering our- selves that in taxing them we were only taxing them in the interest of the temperance cause. It is well that we should work for the temperance cause, but it Avould 1)e an error in finance, as well as in financial and imperial policy, if we Avere to rest the whole taxation of the working-classes simply upon the one item of drink. I believe they will recognise themselves how right it is that it should be brought home to them that they have a personal interest in the expenditure of the country, and that they should bring their vast influence to bear upon proper national economy ; and that they should not get into the ways of some other nations, who think that they may vote any expenditure because it is not they who have to pay for it. Then there is the third item, the third great factor — namely, Capital. capital — capital in all its forms — not only that of the very rich, of those who are called "bloated capitalists," of the large manufacturers. May I hope that you all realise that capital is, in the vast majority of cases, the friend and assistant of industry, and that therefore, while capital must be called upon to pay its fair share, and its full share, of national burdens, it is wrong so to present the case to the public at large as if a kind of fine should be imposed upon capital for being capital 1 I trust that no contemporary historian will have to tell the story of a conflict between capital and labour, such as is called the tug of war in gymnastic exhibitions. I do not think it a right description of the relations between the two, to exhibit them as pulling against each other in opposite directions. As for myself, while I would wisli to tax capital as heavily as is consistent with its free movement, and with that tendency towards accumulation which in all countries has been recognised as one of the Taxes on Glasgow, \dfth October 1885. 75 legitimate rewards of industry, I would not approach the subject in what I may call a hostile spirit, as if capital were to be ostracised, as if capital were an enemy upon whom you ought to levy a premium of insurance for refraining from an attack on it. It is not in a spirit of '* ransom" that capital ought to be taxed, nor is it in a spirit of desire to escape from ransom that capital should argue the matter. I know that another word has been substituted in place of "ransom." It is a much better word : it is "insurance ;" but I do not like that word either. I do not like the itlea that capital is to make sacrifices because it is afraid that, if it does not make them, it will be attacked. We have heard that the system of insurance sometimes has the effect of deadening the feelings of those who insure, and I should prefer that those classes who have capital should contribute spontaneously as well as by law, because they consider that it is right to do so, but not because they are afraid. That is not the spirit in which I wish taxation to be recast in this country. It is not before an audience as large as this that it would be A Graduated fit to argme at any length and in detail such a question as that of a ^"<:o'>i<:- Tax. graduated income-tax. I wiU confine myself to saying that you have not only to look at the motive which may inspire you in suggesting taxation, but at the general effect which such taxation will have ; and it is one of the first principles in regulating finance, that you must consider how far the collection is possible, hoAv far fraud will be avoided, how far you may, or may not, be closing the door upon that increase of revenue Avhich you desire. You are not able, simply, to proceed upon the first logical doctrine of ability to pay. A graduated income-tax has been tried, as Ave know, but we have not been told wdiether it has succeeded. Those wlio have examined the history of the case generally quoted know that the Act which imposed something resembling a graduated income-tax was repealed because it did not succt'ed. I will not argue out the principle of the matter at this present moment, but you have to con- sider, as 1 say, a vast number of questions in connection with the imposition of any new system of taxation. You must look at its probable practical success as well as at the logical force of the arguments in its favour. To sum up this part of the ques- tion I say — Let the new Parliament, let the next Government, re-examine the whole question, and it must re-examine it, putting Imperial and local taxation together. Let it see Avhat are the 76 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. GoscJien. claims — the hereditary claims — either for immunity, or for the retention of burdens long since imposed. Let it say what labour ought to contribute, what capital and income ought to contribute, and what land ought to contribute ; and then in a spirit of justice and equity, which may commend itself to all classes of the com- munity, let the new redistribution of burdens be made. Expenditure You cannot redistril)ute burdens without taking another factor and Economy, jn^o your consideration, and that is — How much money do you want for Imperial and local purposes together % "What is going to be your expenditure % A very important question to ask in view of many of the views that are being put forward ! We have been warned that there is a modern school who do not intend to uphold the views of national economy held in the past, and who are prepared to argue that increased expenditure will be justified, provided you put tlie expenses involved upon now and more capable shoulders ; but I venture to think that some of the con- siderations I have put forward will show that the new shoulders may have anyhow a good deal to carry. Supposing land cannot bear as much as it has borne hitherto, supposing the farmers whose profits have been immensely diminished are unaT^le to carry the load they have borne hitherto, supposing that labour is paying too much, and that a portion of its burdens must be put upon others — then there remains only the moveable property of the country to bear the excess burden coming from the other classes, and the excess of new expenditure that is to be incurred. Language is used with regard to a couple of millions here and a few more millions there, whether for free education or for any other purpose, as if it would be a flea-bite to find all this money. I say, be warned, because, if I have been able to make myself clear to you, there is already a considerable heaping up of a load that will prove extremely embarrassing to the finances of the future. The State and the municipalities will probably be found dear pur- veyors. You do not get things so cheaply from the State ; and though it is argued that in the future there will be extraordi- nary economical virtue about the municipalities, nevertheless I doubt whether what they furnish will be so extremely cheap. When you come to transfer a number of duties which now rest upon individuals, and call upon society, either in one shape or in another, to undertake them, you will find the cost to society will be greater than it has been to the individual. Thus I see in Glasgow, \dfth October 1885. 'j'j prospect, growing expeiidilure ; I see the necessity for a revision of taxation; and wliat I see impresses me with tlie profound con- viction of the necessity for extreme caution in the way in which expenditure is to be developed, and I shall indeed be sorry if the item of economy be struck out from the Liberal programme of the future. Well now, it appears to me to be of extreme importance, if we Vii^ilame in are going to look mainly to personal property to bear the burdens ^(■'^P^':^ of of the future, and if we are to have that rattliny income-tax of 10 ^f^'^^^^^J p 1 1 JSational ])er cent., which seems to be one of tlie dreams of tlie advanced ly^alth school — it appears to me most necessary that there should be a considerable income to tax. What will be tlie position of this country if, after having settled that large additional charges are to be placed upon income, the total national income should begin to decrease? I am one of those who consider that it is the business of statesmen to look not only to increasing the material resources of a single class, but that it is their bounden duty to see how far that national prosperity is either progressing or suffering, upon which the interest of all must depend. I have thought it somewhat singular that in many of the speeches which I have been reading, mainly, I think, in the case of the advanced school, little attention has been paid to that severe depression which, I am sorry to say, is lying on so many industries of this country. I can conceive why the consideration of this depression has not been prominently put forward. One of the rhetorical arguments of recent days has been to put two striking pictures before the country — the one, the extreme poverty of certain classes of the community ; and the other, the extreme wealth which is shown among other classes. But in the desire to show this contrast, in the desire to point to the undoubted extent of accumulated wealth, I question whether it is right to omit the consideration, or to ignore or to minimise the consideration of the undoubted fact — that for some years past our national industry lias not lieen such as to increase the profits of cai)italists or of the employers of labour. It appears to me from all the inquiries I have been able to make that, while wages have, I am glad to say, been still fairly maintained, the profits of employers — profits in most of the large industries of this country — have been very much diminished. (" No," and cheers.) I hear a gentleman say "No." I trust that he will be summoned as one of the first witnesses before the Royal Com- G 78 Speeches by the RigJU Hon. G. J. Goschen. mission on Trade, because if it is so — if profits have not been diminislied — the mind of the country will be much relieved. I thought that even in this city there had been thousands of persons out of work ; I thought that the condition of many of the in- dustries, such as the iron industry, the shipi)ing industry, and others which I will not enumerate, had for some time past been such that ju-ofits hatl been not oidy diminished but had been almost nil. If that is so, what is our duty % Our duty seems to me to be, first to face the grounds for this depression, to look at the natural causes which are producing it, and to see how they can best be met. It is not by ignoring them, any more than by exaggerating them, that we shall be able to accomplish anything. The Royal For my part, I must frankly admit that I have had the mis- Commisston. fortune not to be able to induce myself to believe that even the appointment of a Koyal Commission would be able to solve this problem. I will tell you why. I do not think that there are any legislative remedies possible for this state of things, unless you are prepared to accept the doctrines of protective duties, or to deal with the currency. I hope, indeed I am sure, I shall not be misunderstood. I do not mean to say that dealing with either of these two matters would have any effect, or would have the proper effect, in improving the present state of things ; but I cannot imagine anybody sitting down, even in the chamber where the Royal Conmaission meets, and thinking of any other legislative remedy than these. "What else can there be ? Some persons among the working men themselves have thought not of legislative measvxres, but of curtailing production. I should like to say one word on this suggestion, because I can easily understand how a philanthropic impulse might carry men away and lead them possibly to what might be an industrial disaster for working men themselves. They might say, "Look at the number of liours that men work ; let us curtail those hours, and then not only will less be produced, but the working men will have greater leisure, possibly with the same pay." Yes, if we lived in a land surrounded by a wall, that might be true \ but if, by curtailing production, we simply encourage our foreign rivals to rush in where we abandon the ground, what advantage shall we have derived % We sliall have stopped our production simply to introduce foreign merchandise into the markets we vacate. Nothing seems to me to be of more importance than always to Glasgow, i/ifth October 1885. rememlKT that we are not, and W(! never can be, in a position to Foreign Com- argue out these matters, simply from the point of view of Avhat we petition and do ourselves. Given the desire to increase — as philanthropists and '^^ " ' '^^"' politicians would equally wish to increase — the material resources of the working-classes by a rise in wages, — miglit not the cheaper labour of the Continent, side by side with our increased payments to the individual workmen on the produce manufactured, keep the more highly paid artisan out of foreign markets, and thus cause us to lose some of the customers, some of the markets, on which we have to rely? Clearly, therefore, so far as tlie material resources of the poor can be influenced by a rise in wages, the matter does not rest in the hands of the people of this country. We are com- peting with foreign nations, and we must look at the conditions under which that competition has to be carried on. There is one way in which we have increased, and I trust wa- The Cheap- shall continue to increase^ the resources of the poor. It is by ^'^"".'■^ enabling every shilling earned to command a greater amount of necessaries. I should like to see the man who could show us how, in the face of foreign competition, it is possible artificially either to raise wages or curtail the hours of labour. But the Liberal party have for many years steadily kept one object in sight. They have endeavoured to make sure that the earnings of the working man should go as far as absolute liberty of purchase would make it possible for them to go. And to those who accuse the class sometimes called moderate Liberals, but whom I would prefer to call common-sense Liberals, to those who accuse them of coldness I would say, Kead the speech of Mr. Bright, the okl tribune of the people, the veteran of the Liberal cause, the man whose name has been a household word at every Liberal gathering, not the moderate Liberal, but the old strong and stout Kadical ; see what he has said in the speech he made the other day about the progress of the people and the performances of the Liberal party in the past. But we must not be content with what has been done. I entirely agree with those who say that the states- men of the present day have no right simply to appeal to th<> services of those who have gone before them. Forward we must go; but I hope that we may be allowed to go forward, taught by the immense results, and taught by the progress, which the doctrines, not only of the Liberal party, but of the Eadical party of the past, have brought about. I was speaking just 8o Speeches by tJie Right Hon. G. J. GoscJieii. Conditions of future Prosperity. Importance of Foreign Affairs, now of the position in which we are pliiced as reganls foreign countries. I have often spoken of it before, and I do not wish to exhaust your patience this evening by dwelling on the various circumstances which hitherto have enabled this country to hold its own. We must look to oiir industrial laurels, and we must not tliink, — we must not be led aside even for six months by the idea, — that legislation will be of much avail to us in this matter. It is, as it always has been, by the strength and the skill of the British working man ; it is by the progressive education which may be given him ; it is by the encouragement of capital still to devote itself to every industrial enterprise ; it is by the combined action of all classes, and by steadiness on all sides, that we may hope to overcome difficulties which, mind you, are not weighing down our commerce alone, but are weighing down the commerce and industries of other countries as well. That is a ])oint never to be lost sight of. If they tell you to look at our suffering industries, and from that to condemn our system of Free Trade, ask at once whether industries are not even in a more depressed condition in countries living under that system which the Fair Trade party claim to be an advantage — namely, the pro- tection of their industries — the imposition of compulsory purchase at enhanced prices on consumers. I should not be doing justice to this subject if I were not to allude to the fact that in our dependencies abroad, and in the vast empire which we still happily possess, we have commercial advan- tages which are not shared by many of our Continental neighbours. I am one of those who have contended, and will contend here and everywhere, that it is impossible for a nation such as ours, with our foreign dependencies, with our foreign customers, to argue that we have little concern with foreign and international questions. There are some who tell the working-classes, "Do not concern yourselves with foreign politics." But our foreign politics nearly always involve some circumstance bearing vitally upon some of the great industries of this country. It is said, for instance, " What does a dispute in Egypt mean to the agricultural labourers in a Midland county?" (A voice, "More taxation.") Yes, it means more taxation. But supposing that through the loss of the route to India the safety of India was imperilled, what then would become of tens of thousands of Manchester artisans, whose commerce with India has been brought to its present state from the fact that Glasgow, id,th October 1885. 81 India is a dependency of Great Eritain 1 I wi.sli from tlie Lottom of my heart that it could be brought home to tlie minds of all the W(n-king men of this country that they have a deep interest, not in petty struggles or petty wars, but in the bearings which interna- tional transactions have upon their commercial relations with coun- tries, towards which they have duties, but in which they have also interests. I am never anxious to argue this question too much upon material grounds ; I like to argue it upon the duties which we may have to those whom we have undertaken to protect. I do not think that any class of my countrymen would wish to repudiate engage- ments that we have taken — engagements to men who have staked much upon the word, the plighted word, of this country. But it can be argued from another standpoint, which, perhaps, brings the idea better home to every man. It can be argued that, if foreign markets and colonial markets are important to us — and de})end upon it they are, at least in the eyes of those of us who think that it is equally important to consider how men can earn wages at all, as to consider how they may get an extra shilling on the wages they are earning, — because that is the point, — the industries of this country would fatally suffer if we Averc to lose some of those dependencies which at present are united to this kingdom. There- fore, when it is said, "What have we to do with a trifling incident among the Turcomans?" I say, "i^othing or all. Nothing, if India is of no importance to us; all, if India is of all importance to us." And so I want you to understand that we cannot shake our- selves free from the consideration of foreign politics. We must consider them in their relation, not only to the duties, but to the industries of almost every part of the community; and if we consider those foreign questions from this point of view, still more I trust may it be possible to enlist the sympathy of every class in the maintenance of the closest ties between ourselves and And of Close our colonies. I should be sorry to think that any events which Union ivith have taken place had in any degree shaken the desire of every Liberal, and every Radical, to maintain the bonds which unite us to the English-speaking communities across the seas — bonds which I believe to be a source of strength to ourselves, and a source of strength to the colonies, and a source of great prosperity to both. It is our duty and our interest alike, to stand by our Colonial Empire. I trust you have understood the drift and spirit of the observa- 82 speeches by the Rig Jit Hon. G. J. Goschen. tioiis whicli I liavc made. 1 will yield to none, and those who agree with me will yield to none, in the desire to increase the material resources of the Avorking-classes ; but we must look facts in the face, and it is not only unwise, hut in my view it is wrong, to hold out expectaticnis which could not possibly be fulfilled. I am told we are slow. You think, perha])s, there are faster means of arriving at the goal. By what means % (A voice, "Tax the landowner.") A tax on the landowner? Why! I would like to see the gentleman who makes that remark himself become a landowner. My wish is just that. Ikit that cry for a tax on the landowner reveals the spirit against which I have ven- tured to make a humble protest. What I do not see is, that what renal Taxa- I ^^'i^ call penal taxation up(jn any class would promote the happi- tion no uess of those wdio clamour for it. I know that if at this moment Remedy for ^^ were to attempt by any such penal legislation to discourage or Distress to frighten any of the great industries of this country, you might get some momentary advantage by an immoral division, but you would not get any final economical advantage to the class on l)ehalf of which you would have interfered. No ; and if you were to take the whole accumulated wealth of this nation, and divide it by the thirty millions of heads that compose it, and you were to give each their share, you would have ruined the future of this country — you would have struck at the sources of its pros- perity ; the class to whom you had given that distribution would have their small share in the accumulated wealth, but all the stimulus to future exertion, all those forces which promote civilisation, all those forces which have brought this people to its present position, they would all be annihilated, and by that one act you would not only have destroyed our repiitation, but have imperilled our very existence. It is true that this theory has been put forward in a somewhat crude form by the observation of the gentleman at the bottom of the hall ; but I object altogether to the idea that it is possible so to taj) wealth l)y force of law as to give it that vivifying influence Avhich you desire. I do not know whether I shall give utterance to any sentiment which will be called timid or reactionary, but I will .say that there is no country in the world, ancient or new, where wealth has been so spontaneously poured out as in this United Kingdom. You may tap it in future by force of law, but whether you compare what has been done bv the wealthier classes of their own accord, their muni- Glasgow, i/[ih Octobe?" 1885. 83 ficenco for public objects, or the suuis they hav(; spent in a tliousantl other ways, I say that this spirit which the freer system of this country has called forth in contrast to that which exists on the Continent, has been of invaluable benelit, both in inducing the Avealthy to be generous with their wealth, and in preventing that resentment between classes of which hitherto we have not seen mucli in this United Kingdom, and which, I trust, no language will ever call forth in future. There may be men whose creed it is to tap wealth l)y force of law ; there may l)e men who think that by the regulation of society they will lift the population, and will achieve untold advantages. But I hold that we have done much in the past on other lines, that we are doing much now, and that we will do, even on those older lines, much more in the future. It would be an act of folly, and almost of crime, to endeavour to cool that enthusiasm which on so many sides we sec rising now to the study, and to the settlement, if settlement be possible, of many social problems. We rejoice, all must rejoice, in the awakened conscience of the nation, and in the increased degree to wdiich the principle of duty — the duties of property, the duties of all — is put into the front ; but we must not; we dare not, we cannot, entirely sink the head in the heart, and we must examine the adaptation of means to the ends which we desire. None of us in the Liberal party— none of us, I hope, in any party— are going to stand by in selfish apathy. We will study these questions. We will bring to their solution all the energy that lies in us ; Ijut we must be convinced as well as touched, we must think as well as feel. It is in that spirit that we must approach these questions ; and, above all, I would entreat my fellow-countrymen to stand by one principle as the sheet-anchor of the future, as the sheet-anchor of their happiness, and that is the solidarity of interests among all the classes which compose the nation. Cordially recognising this solidarity, repudiating any antagonism between various in- terests, and rebuking language which would stir up resentment, let us one and all declare that it is an essential article of the Liberal creed that in heart and soul, and in every sense, we will remain a united nation. VI. Delivered at Hendon, Middlesex, on the 21st October 1885. Mr. Milntvs ^Ii"- GosciiEN said — I fim here on a pleasant errand to-night, CatidiJatiire. I am here to support tlie candidature of a great personal friend of my own. I don't come here to recommend Mr. INIilner iir the ordinary way, with the simple platitudes with Aviiicli men some- times support the candidates belonging to their own party. I come here to tell you that I believe in Mr. Milner, and that, if you return him, you will return a man who will do honour to the Divi- sion. I have known him now for some years. I heard him speak several years ago, when a certain number of us went down to Oxford at the inauguration of a club, which was called the Palmer- ston Club. A considerable array of men who had held high office in the State were present, and we had a very interesting gathering. Some of the undergraduates of the day were told off to make speeches, and amongst those speeches one especially aroused the attention of those who had the honour of sitting at the high table. "We lieard an undergraduate speak with eloquence, independence, and originality. That undergraduate was your present candidate, Mr. Milner. I have watched him ever since. I have seen him at Avork, and I believe that if you should return him, he will in the course of time take his place amongst the first men of the Liberal party. He has independence — I do not know whether it is a quality which is extremely appreciated in all quarters ; but I ought to t(dl you the truth. The deeji currents of his synq)athies do not run in an artificial embankment, of which other men command the locks. He thinks and feels for himself. I am here to-night to advocate the return of a Lilieral for this Division. I have at every place, where 1 have had an oppurtunity of speaking, recommended the unity of the Liberal jiarty ; and wherever I have spoken I have spoken up to the spirit of the Hendon, i\st October 1885. 85 resolution which has been put into my hands, ami which I am asked to move — "That this meeting expresses its earnest hope that the result of the impending general election will be the return of the Liberal party to power in a majority sufficient to counterbalance any com- bination of the Conservatives and Irish Nationalists." I cordially support that resolution. It is only by the union 77?^ Call of the Liberal party that we may hope to be strong enough to 7"'' Liberal meet any combination between the Conservatives and the Irish "^^ ^'' Nationalists. I will not speak upon the question as to the prol)ability whether the men who are the enemies of the integrity of the Empire will be found in the same lobby with the defenders of the British Constitution — I will not speak on the probability of such a combination ; but I will say that it is essential for the interests of the country that the Liberal party should be strong enough to meet such a combination, if it should take place. To ensure that unity, Mr. Gladstone has put forward his Manifesto; to ensure that unity, many individuals, composing the Liberal party, are prepared to sink their diflferences. Our Conservative opponents are extremely disconcerted and troubled at the idea of imity on the part of the Liberal party, and their tactics are extremely natural, when by suggestions, by insinuations, by taunts, antl by other means, they endeavour to destroy that unity; and I am bound to say that they seem to have an impression that a certain section of the Liberal party — the more advanced section — is playing into their hands. They seem to fancy that the advanced section is unnecessarily bringing to the notice of the electors subjects whicli cause differences amongst us ; they suggest that some amongst us may be, if I might use the phrase, riding for a fall. " On what other assumption," they may fairly say, "can we explain the utter- ances of some of the chiefs amongst the Liberals, exercising great authority, who appear, from week to week, to start new theories, as if on purpose to alarm a ci-rtain portion of the Liberal party?" I am suggestuig what the Conservatives are saying to themselves. " What on earth," I could imagine them to say, " did a certain statesman mean when, even at a social breakfast at Bradford, he started the theory of Triennial Parliaments ? Surely this must have been done with a view to widen the breach between him and the opjiosite section of his own party." But the Conservatives must not deceive themselves. Tliey will 86 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. not succeed by putting forward any sucli ideas. They -will not drive the average and the common-sense Liberals into the camp, ■\vliere Lord Salisbury is commander-in-chief and Lord Eandolph Churchill is chief of the staff. We shall not be driven either by the taunts and the insinuations of our opponents, or by the imprud- ences of our rasher friends. We know the duty which we have to perform, and we shall endeavour to perform it. And I will tell you wliy we shall not be moved by any of these Conservative sugges- tions. There is one view which they endeavour to rub in, in every Grounds of -speech that they make, and in every article wliicli they produce — Confidence in namely, that our great leader, under Avliom Ave are summoned once Liberal more to serve, has simiily become a ligure-head. I call that a very Leciders , ' offensive view, which will bo rc])\KHated by the Liberal party. And they have another idea. They hold that men such as Lord Hartington, Lord Derby, Mr. Childers, and others of that stamp, are going to betray the traditions of which they are the heirs ; are going to abandon the school in which they Averc brought up, and, with a turn of the hand, are going to throAV over the doctrines which they have learned at the feet of their chief ; that they are going to throAV over Gladstonian finance, Gladstonian economy, Gladstonian ideas as to the solution of our great social questions, Gladstonian views as to national expenditure, and, more than that, of national retrenchment ; and that they are going to celebrate the retirement of their leader by an auto-da-fe of his principles and (if their own. I call that an offensive view, to which I Avill never subscribe. The Conservatives further hold that the l)ulk of our party are so little impressed Avitli the views, the traditions, and the mode of teaching by Avhich, for the last tAvcnty years, the Liberal party has been guided, that they all would be prepared at once to abandon the paths on which the Li])eral party has accom- plished all the progress of which we are proud; and that they would be ready to adopt forthwith the doctrines of a totally different school. These are offensive views, to Avhich 1 Avill not subscribe. Confident in the loyalty of our leadt'rs — confident that they would not allow a majority brought together upon one pro- gramme and upon one liasi.s to be utilised for the execution of a programme on which the electorate has not yet been consulted — I beg every one who is here to-night, and every one over whom I have any influence — I would beg them not to fall out of the Liberal ranks. Hendon, 21st October 1885. 87 Our Conservative opponents say, " If that is your vi(!W, and if you are going to supi)ort a Gladstonian Government — if you are going to support the supremacy of the Liberal party— why then Coniroversks this controversy about competing suggestions and ideas that are "^'.^^ '^'"^ ^^^^ ])ut forward by some sections of your own party? "Why is there any use in opposing by argument the views of the advanced school?" Gentlemen, that brings mo to a point of considerable interest, both to the Liberal party and to the country at large, and that is, What is the present situation with regard to the programme before us ? For my own part I do not see any obscurity or difficulty in that situation. We have before us the programme put forward by Mr. Gladstone — the programme on which we are asked to unite, and that programme I will call the authorised programme, or, if any one prefers it, the authoritative progi'amme. That is the platform upon which we are asked to unite. Our opponents — the Conservatives— have little fault to find with that authoritative programme. But we are at a crisis of our history, and the oppor- tunity has been utilised, in another quarter, to place before the electorate, not only the measures on which we are united, but also other great issues affecting our future — great questions affecting the whole construction of society ; and upon these, a debate has licen initiated. With regard to those issues lying outside and l)eyond the programme authorised by our chief, liberty is accorded to every member of the Lilieral party, of which, on both sides, we shall claim to make the fullest use. Those Avho have put forward new views are entitled to endeavour to prove their wisdom to their countrymen, if they can. Those who see, or fancy that they see, that in those views there may be much that is wrong, are not only equally entitled, but they are equally bound, to tell their countrymen what they think. As I have said, our Conservative opponents see no use in any debate as to questions Avhich are not to lead at once to any political and party voting. I brush aside the suggestion. 1 won't admit that party considerations are entirely to close the mouths of all politicians. In the House of Commons it is difficult enough, sometimes, for men to speak the thoughts that are in their minds, and to the expression of which, whether those thoughts are right or wrong, the country is entitled. It is difficult enough in the House of Commons, l)ut as for the idea that, even out of that House, at a time like the present, there is any class of poll- 88 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. ticians belonging to the Lilteial party, or to any other party, who arc to have their montlis closed, and who, for fear of being de- nounced as wanting in party s])irit, are not to give their country- men the benefit of such o})ini(»nK as they may have formed on matters affecting the prosperity of the Empire — I say I protest against any such idea. I scout the notion that, unless we direct them to a particular issue in the present election, our utterances are of no value whatever; nor do I admit that the criticism — which is deprecated by the Conservatives as useless, and by the advanced section as out of place — has been of no use. Certain proposals, damaging, I believe, to the Liberal party, have already been re- moved by the force of criticism. We don't hear much more of a favourite doctrine, which might have had a great effect on a portion of the Liberal party, — we have not heard much, of late, of the famous "three F's." It has been found that the "three F's," how- ever congenial to Irish soil, are not particularly adapted to the British taste ; and, under the light of that " calculating criticism " which is denounced by some members of our party, the " three F's " have vanished from the unauthorised programme. The Author- I want to say one Avord upon the phrase, the " authorised pro- ised and the gramme." A distinguished Liberal challenged me yesterday to declare Unauthorised -vvhat I held as the authorised programme. My answer is perfectly "^ ■ clear ui)on that ])(nnt. I know of one authorised programme, and of one only, and that is Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto. That is what I call the authorised programme. The wisest and the most important suggestions may be made outside of it, but these I consider to be un- authorised ; and it is not necessary to subscribe to them upon pain of being excommunicated from the Liberal party. That is the point. If we go against the authorised programme, let them call "ana- thema;" but as to plans outside that programme, I won't say that their authors are not entitled to put them forward and to speak on their behalf, but we are not bound to subscribe to them. " No one," said Sir Charles Dilke, " no one can deny us the right of suggesting them." Certainly not; no one denies the right to put forward all the articles of the extra programme ; but, on the other hand, there are some of us who, basing ourselves and founding ourselves even upon expressions of our chief in his own Manifesto, will claim precisely the same right of speaking against, and voting against, these items of the extra programme. Do not let us drift into any misunderstanding. There need be no misunderstanding. We are Hendon, 2isi October 1885. 89 united upon certain puints, und otlier points are .simply 0})en questions. That is the true position. I am then asked, What are the questions to which you refer outside the authorised pro- gramme? Well, a graduated income-tax is not included in Mr. Gladstone's programme. It was said last niglit tliat a strong, and even a revolutionary, revision of taxation was witliin the i\fanifesto. But as regards the term "revolutionary," I am not entirely in accord. I shall wait to see whether the great master of modern finance, at the close of his fifty years of public service — after having brought u.s all up in the school in which we have learned so much — I shall Avait to sec whether he intends to introduce a revolutionary change. But I admit that tlie revision of taxation in some shape is within INIr. Gladstone's programme. I do not make the same admission as to a matter upon which strong Liberals are at variance — namely, Free Education. I consider that to be outside the authorised programme, — and we are not to be called anathema if we do not agree to it. Again, the question of Allotments, I take not to be within Mr. Gladstone's programme. I think Sir Charles Dilke said himself that the question of Allotments Avas not within it, but he said it was an essential part of the reform of local govern- ment contemplated by Mr. Gladstone. Xow, I wonder how he knows that. This is a matter on which I have the greatest possible doubt. AVhy is it essential to any local government reform under- taken by Mr. Gladstone ? I believe, if it were essential, Mr. Glad- stone would have put it into his ]Manif esto. He spoke of the reform of local government, he spoke of the reform of the land laws ; and the allotments are a link between the two subjects. They touch, on the one hand, municipal reform; they touch, on the other hand, the question of the Land Laws ; but Mr. Gladstone in his Manifesto said not one word on this question of Allotments. Therefore, I want to know how it can be asserted that it is an essential part of any reform contemplated by Mr. Gladstone ? I allude to the point, because we must have no misunderstanding of this kind. We must be able to feel that we have a clear and full expression of Mr. Gladstone's views within the four corners of his Manifesto; and for my own part I am not disposed to look beyond the four corners of that document. I shall reserve my view upon the question of Allotments; but I say this— and I say it weighing every word that I say — that men must l)e careful not to read into Mr. Gladstone's Manifesto anything which is not there, or else 90 Speeches by the Rigid Hon. G. /. GoscJien. Common- Sense and Utopianism. charges will he hrought that he has not put his wliole policy hefore us. Therefore, in the interests of the Manifesto, in the interests of the unity of the Liheral party, I protest against anything being read into that Manifesto which we don't find in the sentences of Avhich it is composed. I have only one word more to say, gentlemen, with regard to the speech of Sir Charles Dilke. He said that I seemed, on some questions, to be at issue with the bulk of the Liberal party. I am not aware what these questions are, and, if I am not aware what the questions are which arc alleged to separate me from the bulk of the Liberal party, I am not content to pass by in silence such an observation. What are the questions on which I differ from the l>ulk of the Liberal party? There was one. It has been settled, and now I am not at issue with the Liberal party. I am not at issue with its chief. I am bound to say — and why should I not say it before any meeting of my countrymen % — that it is my firm conviction that I agree as much with Mr. Gladstone as any of those wdio are my critics, who allege that I differ from the bulk of the Liberal party. Moreover, this I assert, that I am in perfect sym- pathy, and in agreement in opinions with Lord Hartington, with Mr. Childers, and with many otliers who have spoken on the Liberal side ; and, if it is said that I am not in accord with the bulk of the Liberal party, it implies that the bidk of the Liberal party have transferred their allegiance from the men witli whom I agree, and from the chief of the party, and that they have given their allegiance to others, wdth whom I may not be in siich perfect sympathy. Gentlemen, I have been asked one qv^estion more — and this is the last point upon which I shall come into confiict to-night with any of those whom I prefer to call fellow-workers with me in the same great cause, and with whom I, for my part, do not wish to establish such differences of opinion as, perhaps, they endeavour to establish with me. I have been asked, why I have said that the critics of some of the views held by the advanced school were the common-sense Liberals, and why I did not apply the same epithet to the opinions put forward by our extreme friends. Well, I wish to be polite, but I do not know how, within the limits of politeness, I can quite answer a question of that kind. What I have asserted is, that those who think with me are common-sense Liberals ; but I have never used sufficiently bad language to suggest, for one moment, that those who arc opposed to me spoke nonsense, so I do Hendon, 2\st October 1885, 91 not much like to l>c cliallcii-iMl upon tliis point. Hut I will ti-ll you, as I have been challen^^ed, whore 1 think un od'ence iij,'ainst common-scuse has been committed. It is not only in the precise proposals which represent the final result of many speeches and of long arguments, but it is in the suggestions which have been thrown out, in the modes of thought which have been encouraged, in the phrases which have been used, in the arguments which have been put forward, that I confess I have seen more of ardour than of common-sense. "When we are told, for instance, that the labourers arc to be restored to the soil, and when reference is made to the state of things in the fifteenth century, and when the position of men who, at the time, may have numbered three or four millions, is compared with that of a population of thirty millions, and the suggestion is made that these thirty millions should occupy the soil in the same way as the three or four millions occupied it in the fifteenth century, — gentlemen, it is extremely wrong of me — but I cannot see the common-sense of such an idea. I cannot see common-sense in putting forward views more worthy of a place in a book which I wish some of our friends would study, than of our more i)ro3aic days — a book belonging to a century later than tlu' fifteenth century — I mean " More's Utopia." Now, I have spoken of allotments. I am entirely in favour of allotments. I have never ceased to express my view that the more the system of allotments can take root in this country, the better for its welfare, the better for the social happiness of a large portion of our population. But let me illustrate my meaning as to what I call exaggerated ex- pectations, by a medical simile. There are certain remedies — good, sound, and wholesome remedies — which may be recommended as refreshing and ixseful to the constitution, but which ought scarcely to be advertised in this form : "To all who are suffering from de- pression of spirits, from congestion of the liver, from nervous debility, from exhaustion, from spasms, from rheumatism, try Hol- lo way's pills." I believe that HoUoway's pills are very good pills in themselves, but that they will not cure the whole list of diseases which they are advertised to cure; — and, similarly, when I see a particular remedy thus recommended : " To all who are sufiering from depression of trade, from congestion of industries, from foreign competition, from industrial exhaustion, and all other industrial ills, come and try my grand new patent of municipal allotments," — I say try it, but it will not cure the whole of the 92 speeches by tJie Rig Jit Hon. G. J. GoscJien. maladies on the list. That is the point in which I say the advocates of those views are deficient in common-sense. They urge these panaceas far beyond the limit at which they will really be effective. Let them try a system of allotments. I agree with them in aim, as much as many of those who criticise me, but I hold the principle of the system which they urge to be open to criticism; and I further maintain that they Avill do liarm, that they will divert the attention of the public from many other matters of the deepest importance, if they concentrate it upon a point, important in itself, but nevertheless not so important as to justify the monopoly of attention which is claimed for it. Allotments. And now, gentlemen, I wish to enter into competition with those who think that they have certain specific remedies which can be applied to those sufferings, and to those social shortcomings, which we all deplore. 1 repeat what I have said frequently before, that if by a revision of the land laws wc can increase the number of those who are interested in the soil, we shall have (lone something to increase the stability of the country and the happiness of its inhabitants. But let us be a little precise. What do we mean by allotments, and what is the relation of the system of allotments to the system of peasant proprietors? By allotments do we mean, or do we not mean, gardens sufficiently large, but not larger, than will occupy the spare time of agricultural labourers and their families — the allotments, of course, in the case of a man with a numerous family being larger than those which have to be worked by one man alone 1 Up to the point of giving to every agricultural labourer the opportunity of having a garden by which he will increase the comfort of his family — up to that point, I heartily go with the supporters of this theory. But when we come to the question of Peasant Proi^rietors, I say again, if we can establish a class of peasant proprietors I shall rejoice ; but I don't see at this moment how the agricultural labourer is to be transformed suddenly, or without a vast number of intermediate processes, into a peasant proprietor. Let us look at this matter like practical men. Is the agricultural labourer to depend for his subsistence upon the acres which are to be given him, or upon his weekly wages 1 If he is to be taken away from his present employment, and launched upon farming on his own account, I consider that we should be trying a very dangerous experiment. I do not object to it in the interest of the landlords or of the farmers, Hendon, 2\st October 1885. but 1 want to kimw whether it is necessary or wise, iu the interest of the agricultural labourer himself. I will tell you where the plan may su(;ceeil. It may succeed in the case of men who are not depentU'nt entirely upon their daily work for subsistence. If by such means you can increase the number of proprietors, so much the better, but I do not as yet see the process which is to restore th(>. agricultural labourer to the soil. Before we do so, let us be sure, not only that the soil will yield the necessary crops, but that these crops will yield the necessary price to remunerate the agricultural labourer. But now let me submit to you some considerations of a broader Positim of scope than those which apply to one class of the population alone. Agriculture. I think we run some risk that the constant arguments about school pence and allotments may divert the attention of the public, and of the Liberal party, from even larger questions having a deeper relation to the future prosperity of the people. As month after month goes by, it appears to me that the country ought to realise more clearly the dangers and the difficulties which are besetting the agricultural interest generally. There is a tremendous fall in ])rices, a fall useful to the consumer, imless the advantages of that fall are arrested liefore they reach hiiu, as I fear is frequently the case. I won't say anything about the fall in the price of wheat except this : — In my own neighbourhood, flour is now selling at 9d. a gallon, and I am informed by working men that the difi'erence in the price, as compared with prices even a few years ago, makes a saving in their expenditure of Is. 6d. a week. I rejoice in that statement. Nevertheless, as regards wheat in some degree, and most articles in a much greater degree, there is a diffi- culty in the system of distribution. That is the chief difficulty of the present day — a problem far greater than many of those to which speakers are continually calling attention. Here are industries being ruined by the fact that the produce of their labour commands so low a price m the market, and yet, when the consumer comes to buy, he cannot get the advantage of the fall. Here is another remarkable fact. The other day a contract was made for fifteen thousand carcases of Australian sheep at 4id. the pound, whereas I am perfectly convinced that, unless Hendon is a very much cheaper place than others, nearly lOd. a pound is being pai.l for legs of mutton. But, to return to the })oint, how are farmers, and how is land, to prosper with prices at these rates ? That is the II 94 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. GoscJien. problem wliieli forces itself on us. Yet at the same time when the landed interest is being subjected to these severe trials from foreign competition— trials which it must endure and traverse, by whatever means it can, for no Legislature will ever put protective taxes on the food of the people, — meanwhile it has to face another class of attacks. Let us beware that we don't make matters worse by launching out into crude and ill-considered theories, to frighten those who are interested in the land — deterring them from putting that capital into the soil which is necessary, not only for a good crop, but for the employment of labourers throughout the country. At this very moment, while men are anxious to plant the agricul- tural labourer on the soil, th(>.re is a new fear which is occupying the minds of some landlords, and of not a few amongst the farmers, and that is this : How can we go on employing the same number of labourers upon our land, if we are entirely uncertain as to the future to wdiich we are exposed? When landlords are told that, at any moment, a municipality may come down upon them, and that the whole tenure of land is to be subjected to new ]irinciples, would it be hiiman nature for them to come forward and employ a larger number of agricultural labourers in improving land of which they do not know that they will retain the ownership? These are practical considerations. These are considerations which cannot be lost sight of ; and, believe me, a man is just as good a Liberal if he puts forward these views, and gives his attention to these difficulties, as if he ignores them and passes them by. Conditioti of That is the position of agriculture. In some aspects the agricul- thc Labourer, tural labourer is better off than some of his comrades in towns. At all events, his wages have increased ; and mark you — for this is an essential element in all the problems we are considering — the wages of the agricultural and other labourers now command a much larger amount of the necessaries and even the little luxuries of life than they have commanded at any other time; and therefore the agricul- tural labourer has some conditions in his favour. He has, as I have said, larger wages than he had some years ago ; he has greater com- mand of the necessaries of life. Land is cheaper, if he could buy it. He has more opportunities of thrift, and the great exertions of those who have laboured in the cause of temperance have taught him rather to lay l)y his money than spend it in the p\d)lic-house. And so I trust that, undca- all these influences, the labouring man, with better wages, increased resources, cheaper food supply, and Hencion, 21st October 1885. 05 M'itli iiKiiv- thrift, greater solf-respect, and greater tcinijeranec, ^vill be al)le to go forward in tlie direction in which we all desire him to advance — namely, of becoming the o\vn(a- of his own cottage, and possibly also tlie owner of his own pint of land. But now, there is another system to which I should like to Co-operative call sjK'cial attention — a system wdiich has already had excellent Fiing. results in .some (juarters, — and that is co-operative farming. If agricultural labourers and others will unite, and endeavour, by acting togetlier, to secure some of the economical advantages of the larger holdings, together with a great and valuable stimulus to individual exertion, — then, I believe, you may find the means to ensure the attainment of the object we all have at heart, — the increased interest of the public in tlie land. I see a great future for co-operation ; and, mind you, co-operation has this advantage, that it gets over some of the difhculties involved in capital being necessary for the individual labourer. Give the individual labourer a farm on which he has to live : how is he to exist during the six or nine months before he can sell his crops ? And as to the system of loans to a labourer, with two or three or four acres of land, it is extremely complicated. But if you can bring the labourers together, if in a community you can find a number of working men who can unite and try the co-operative systeni of farming, — in such a movement, I confess, I should see great hopes. For my own part, I have always thought, that in voluntary co-operatioir you have the real antidote of compulsory communism. If men will act together, with a fellow-feeling for each other, in voluntary associations, — not only may you achieve the best material results, but you will have created a tone wliich will be far higher and better than the feeling of confidence in any local government, or reliance on any municipality in the world. I want the British communities, both across the seas and at home, to give to all the world an example of self-reliance. I have put lance in rest in support of this principle, and I have denounced the view that you have simply to look to society, or to municipali- ties, or to local government. I have maintained against all comers that by voluntary association greater triumphs and more lasting good will certainly be secured. Gentlemen, I had wished to say something to you this evening upon the question of the Depression of Trade, as it aflects other industries besides that of agriculture ; because I hold that it is our 96 SpcccJics by tJic Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. Foreign Com- petition aUil Industrial Education. bounden duty to see how the springs of the aggregate iiuhistries of the country may be kept running to such a degree that the whole of our prosperity may not suffer from drought. We must not look to one interest alone. We may labour for the agricultural com- munity — and let us labour in their behalf with all the energy of which we are capable — but let us also look to the position of trade in the large towns ; let us look to the conditions under which we can best hope to meet that foreign competition which is said to be weighing so heavily upon almost every branch of commerce and production. I cannot detain you by explaining the various respects in which I think we have lost some of the advantages which we formerly enjoyed. Lut the more we lose some of these advantages, the more let us cling to the other advantages which we retain, and the more let us see to it that we augment our facilities for beating the foreigner in every direction where improvement seems possible. How can we do this? There is one step on which we shall all unite — in which, I trust, all Liberals and Conservatives will Tuiile — and that is to increase the capacity of our industrial popidation by education. That is an essential point. While we concentrate our attention upon pence paid for primary education, let us not forget that there is another education upon which the industrial future of this country may depend. I refer specially to technical and industrial education. If it is necessary that the State should lend its great power and organization, that it should lend its assistance, in order to develop a perfect system of primary education, I venture to think that it is as necessary to step in in the interests of education between fourteen and eighteen, as it is to relieve the working-classes of the cost of education between five and fourteen. We must look to more continuous education. We must enlist the working-classes in its favour. We must not only think of increas- ing the material resources of the working-classes by artificial means of raising their income — but we must take care that this country shall retain such a position on the industrial stage of the world, that our working men shall be fully emjiloyed in all our manufactures. Some men look chiefly to the distribution of exist- ing wealth. For my part, I think that all statesmen, that all men who are interested in the future well-being of our vast population, slioidd rather look to an increasing flow of the springs from which prosp(u-ity may 1)e diffused in a continuous and broadening stream over the whole face of our land. For my part, while others look Hendon, 2\st October 1885. 97 to thii division of the spoils, I shall take iq) a position in defence of the wells. Beware, too, that the channels of irrigation be not hlocked, that Liberty of liberty of trade be in no way interfered with. Liljerty of trade 'J rade essen- would be better expressed by the words "liberty of exchange," Avhich is the French translation of our word Free-trade. Now, I wish to sound a note of warning. Let us take care that, wliile on the one hand we defend our system of liberty of trade against " fair " trade, we don't, on the other, adopt a system which limits freedom of property, freedom of ownership; freedom of labour. Let men be warned that, in some of the modern theories of the day, principles lie concealed which strike at that liberty of exchange which is at the bottom of the prosperity of the country. Freedom of exchange may be attacked from two different quarters ; and you will see on the Continent that there are no fiercer opponents of freedom of trade and freedom of exchange than those who are in favour of the limitation of the rights of ownership, and of regulation by means of the State. Defend your liberty, from whichever side the attack may come. I must not detain you longer to-night, though that freedom of Past Work exchange, on which I have just touched, is a very tempting field. ^"^ Present Shall I be charged here, too, that I am showing scepticism, while, '"'^'^ '^^' in truth, I am exposing heresy. Let me tell you what I have dinned into the ears of all the audiences to which I have been speaking, that if there are some of us who are not content to acclaim the specific remedies now proposed for the cure of all our social difficulties and disorders, it is not because we are indifferent, it is not because we are idle, it is not because we are sceptical. "Wliy, some of us even twxnity years ago were pioneers in that movement by which tens of thousands of the industrial classes in the metropolis have been better housed. Some of us were pioneers in the movement which raised the education of the children of the poorer portion of the middle class, and, by the reorganization of middle-class schools, brought excellent teaching at the cheapest possible rate within the means of thousands of families, to whom low fees at a high-class school were a priceless boon. Many of us have taken part in legislation intended to strengthen those Friendly Societies Avhich have developed the thrift of British working men, and to which I trust we may look much in the future, and from which avc 98 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. may hope to find much resistance to dangerous doctrines. Remember, too, that it is not more than fifteen years ago since many of us inaugurated that new system of elementary education — wliich has ah-eady exercised a vast influence for the good of the whole population. I will not weary you by reciting all the work wliich has been done by the Liberals of the old school. We have worked at the administration of the poor law ; Ave have endeavoured to mitigate the evils of that fearful system which appals the feel- ings of every man ; we have studied the means to rescue pauper children from the contaminating effects of their workhouse life ; we have laboured at a system, under which we should so bring up the children of paupers and inmates of Avorkhouses that they might live a more wholesome and natural village life, and be- come useful members of the village comminiity in their time. We have, in a hundred ways, done what we could — we, the older members of the Liberal party — to advance the social prosperity of all classes of the community. The labourers who come in at the eleventh hour may claim their penny, and the older labourers who have toiled long will not grudge them their reward. But let these older labourers not be told that they have not toiled at all, and that they are not entitled to the modest recompense of their countrymen's regard. ' Arm-chair Gentlemen, I have assumed that the audience which I am ad- dressing this evening is, if I may say so, a fair sample of the Li1)eral jiarty at large. I have assumed that it embraces various schools of political thought. I have assumed that probably some are here Avho may belong to what is called the more ardent and advanced party. I assume that there are also a num])er of gentlemen in this room, whom their fellow Liberals would jjlayfully call by the name of "arm-chair i)oliticians." Well, what does that meani AVhat do you mean by an arm-chair politician 1 Does it mean this, that those who are so called, somewhat resemble the physician who remains at home, who prescribes for his patients, who studies all the causes of disease, and who, by means of careful diagnosis, recommends the remedy which he thinks will best strengthen the constitution of his patient, — while the advanced poli- tician is the surgeon who goes forth to amputate limbs ? Is that the difference ? Does the difference consist in the degree of activity, or in the form of activity? I think, on the whole, it is meant that the test is the degree of activity ; and if so, I acknowledge Politicians.^' Hendon, 2\st October 1885. 99 it is a just reproach. Men have no Ijusiiiess in these days to sit at home at ease, and they must not complain if in that case they arc abused, or if they are thrust aside, — fur, unless they exert them- selves, they must lose influence and power. Never, so far as I can remember, has the country required more the active interposition of all classes, of all men Avho care for the country's interests. Never would indifference, political indifference, be in my eyes a more guilty fault. There may be rough work before us. The work may soon be rougher even than it is at present ; but Heaven forbid that, terrible as the temptation may be, any class should be bored into the idea of neglecting their political functions. I say, then, that all must come forward and perform their duties to the State, — and bring your charge — you will justly bring your charge — against men who dally in idleness, while such great arguments are being conducted throughout the land. I saw it suggested, that the man at the plough might complain, if the lolling spectator were to scold him for the manner in which he was performing his allotted duty. Yes, I Avill acknowledge that if the man who scolds is merely a lolling spectator who stands aside, then the action of that spectator will justify bad language on the part of the man at the plough. But if the man who remonstrates is a fellow-servant with the man at the plough, if he is working in the same field, if he has studied the same soil, — then if he sees that the ploughing is not such as to go deep enough into the soil, it will not only be his right, but it will be his duty, to inform their common master of the fact. I wish to be sure that in the ploughing of the soil which is now being performed the plough may go deep enough, and that the furrows may so be dra^\^l that the soil may bear fruit, under the shining sun of truth, the vivifying breezes of public opinion, and the searching harrow of fair and honest criticism. It is in that spirit that all must work for our common country which is our common master. Let us look to it that the seed which is now being thrown into the soil is st)und and gooil and clean. VII. Delivered in Brighton on the 4th November 1885. The Multitude Mr. GosCHEN said — I thank you heartily, my Fellow-Liherals in of Speeches. ^^j^g county of Sussex, for the magnificent reception which you have given me this evening. The electoral campaign in which wo are at present engaged has indeed laid a severe burden upon all who have tlirown themselves heartily into it. The strain has been severe, and the labour has been protracted ; but, speaking of my- self and of my personal experience, I can most truly say that every time that I have been brought into contact with such audiences of my countrymen as I see here before me to-night, I have met with such a warm welcome that it has fired me with fresh courage, and has given me fresh energy and fresh zest, to perform those duties which the nation demands of those who enrol themselves in its service. I am not surprised that the able writers in the Press, who every day in the week are bombarded at about one o'clock in the morning with speeches arriving on telegraphic tapes from all parts of the country, have had a surfeit of talk. They are trained politi- cians, and they know as much as, and often more than, the candidates they are condemned to read. IS'evertheless, I think that the discus- sion which has been carried on has been indispensable. So long as we were engaged upon what one may, I hope not irreverently, call the stock subjects of politics, so long as we had to deal with matters which had been debated for years in every debating society, and with which we were familiar from our boyhood upAvards — so long, perhaps, there was no need, not so much need at least, for that dis- tracting process which has been going on. But the ventilation of new topics, the fact that new proposals crowd to the front, the fact that the nation is called upon to decide upon many new issues with which we are not so familiar, — these facts increase the necessity Brighton, ^/k November 1885. 10 r for statesmen and politicians to throw themselves with energy into the arena of controversy; aiiWt'. the Conservative argument, "We do not intend to tax food ; we intend to tax importations to tliis country — not even the raw materials, but manufactured articles — it is thus we intend to remove the depression of trade? " (Hear, hear.) Very well ! Are you going to tax luxuries ; or are you going to tax general comnno- dities? I heard some one say, "Hear, hear," and I should like him to answer this question : If you only tax luxuries, what good will you do to the cotton industries and otlier great industries of the country % You may get a small revenue by such means, but you will not cure the depression in trade. If, t)n the otlier hand, you tax the staples of these great industries, if you tax imported iron, then is the farmer who has produced his wheat, in competition with the wheat producer in America and India, to pay for a protected steam plough at a higher price % Is he, through the pro- tective system, to be compelled to pay more for his agricultural implements? Is he to pay higher for all that he needs, and then not have protection for himself ? In the name of everything like common-sense, how is this Fair Trade ! I call it the most unfair trade in the world. I call it unfair to protect certain industries in the country and leave the others unprotected. I believe there is a gentleman not unconnected witli Brighton, who suggests that lead should be protected in order to increase the price. Then, is the farmer who wants lead for his roofs, to pay a protective price to the miner in Cornwall, while he is to have no advantage in connection with the wheat he produces himself? Such an argument will not hold water for one moment. We have experience on these matters. Where protection prevails as it does in Germany, there is the most furious jealousy among classes as to what industry is to be protected. The landowners and farmers say, " W(! must have protection, if the other classes have pro- tection." And so it becomes a war of interests. There are lobbyings of every kind, and alliances are formed, not upon politi- Brighton, \th November 1885. 109 cal grounds, 1)ut upon the grounds of pecuniary interest, and tliat which ruins the prosperity, is at the same time ruining the Parlia- ment, of Germany. That is the result of your Fair Tra(Uj and the protection of some industries, wliile others are h;ft unprotected. No ; the great fabric of so\ind economy is not such that you can take out one phmk witliout bringing the whole edifice to the ground. You must defend the edifice as it stands ; and all who care for economic truth must rememl)er that nearly all the parts hold together. No true Free Trader can be a regulator of prices by legislation ; he must recognise the principle of competition, and he must see — and it must be the duty of all economists to show — how the competition, which doubtless exists, can be carried on so as to end victoriously for the country to which we belong. I know that we are placed on oirr mettle. I acknowledge to the How to meet full the great progress of foreign competition. I see that many of Foreign Com- the old privileges and the old advantages which this country pos- A^^^""'— sessed in conducting her commerce may be passing from us. AVe must keep our eye on those which we retain. We must face the circumstances under which our industrial and commercial activity must in the future be carried on. What are those conditions? Let me look at some of them. Our industry must be conducted under favourable sanitary conditions. We must endeavour to keep it employed upon cheap raw material. We must take care that our routes of communication with foreign markets remain open to us. We must take care that our possessions remain inviolate. We must take care that we do not frighten capital away. We must take care to establish as cordial relations as possible between labour and capital ; and we must look to this, that our workmen shall have such opportunities of education, technical and otherwise, as may enable them to compete more effectually with their com- rades on the continent. In the progress of technical education I see much hope, but I also see a necessity for further and continuous national effort. We must hghten, too, so far as we can, the aggre- gate burden of taxation. These are the conditions under which we must attempt to carry on the industry of the country. There is one argument which is frequently used by Protec- tionists, to which I do not think we ought to be entirely blind. They say that to discourage the growth of wheat and other cereals at home is to that extent to be dependent upon the foreigner, because, they say, See the position to which Ave shall be reduced in a state I T lo Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. of war ! That brin.L^'s lue to a point on which I, in common, I trust, with many Liberals, have a strong opinion. I hokl that Free Trade absolutely requires that we should be thoroughly well pro- By the Main- tected by a mighty navy at sea. A country which imports as much tenance of our ^s we do, which sells as much as we do to foreign nations, must ^"■"^"^^ know that her navy is able to cope with every duty that may be upiemacy , ^^^^^^ \},-^or\. it. Now, here is a third point which I miss much in Conservative speeches. When the Liberals are in office, it is necessary for Conservative tradition to have a naval scare every five years. The Conservatives are now in office themselves, and I want to know, I should like to be told, what they think of the present condition of our navy, as regards the num- ber of our ships, and the condition of our coaling stations. I have not seen that Lord George Hamilton, or any Conservative orator, has ever stated that they would be obliged to appeal to the country for any increased estimates, but it will be a very curious coincidence indeed if they come forward with that cry imme- diately they are in a niinnrity. IIow do they find the country situated % They talk, and talk wisely, of the necessity for better organisation. But do they think that that will do the job? Do they thiidc that that is enough? Do they think that, looking to the number of our ships, we have enougii to cope with every possible combination against us % If not, it is their duty to say so now that they are responsible, and not afterwards when they have ceased to be responsible. Let them tell the country what is necessary. Do not let them shrink from the duty of stating, " We shall want further sums, if we remain in office, to strengthen the Xavy." If that is their idea, let them come out with it. Let them tell the electors. The electors of this country will not be shabby as regards the Navy. They know what depends upon the Navy. When we sec that even a poor country like Italy considers it indispensable to strengthen her navy, when we see that democratic France has thought it necessary to increase her expenditure by millions on the navy, it is not a time for this country to grudge any sums that may be necessary. Remember, our existence as Free-traders, and in many other senses, depends on this country remaining mistress of the seas. And this leads me to another point upon which I should wish to be allowed to say a word or two, I mean a question closely connected with the Navy — namely, foreign policy. Well, Brighton, ^tJi November 1885. i 1 1 now, I Avonder liow many persons in this liall would say, " Wliat are foreign affairs to us ? " I will tell you if you will allow me. Foreign affairs are the affairs of our customers ; foreign affairs are the affairs of our purveyors; foreign affairs are the aifairs of nations through which our great routes of communication pass ; and the grower of hops in Sussex might as well say that he has no concern with the beer-consuming towns in the north of England, or the manufacturers of IManchester might as well say tliat they have no concern Avith the affairs of those to whom they send their goods, as this country could say that it has no concern with foreign affairs. The coal miners in the North of England surely have a great interest in the railways whicli convey the product of their labour to the fireplaces in London ; and so those who manufacture English goods, or even the British housewives, who want Chinese tea, are all interested in keeping open the highways of that British commerce, ujion Avhich the prosperity of this country is based. It is not true, therefore, to say, that we have no concern with foreign affairs. I have treated this question from the lowest standpoint. I have not spoken to you of the duties which a country like ours owes tf) subject races. I have not spoken to you of our duty to watch those great Foreign Powers, whom I myself am not Utopian enough to think ought not to be watched with the greatest care. I think that we ought to watch their combinations and their movements with constant solicitude. Therefore I bespeak the attention of every man to our foreign affairs, not for the purpose of national glory, but for the sake of national existence, of national prosperity, and of national honour. And how do I Avish that this foreign policy should be carried on ? What are the characteristics that Liberals would wish to see distin guishing our foreign policy? They are clean-handedness, continuity, and courage. All these three characteristics I claim as necessary for our foreign policy. Remember the enormous advantages which foreign countries enjoy who can give anything like a continuous direction to their foreign policy. Do not let us lose more than is absolutely necessary of that advantage. For my part, I should rejoice if we could lift this great question of foreign policy above the recriminatit)ns of party, and make it the subject of a " Loyal and Patriotic Union." At present we suffer disas- 1 1 2 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. GoscJien. trously from the •\vaut of continuity, and from foreign questions being made the subject of party animosity. Let me give you an instance of the difficulties which party animosity introduces into our foreign policy. Take the mission upon which Sir Henry Drummond Wolfi' is now engaged. I venture to say that if that mission had been put upon a Liberal, and Parliament had been sitting, it would have been fore- doomed to failure from the very first. Why % Because Sir Drum- mond Wolff himself would have put the Minister of the day to such a cross-examination with regard to the intentions implied in such a mission that the whole matter would have become impos- sible of execution. Ministers have been — you will excuse a Scotch term — " lieckled " in Parliament to an extent which I believe has been most detrimental to the interests of the country. Look at this as practical men. If day after day you are pressed prematurely to reveal an intention and give a premature pledge in these complex foreign affairs, and in the end, in very weariness, you give it, the next day you may find that you have made a mistake, and that the pledge ought never to have been given. The insistence upon premature pledges is full of danger for the common good. Take the unfortunate events in the Soudan. Night after night Con- servatives pressed Her Majesty's Government at the time to say what their policy would be, in certain eventualities, with regard to the Soudan. At last they elicited most reluctant pledges, and those reluctant pledges afterwards embarrassed the action of Mr. Gladstone's Government, and contributed, I am convinced, in no By Conthmity slight degree to the disasters which occurred. If in our foreign in 0U7- Foreign policy we could, as we used to do, show a more united front to " '^•^'' the world, the addition to our power would be immense ; and I entreat all my countrymen to consider whether it is not possible to restore such a continuity of poHcy. I think the present is not a bad moment to resume that identity of purpose in our foreign policy which has been too much discarded. I wish to say this without party recrimination of any kind. The Liberals have lately attacked the Conservatives for carrying out their policy, and the Conservatives used to attack the Liberals for carrying out their policy. The fact is, that fate is too strong for either party, and both parties must act according to certain necessities which are imposed on the defenders of the interests of this country, upon whichever side they are. What is the situation at this moment 1 Brighton, \th November 1885. 11, Lord Siilisbury — I forget wlietlicr in this rlake, of Canada. IX. Delivered in the Calton Ward, Edinburgh, on the 16th November 1885. Mr. GosCHEN, after some prelimiiuiry observations, said — The The Issue at issues at this Election are too large, too serious, and too far-reaching, ^'^^ Coming to make it right for candidates to waste much time in personal mat- ters, in personal attacks, or in personal recriminations. What I want to do is to satisfy the electors, if I can, that I fairly represent the opinions of this constituency. For that purpose I am anxious to explain my views positively and not negatively. It is a poor way to conduct your candidature to speak chiefly of what your opponents are thinking or saying, without fully explaining your own position. I have not been content with simple criticism of the opinions of others, or with launching return blows at adversaries, I have declared what policy I would myself promote and assist to carry out. You knoAV as Avell as I do what is the great issue before us. It is this — How we can best carry forward in the next Parliament those objects iqxin which the Liberal party is united — those objects which have been put forward in the pro- gramme of him, who is the only recognised leader of the party, Mr. Gladstone. You know the famous four pomts. I should like to persuade you that they are, one and all, matters of direct personal interest to every elector. To-night I will speak more particularly of Local Government and Land, and endeavour to prove to you how the electors in this Division are interested in them. Many electors may think that, living in a city which is well governed, and where you have a large and perfect municipal government, you are less interested, or not at all interested, in the great question of Local Government Reform, which stands in the forefront of tlie programme to which we are pledged. I submit 124 speeches by the Right Hon. G. /. Goschen. to you that the citizens of Edinburgh are deeply mterested in this question, and I will tell you why. Not because of a necessity for improved government in this particular place, but because there will be a new distribution of duties. A number of duties, hith- erto performed by the Imperial Parliament, Avill, under any new Local Government Bill, be placed upon localities themselves ; and thus large questions in which I know many of the electors in this room take a deep interest — for instance, the Licensing ques- tion and the question of Local Option — will be settled by grantmg to the existing municipalities, and to the new local authorities throughout the country, a much larger share of authority than they have had hitherto. And we have a double object in view — the object of transferring work from Parliament to the mimicipali- ties, and thereby lightening the work of Parliament, and making Parliament more efficient for general legislation ; and, on the other hand, that of confiding to local authorities greater powers than have existetl heretofore, thereby lifting the whole system of Local All Classes Government to a higher plane. You will thus be able to secure interested in more rapid Imperial legislation in the direction of those many Local Govern- j.yfQj.jj-,g fp^ which we are all anxious ; and, at the same time, even ' in a city like this, you will have increased opportunities for exercising your civic privileges and performing your civic duties. It is perfectly clear that the local authorities, unreformed as they are — at least in the rural parts of England and Scotland — have not done their duty. They have not been able, through their constitution, to do their duty in regard, for example, to the important question of the Housing of the Poor. The enforcement of sanitary laws has been defective owing to the defective con- stitution of the local authorities. Now, I would ask any one, to whatever class he may belong, whether the execution of sanitary laws — the rigorous execution of these laws — is not a matter of personal importance to aU 1 Working men are specially interested in it. To them it is not onlj' a question of health, it is a question of wage ; because the stronger the working man, the less he is stricken down by sickness ; and the more wholesome his dwelling, the more wholesome the surroundings in which his wife and family are living, the more he will be able to perform his duty to his famdy, and to do thorough work. And so I say these municipal questions are not mere theoretical questions. They come home to every one in the country, and on their wise solution will Edinburgh, \6th Nove7nber 1885. 125 depend tlie licaltli and the proper housing of the people, and many other most important interests wliieh concern tlie whole of the community. Don't, then, think of local government reform as a matter that we can simply put on one side, saying, " Oh, it is all very well ; hut we shoiUd wish to liave legislation more directly affecting this or that class." Local government aficets all classes, and I invite the electors to insist on its reform as a matter that must l)e carried out by the Parliament which is ahout to be assembled. And noAv let me speak on the Land question. Here again I say. And in Land that, though this is a town constituency, you, the electors of Edin- ^■^<'form. burgh, and the electors in all borough constituencies throughout the United Kingdom, are deeply interested in it. In my opinion, all classes connected with the land — the agricultural labourers, tlie farmers, and the landlords — will find their interests promoted by the freer sale of land, by land becoming a commodity in the market like any other commodity. To all these classes the greater dispersion of land will be a source of increased prosperity. Arid if that is so, the inhabitants of the towns will not fail to have a large share of the benefits. No line — no arbitrary line — separates town and country, so that you could say, Here are all urban interests, and there are all agricultural interests. The well-being of the whole country hangs together by innumerable tics, and any development of prosperity amongst the agricultural labourers and the farmers, reacts Avithout fail upon the towns. Then, I ask, luive you not this further great inducement to undertake reform in the Land Laws, that, having to support an enormous mass of Imperial and of local taxation, you are all interested, individually and collectively, in each class of the com- munity being able to bear its share 1 And, looking to the increas- ing amount of expenditure, is it not personally important to us all that land should be in such a flourishing condition that, both through the income-tax, through the death duties, and through the local taxation which rests in so large a degree upon real pro- perty, we should be able to derive that income from land which otherwise would have to be made up by other sources of revenue ? Here, again, you see how the prosperity of land is a matter of the highest moment, as assisting other interests to carry the gigantic burden of our national expenditure, which we must be able to bear lightly and fairly, if we are to hold our own at all in the race of K T26 Spccc/ics by tJic RigJit Hon. G. J. Goschcn. nations. I scarcely think that the question of Expenditure has been sufficiently considered in the; ]mi'lyl)iir]y nf tliis general elec- tion, but it is one which Avill tax the nieniljers of the next Parlia- ment to the utmost. The state of the country is not svich that we can look with light hearts to any increasing burdens, and so I venture to put in a claim, as I have done elscAvhere, for one of the oldest watchwords of the Liberal, and the Eadical, party — for retrenchment and economy. Depression of The question of Expenditure is closely connected with that of Trade. trade ; and inquiries have been sent to me, which I am very glad to answer, with regard to the depression of trade. Three questions have been put to me. The first is this — Do you ignore or do you recognise the depression in trade ? Well, I recognise the absence of profits — and a very serious state of things it is — more than some of the politicians who have spoken upon this matter. I think we have arrived at a situation which is sufficiently serious to de- mand very considerable attention. I am not disposed to under- value continental competition. I cannot take a rose-coloured view of our immediate industrial future. That is my answer to tlie first question. I am next asked — but I Avon't trouble this audience much upon it — Whether I consider that the appreciation of gold has increased the state of depression ? I should expe(;t to be inter- rupted pretty soon if I were to enter upon an elaborate currency argument upon this occasion, but I am prepared to say that I certainly believe that the appreciation of gold has had a material effect ujion trade ; and that the absence of profits — which is the main feature of the present depression — is largely due to a fall of prices, representing a change in the relation of gold to commodities. The sul)ject is too abstruse for a puljlic meeting, but let me point out that the absence of profits is partly synonymous with cheapness of prices, and that low prices are not without their counterbalancing advantages to a country such as ours. Cheapness of price means cheapness of living, and I should look with the greatest pos- sible doubt on any schemes which tended artificially, directly or in- directly, to raise prices against the consumer. Well, I am further asked what legislation I would propose, or whether I could con- ceive that some legislation was possible ? I think action extremely difficult. I do not think that by legislation you would be able to restore any greater Inio^ancy to trade. I can fancy, on the other hand, that l)y legislation yon could do incalculable liarni. You Edinburgh, ibth November iZZ^. 127 might sto}) or liiiniper industries, or you niiLjht do what would almost be as l)ad — you iiiii;lit artificially force industries, to Im followed afterwards by what has so often happened in similar cases — by the crash of those industries themselves. You cannot solve the problem by such means. There are other ways by which you can better hope to meet the rivalry of foreigners. I have frequently called attention to them. Relieve the country, as far as you can, of any undue pressure of taxation ; increase our thriftiness as a people, promote our sobriety as a people, and pay the greatest possible attention to the organization of education, to technical education, and to all possible methods by which the workmen, and the foremen, and the managers of industries can best learn their craft ! These are the best methods by which to enable the working-classes to compete with their rivals abroad — these are principles, gentlemen, which have commended them- selves from of old, to the old school of Lil)erals — these are the principles which hitherto, notwithstanding ups and downs, have made us a prosperous nation. And noAv permit me to allude to the charges unjustly brought Crilicism and against those who see difficulties in ulterior measures which are £'t'^i"^Jasm. proposed, to the effect that they are wanting in enthusiasm ; that while others are enthusiastic, they simply criticise, or go backward. On Avhat single question which belongs to the range of practical politics may it be fairly said that I have gone back, or that I belong to the retrograde party ? What is at the root of the charge ? — a charge which I repudiate in the strongest possible terms. It is this — that, while I admire enthusiasm, and share the enthusiasm as to ends which are to be reached, I am not prepared to acclaim and to praise the first measure which is proposed to promote those ends, if it does not seem to me a practical measure, likely to realize the object at which it is aimed. Is not that the process which you follow in your private afi'airs? And surely public affairs have to be conducted in the same business-like way as your private affairs. It is not enough simply to say. Here is an object which we desire to reach, and if anyone opposes the particular plan by which we propose to reach that object, or if he criticises it, he must be hostile to the object and wanting in enthusiasm. I claim the right for every member of the party, as I accord the right to every member of the party, to examine the measures by which we are asked to pursue connnon ain:s. If I see I 28 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. that a cortuiii object is desired, and tliat measures are proposed which clearly will not carry out the i)articular object aimed at, am I furthering that object by saying that I -will vote in favour of such measures, if I believe that they will frustrate their purpose % That is not business-like. It is an unfair charge against a man to accuse him of being an enemy to the cause advocated because you can't persuade him to agree to your favourite methods for promoting it. For instance, in educatio)i 1 am as keen an educationist as any member of the Liberal party. ] will not trouble you by a repetition of the remarks that I ha\e made on previous occasions with reference to free education, nor with regard to my Instances of views on technical education. ]]ut this I have said, and this I Criticism. repeat, that I am most anxious that all those measures should be considered solely from the point of view of how best to promote that educational progress in Avhich the industrial future, the moral future, and the social future of this country are so deeply concerned. Some may think that the remission of fees in ])rimary education is the best step to take; others may think that if you spend the sum -which free sclu)ols would cost the country upon the improvement of the technical education of the working-classes you would better promote the connmon object which you have in view. AVliat 1 elaim is this — that in the debate which is proceeding in some parts of .Scotland, and in some parts of England also, as to what is Liberal and what is not Liberal, you are not to look simply at the particular measure discussed, but you are to see whether you are united in the common end ; and I claim, as regards education, not only not to be a retrograde Liberal, l)ut I claim to be in the very forefront of those who are anxious for the education of the working-classes. Again, as regards the land, I have repeatedly said, long before the present discussion had arisen, when the question of Allotments and other similar proposals came to the front, that I was in favour of promoting and, by every possible and legitimate means, of increasing, the number of peasant proprietors in all parts of the kingdom. I have often said — I said it ten years ago at least — that it Avas a danger that the land Avas held in .such fcAV hands, and that an increase in that number would largely promote the prosperity and stability of the country. Eut does that bind me down to agree to any particular measure devised, if I believe I see that it will not have the desired efiCecf? AVould it not be Edinburgh, \^th November 1885. 129 cowardly, would it not almost be treachery to my own convic- tions, if I were simply, for the sake of catching votes, to pre- tend to accept a measure, when I believed it would fail to accomplish the object in view? I am not particularly hurt by this charge that I have examined measures which have been pro- posed. It is necessary that measures should be examined. Those do a service who strive to ensure it — I do not Avish to speak of myself, but I think it is absolutely necessary that the duty should be performed — that every measure, every new measure, should be thoroughly thrashed out, as several measures have lately been thrashed out, before the constituencies of the kingdom. It is work that can be done with good temper and with all the courtesy of controversy, and without recourse to such epithets as " retrogade," or "sceptical," or "indifferent." Let me give you another illustra- tion in connection with land. There is the famous case of the three F's — fair rent, free sale, and lixity of tenure. If the three F's were enacted in a Bill, they would strike a blow at peasant proprietorship, which would render that system almost impossible of execution. You may have either peasant proprietorship, or you may have the system of double ownership ; for the three F's mean the most complicated system of double ownership — a system of double OAmership which I conceive to be totally inapplicable to the United Kmgdom, Avhatever may be its effect in Ireland. But you cannot have both. I have sought to illustrate the unfairness of the charge brought Recognition of against some Liberals that they are too critical. If they were Enthusiasm. simply critical, Avithout sympathy with the object to be arrived at, a legitimate charge Avould lie against them. But I claim, and I will claim before any audience of my countrymen, that I have as much enthusiasm, with regard to aims, as any of those who have criticised me. If I have the good fortune, as I hope to have, to represent the Eastern Division, — I am sure, though there may be many faults which jit'ople may find with me, that there is one fault which they will not find with me — that is, that I am deficient in enthusiasm. I agree with those who say that if there w-as not some enthusiasm, if there were not high aims and great causes in which we could embark, then the infinite pettiness and comi)lications of party struggles would before long disgust all the best politicians. "We must look to our aims, the greatness of our aims, in order to reconcile us to political life. "While these aims are 1 2,0 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. great, political life is })lea.siint. ]f these aims were small, Ijelieve me, it Avould be no great privilege to sit in the Imperial Parliament. There are other countries where men do not find Parliament so satisfactory in dealing with large questions as to reconcile them to the sacrifices and the struggles that attend Parliamentary life. In the United States, it is said, many men stand aside and aloof from political life. They do not find in it the large issues and high aims which might attract them. ]\lay that never be the case in this country ! May our political life always be such, as not only to attract the heads and hearts of men, Init may that life be such that we may struggle, each according to his conscience, each according to the best of his abilities, to promote measures which shall improve the condition — social, moral, and mati^rial — of all classes of the community. I do not envy those politicians — I do not know that there are many of them — who would simply narrow their views to certain material objects, to be dangled before various classes. It ap- pears to me that the one thing needful to remember at this crisis of our history is that to which I have referred to on many other occasions, and I have referred to it before to-night — that you cannot influence the well-being of one class without influencing also the well-being of other classes. All classes hang together. All Interests Their iiiterests are so intcn'woven, that if you legislate for the intenvoven. y^r^} benefit of anyone, you will And that you are legislating for the improvement of all. This l)rings me back to the point from which I started — the common, the joint interest of all classes in the work which we are about to undertake. We have to improve local government. Why % In order to see sanitary legislation more efficiently carried out ; in order to see the housing of the poor attended to ; in order to see landlords kept up to the mark of doing their duty as regards the houses which they let \ in order to keep all classes up to the performance of their civic duties. We have to prevent foolish fiscal legislation. Why ? Because any legislation striking at industry, any experimental legislation dealing with tariffs, any measure in the direction of Protection — all these would strike a blow at the well-being of all classes in the community. We have to stimulate education. Why? Because it will benefit all classes of the community. That is the spirit in which I approach these questions, looking to the community as a whole. I should lik'c to touch on one point more, the system of ex- Edinburgh, ^6lh Novembe?' i'6d>^. 131 acting a great many iiledges and pvoniises from members when they pro})ose themselves to constituencies. Now, I know some- The Mania thing of the difficulties which ensue. People often seem to i^wc^ f°'' ^^^'^^S"- that members of Parliament must have a set of cut and dried opinions which they can produce at a moment's notice, not oidy on the topics of the day, but upon every i)ossible question that can be by any ingenuity imagined. But most of us have not had time to examine every possible question that can possibly arise under any contingency, and this is how things go : A candidate is asked to pledge himself, we will say, to a particular resolution, and he is Aveak enough to comply. Well, what happens in the House of Commons % A resolution is proposed ; there is a debate iipon it, and, to the confusion of a great many people, a member gets up and says, " I Avish the hon. member who has proposed this resolu- tion would allow it to be amended by adopting the following words." Then there is a confused scene, some begging the hon. member not to accept the amendment, and others not to refuse it. Well, our weak candidate has pledged himself to the resolution. Is it the resolution in its original form ; or is it the resolution amended and changed by the words which have been intro- duced? Members round him say, " What are you going to do?" and he says, "I am pledged — let me see — what am 1 pledged to? I am not pledged to this particular resolution. I do not know to what I am pledged." 1 have seen these things repeatedly. For instance, after a resolution is proposed, someone says, "It is too vague — put in the word 'forthwith,' and then I will vote for it ; " and the mover of the resolution says, " 1 will put in 'forthwith.'" Then you say, "But I don't mean that. I have not promised my constituents to engage in legislation /orf/i^aY/i upon this subject;" and so the unfortunate candidate finds himself in this position, that he does not know to what he is pledged, and the greatest misunderstandings arise between him and his constitu- ents. Kow I say this — and I will say it even if it cost me my seat in Parliament — (cheers and hisses.) Yes, people like to get these pledges ; but, look to it, that the pledges are possible. There are Ijledges on impossibilities ; there are pledges on generalities. They are illusory. I tell you distinctly they are illusory ; and the more honest way is to say what is your opinion at the present moment ; but, I feel, as for pledges, that is a different affair. In your private lives, pledges would not commend themselves to you. You would not 132 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. pledge yourselves to generalities — you wouUl not give any general pledge of ^vllat you wuuM or would not do. You would want to know positively, that that which you promised, ymi covdd jterform, and you would want to look not only to the letter, hut to the spirit in which the promise Avas given. A constituency is fully entitled to hear the views of candidates ; but as to pledges, I say, in conclu- sion, that I will not hold out hopes, during the heated tinu; of an electoral contest which T know will not be realised afterwards when I am in my place in the House of Commons. There is nothing easier than to say "yes" in an off-hand manner to the first question that is put to you; but to carry out your "yes" in Parliament, when you get there, may be a matter of very con- siderable difficulty. When the day comes for you to vote for the candidates at the poll, if you shall say " yes " to my election then I will umlertake that I shall be able to say " yes " afterwards with respect to every pledge I have given, Iwth in the letter and in the spirit. X. Delivered in the St. Leonapd's Ward, Edinburgh, on the 17th November 1885. Mr. GosCHEN said — To-morrow tliat Parliament will end which Personaliiies was eleeted in 1880 — elected with great hopes of what it might ^/^^"^ l)e able to achieve — a Parliament Avhich, I believe, notwithstand- ing many of its shortcomings, has done very considerabh; things. But that Parliament during its later yetu's was unable to per- form its duty on accoimt of an organized system of obstruction — a system so organized that it was impossible for the united Liberal j^arty to overcome it. Well^ gentlemen, this Parliament has come to an end, and within a week from the present time it will be the duty of the electors throughout the boroughs of England, Scotland, and Ireland, to elect representatives, and to constitute a new Parliament ; and I believe that it will be the fervent hope of every man, to whatever party he belongs, that the new Parliament which will be elected should be strong enough, should be brave enough, should be persistent enough, and durable enough, to perform all those duties which the country expects of it. Within a week this contest will be over, and it appears to me that as the contest grows Avarmer, more weapons are employed of a questionable character, and which were not used at the earlier stages of the fight. Those who heard our great chief, Mr. Gladstone, last week, heard him read a list of the various cluirges, the malevolent and malicious charges, which had been brought against him. Thos(; who read the papers this morn- ing will have seen that Mr. Chaml)erlain had also a list to read of very atrocious cahunnies against his personal honour, ami against his personal character, in which his adversaries had indulged. Some of the electors in this constituency have been much in the same position as \\\v electors of Birmingham. They, too, have 134 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. False State- ments as to Religiotts Belief. heen treated to slaiukTS with regard to their candidates. I stated last night that I did not wish to mix uj) any personal questions or personal recriminations in this contest. I think it far more important to tell the electors what my views are upon the questions of the day. But some things cannot be passed over entirely in silence. There is an instance, I won't say of a slander, Imt of a gross falsehood, that has been put out by the canvassers of my opponent. They have been stating, I am in- formed to-day, not oidy that I am a Jew by descent and birth — for which there is not the slightest possible foundation, because my family for centuries have been Protestants — but that I am at this moment holding the Jewish faith and attending the Jewish synagogue. It would have been nothing to say that I was a Jew, because in these days, if I Avere a Jew, there is no reason why I should not come forward plainly and say so. I don't think any man ought to l)e ashamed of the religion to which ho l)clongs ; and I have never knojvn a Jew who was ashamed of the race to which he Ijelonged, or who prevaricated with regard to his religion. It woulil have been nothing to say that I was a Jew, but to assert that I am a professing Jew at this moment, is a wicked insinua- tion for this reason, that, if it were true, it would have been most disgraceful in me to have come forward and spoken of the Estab- lished Church of England, as the Church I myself belong to, and to have used other expressions conveying my attachment to the English Established Church. I am almost ashamed to allude to such personal matters, but I mention them to place electors on their guard. From the first moment Avhen I put my foot on a plat- form in Edinburgh, I have said I wished the struggle to be simply political. But if slanders are whispered into the ears of the electors, and if at the doors of meetings pamphlets, contain- ing every possible falsehood, are put into the hands of electors, candidates are almost forced to reply. Gross pamphlets have been circulated among you with regard to my connection with Egyptian affairs, full of garbled extracts, false statements, and incorrect figures. This ruljbish gives an entirely false colour to everythmg that I have done in connection with Egypt from the beginning to the end. I should be sorry not only that men who are the electors of this Division, but that any man should believe tlie stuff that has been written of me. In till' first instance, it has been })ut forward that I went to Egypt Edinburgh, i y Ik November i^Z^- ^35 in the interests of German Jews and speeulaturs. Tliat is aljsolutely False State- false. I did not ^o to Egypt in the interests of capitalists. I will """^' ""' ^ r^-, -, 1 ^^ ■ £ I^ fission to tell you in whose interests I went. Those Avho know anything ot ^^^^^^^ this matter know that I went to Egypt Avithout any personal interest whatever. I went to Egypt in an unpaid capacity, at great personal mconvenience to myself. There were thousands of people who had bought Egyptian securities in the open market. There Avere half-pay officers, retired civil servants, tradesmen of every kind, widows, thousands of people who had invested small savings in Egyptian bonds, holding millions of this stock. It was felt that the utter breakdown in the value of these bonds would mean ruin and impoverishment to thousands of families. Many were the letters Avliich reached me as to the misery which would be caused, and I went to Egypt in the interests of a great body of people — not of great capitalists or speculators. Speculators are very well able to take care of themselves. And now let me tell you the conditions on which I went to Conditions^ of Egypt. This was the first condition— that " it must b(i under- ^^^^ Mission. stood that if I undertake to represent the interests of the bondholders, I should do so simply with a view of securmg, if possible, their more equitable treatment, and advising Avith regard to the propriety and expediency of accepting or rejecting proposals that may be made by others, but that I should not, under any circumstance whatever, be involved myself in any financial transaction or combination. Secondly, if any financial combination favourable to English bondholders should be pro- posed by English capitalists in whom the bondholders Avould have confidence, I should Avish to be able at once to consider my functions at an end. Further, that my position should be entirely honorary — that is to say, that I should not re- ceive a single farthing for any services I might render. Not only that, but I should also expect that in any negotiation Avhich might be carried on, of Avhich I Avas cognizant, no paid agents of any kind should be employed. To speak quite plainly on this subject," I Avent on to say in my letter at that time, "what I mean is this, that no money should be made by anybody out of the protection of the interests of British bond- holders." These were the conditions — that was the letter 1 Avrote at the time 1 undertook my mission. And here is the last stii)ulation to Avliich I shall call your attention. "I can under- 136 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. take," I said, "no duties that woidd interfere in any way with my perfect freedom of political action. I could not urge any steps on the English Government, which, though useful to the bond- holders, I might deem politically inexpedient. I am bound to say that this may fairly be considered by bondholders as a reason for preferring their interests to be placed in other hands." I reserved by this stipulation my entire pcjlitical freedom. I said 1 would not in the least degree do anything that would jeopardise my perfect freedom of political action. And I should like to know why any one should have thought that I would sacrifice my political position, which I venture to say was one of which I had no reason to be ashamed — why any one should have thought that, in a case such as this, I shoulil l)e prepared for one moment to sacrifice my duties as a politician and statesman. I have seen a scurrilous pamphlet which states — what is a notorious and stupendous falsehood — that I did not join the late Cabinet on ac- count of Egypt. Whoever wrote that, unless he never read a newspaper in his life, must have known it to be false. You know the reason why I was not in the late Cabinet ? (A voice, " The franchise.") Yes, the franchise. It was not Egypt. I am almost ashamed to allude to such a calumny as that it was on ac- count of Egypt that I was excluded from the Cabinet, but you know — it is an open secret, though I am sorry really to allude to it — I have been offered since then some of the highest offices of the State. I have given you a specimen of the truth of the; allegations in this pamphlet. There is another statement, which is more of a technical nature, and I confess that to enter upon these matters at a meeting like this, is somewhat difficult; but it has been said that the arrangement wliicli F made involved this country The Arrange- afterwards in the complications which followed. It is not the metit of i^-]6. f.^(.t that the arrangement made in 1876 involved the Govern- ment of this country officially. The arrangement of 1876 was what you may call a private arrangement in bankruptcy. An elector cried out some time ago, " What about the Egyptian tax- payer?" Well, I am glad to say that in the arrangement made by me, securities were taken to })revent the fearful abuses that had existed before with regard to taking taxes twice over from the Egyptian taxpayer. I laboured as a private individual to my iitmost in order to secure efficient administration in Egypt, but Edinburgh, \']tJi November 1885. 137 it Avas beyond the task of private individuals, and therefore the scheme broke down, but it did not involve the British Govern- ment. Our Government became involved by the Control, as it is called, established by Lord Salisbury in 1879. It was in 1879 that the British Government established an official Dual Control. But it is said " Mr. Gladstone protested against the interfer- ence of Britain in Egypt in 1876. Mr. Goschen went to Egypt in 1876, and therefore Mr. Gladstone must have protested against his action ;" but the cinious point is this, and it shows the logic of pamphlets of this kind, that Mr. Gladstone made his protest hffore I went to Egypt, and his protest Avas directed against the official action which had been taken by the Conservative Govern- ment in sending in 1875 ]Mr. Cave to Egypt, in buying in 1876 the Suez Canal shares, and in sending Sir Rivers Wilson to the Khedive to advise him on finance. These were the points against which ^Ir. Gladstone protested, and he has over and over again, in the House of Commons, drawn a distinction between the private arrangement of 1876, which did not involve the interference of British Government, and that Dual Control which was established by Lord Salisbury in 1879, and which did involve such inter- ference. If you are not exhausted, I Avould wish to say one word further The Control upon that point. Lord Salisbury did interfere in Egyptian finance C/1S79. in 1879, but I venture to believe that both then and in 1875 and 1876, the intervention of the British Government Avas not, and you Avill be glad to think it was not — though it is a Conservative Government of which I am speaking — was not on behalf of the bondholders. It was to secure that degree of order in Egypt which Avould secure the route to India. ("Oh, oh.") Well, I am not S})eaking of myself ; I am speaking of a Conservative Government at this moment. Bankruptcy in Egypt meant chaos, chaos meant foreign intervention, and foreign intervention meant the loss to us of the control of the Canal and the route to India. You may doubt this, but that is my view, and that has been the view of successive Governments. (A voice, "It was the loss of interest.") No, it was not the loss of interest. That is an entire error. Of the interest much has been lost ; the interest has been cut down ; but the object of successive Governments has been to prevent thai chaos in Egypt which would mean the intervention of the foreigner. 1 38 speeches by the Ri^ht Hon. G. /. Goschen. And whyl Many peoplu wlin talk very glilily al)()ut Egypt, forget that alniDst every great European Power has Judges in Egypt, wIkj together form an International Court. A Code with an in- ternational sanction regulates the relations between foreigners and the Egyptian Government ; and under that code, every bondholder, whether foreign or British, is able to sue the Egyptian Govern- ment in that International Court and to get judgment. And judgment means this — that the foreign Government has a right to see it enforced. The British Government does not, as is some- times supposed, intervene on behalf of such pecuniary interests ; but foreign Governments do, and the German Government did interfere when Egyptian bills held Ijy Gernuui creditcn-.s were left unpaid. The deposition of Ismail Pasha was due mainly to the intervention of the German and Austrian Governments; and we found ourselves in this position in Egypt, that almost every Euro- pean Power possessed, by treaty right, a loma standi, ami in that way was able to protect the interests of the creditors l)elonging to their ])articular States. Thus, any settlement, which averted bank- ruptcy under an amicable arrangement, prevented that financial chaos which would have given every foreign Government the right to interfere in Egy] it. We might have said that there ought to be n(j iiiterfer(>nce in Egypt ; but the misfortune is this, that if w^e had not interfered, other countries who have not got the same sympa- thies — who, I frankly say, are not animated by the same motives, would have interfered, and so, in the interest of all, to avert bankruptcy was a public service. Intervention was not only in the interest of the creditors of Egypt, but in the interest of European peace. That view has been at the bottom of much of the policy which has taken us to Egypt. And now T have given you the true explanation of the position in wliich th(>. late Govern- ment found themselves in Egypt. Our future With regard to the future of Egypt, the misfortune is that we Policy III j^j.g^ through international treaties, so linked with other Powers ^^y^'- that we have got little freedom of action of our own. I have often been taken to task for having opposed, on some occasions, Mr. Gladstone's Government in its action with regard to Egypt ; l)ut I have been as often taken to task by Conservatives, for the aid that I have rendered that Government in debates upon this subject, as I have been by Liberals for the criticisms I liiive made. I have been entirely in accord witli Her INlajesty's late Edinbiirgh, ijih Nove}?iber \^'6^. 139 Govormiient in this, that liuving once declared they had gone to Egypt without any regard to exclusively British interests, and having intended to come out of it with clean hands, they could never have accepted a protectorate over Egypt, or sought for any special advantages for this country. That is one of the cardinal points of ]\Ir. Gladstone's policy, and upon that I have been entirely with him. Where I have differed from the late Government has been in this, that they have, in my humble judgment, not looked facts in the face sufficiently early; that they have sonu'times been Ijlind to the dangers surrounding them; that they have allowed themselves to be carried away too much by public opinion, and then have vacillated at im- portant moments. But I have not been more critical than some of the most advanced of the supporters of Her Majesty's Govern- ment. And I say to this audience, what I will say to any audience of electors or non-electors, that I do not propose to enter Parliament like the First Lord of the Admiralty in the comic opera — " Her Majesty's Ship Pinafore " — who " always voted at his party's call, and never thought of thinking for himself at all." I claim some right of independent judgment for myself. Let me now turn to some domestic subjects on which I have not Divellmgs of yet spoken in detail. I am anxious to speak upon a subject in Labourers in which I have taken the deepest possible interest for the last twenty years — the housing of the working-classes. I see views are put forward, as if now for the first time, that it is a desirable object, and the duty of the community, to see how the working- classes should be housed. That is a point on which I may say I am thoroughly informed, because twenty years ago I took part in the first movement made in this respect in the metropolis, b}' joining a body of men who first experimentalised to see how far blocks suitable for working-class dwellings could be built at moderate rates, within the means of working men. Under the system then inaugurated, tens and twenties of thousands have been housed, and a great mass of bad dwelHngs have been pulled down. And, now, what are the jirospects that can be held out to the working-classes of legislative action in this matter 1 Most of those who are present in this room are aware that a Commission has been sitting upon the housing of the poor, and for the last two years I have been at work on that Commission along with very able colleagues. There is a school of men who believe that 1 40 speeches by the Right lion. G. J. GoscJicn. Objections to providtnj{ them at Public Expense. hy forcing this matter on, and l)y putting it in the hands of municipal bodies and corporations, you will he ahlc to do a great ■work on hehalf of the -working-classes which otherwise could not h<> done. This is the point on which I would wish to en- gage your attention. It has been thrashed out at the Royal Commission, and instead of holding out impossil^le or Utoi)ian ideas, let us examine the sulyect together as practical men. Supposing you gave a corporation power to build houses, and to take compulsory powers to erect large blocks of liuildings, the hrst question which arises is this, Are the new dwellings, which are built with municipal money, to be h't at competitive rents, or at low rents? (A voice, "For nothing," and laughter.) I accept that as a humorous interruption, but not as an argument which will connnend itself to the working men of Edinburgh. They will not be let for nothing, Inxt there will be a certain body of men who will say, "Let them be let, not at competitive rents, Ijut at lower rents." Then the question is. Who are to be the recipients of this privilege of being housed cheaper than their neighbours who have to seek houses amongst buildings built by ordinary builders 1 How are you to find out ? How is this to be settled 1 Is it to be settled by the amount of wages of the working man'? If that is so, is there to be a committee of the Corporation, or of the local authority, to sit upon the list of various applicants for cheaper lodgings than the iiiarket can afford, and to decide according to the means of working men, whether they are to receive the privilege of entering these cheaper lodgings? If so, you place the independence of the working man at the discretion of local authorities and of municipalities. You give an inquisitorial power which, I believe, the working-classes would resent, to determine who is so ])oor as to be entitled to that particular class of lodgings. Well, then, think of the gigantic prospects of possible jobbery, think of the temptations to which common council men, or members of local authorities, who, after all, are but human, would be exposed, if they were in this position, that being themselves the representatives of the inhabitants of houses, they were to choose from amongst a large; number of appli- cants, those who were to be accommodated at rents below the market price. I believe that if these plans were submitted to the working-classes themselves, they would say, that such a system of what you may call charitable or eleemosynary rents would not be Edinburgh, \']th November i^Z'^. 141 one which wduM lit in with the sdf-ivh'aiit habits of thi- British people. But you may say, "At all events let them try at competitive rents, and we shall have an increased sujijily of houses." Let us test that. Will not builders be frightened at the prospect of municipalities coming in with their large funds at any moment, and erecting great blocks of buildings for tlie working-classes? Will tlicy not fear that the competition of pulilic money against them might bring them down to the point of ])eing unable to make any profit % And if so, woidd they not draw in their horns? Thus the work- ing out of the system might be that you would diminish the supply of buildings, at the very moment that you wished to pro- mote it, by giving these powers to the municipalities. You may agree, or you may disagree with me, upon this point, but I think you will admit the force of these observations, and that there are arguments at least on both sides, and that it is necessary carefully to look into these matters, so that you may not find your- selves landed in this position, that after you have made an enor- mous outlay Aveighing heavily upon the taxpayers, you would not have promoted the great object which you have in vie-AV. I admit, on the other hand, that everything must lie done to Beiier facilitate the erection of buildings — of improved buildings — for the Mdho.h. working-classes — that can be done. (A voice, "Co-operation.") Co-operation, certainly, so far as it possibly can be utilised ; and I thank the elector for that word, because I would infinitely sooner see this matter taken up by co-operative building societies. I would greatly prefer that buildings should be erected by societies with shareholders who are working men, and that, by this means, working men should acquire, as it were, the freehold of the tenements in which they live. During the last few months I have been engaged in investigations with regard to dwellings in the East End, and one of the first things you have to do— perhaps my observations refer more to some of the towns in the south, but the jirinciples are the same as regards Scotland — one of the first points to look to is, How can you get sites 1 How can you obtain areas on which to build at reasonable prices ? Well, on that matter, wherever there is property which has been badly kept, property which the landlords or the middlemen, or both, — whoever are responsible for it, — have allowed to be kept in a disgraceful state, landlords ought certainly not to receive compensation in proportion to the profit which they L 142 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. GoscJien. Dwellings of Labourers in the Country. make l\v keeping their houses in that state, Imt only in proportion to the profit they might get from tliem, if kept in a state fit for human habitation. I look, as I have stated at various meetings, in the main to tlic action of the municipalities and the State in laying hold of individuals, and compelling them to do their duty, and punishing them if they don't do their duty. I attach much more importance to that process than to the direct interposition of the State stepping in and relieving them of the duties they are bound to perform. I wonder if I should fatigue you if I were to say a word or two about the housing of the agricultural classes on similar lines. Those who are acquainted with this matter know perfectly well that there are very few cottages that pay. The owners of estates are bound, and have carried out their obligation to a considerable extent, to provide cottages. Ikit if these cottages had to pay rent to remuner- ate the builders, extremely few cottages would be built. I hope you will clearly see the aim I have in view. I don't denounce the object — indeed, I sympathise thoroughly with the object; but if the community steps in and says, " We will build these cottages," then, I ask, are they going to let them at rents below the rates at which they can be built, putting the difference on the community, or will they charge competition rates ? If they do so, would it not be probable, would it not be human nature, that the landlords would say, " Well, this has been a very expensive business, and we don't see why the community should not take it off our hands, so that Ave may no longer have to lose money on cottages as we have hitherto done?" That would be a most natural proceeding on their part. Now, here is another difficulty. Some reformers propose to compel the landowners to build cottages upon their estates in proportion to the number of labourers whom they employ. (" Quite right.") Quite right in principle, but let us see how it will act in practice. I agree in the view as to the duty of landlords ; and I believe in many parts of the country — I hope in most — under the stimulus of public opinion, which has become alive to the necessity, landlords are now multiplying their cottages, and are providing good cottages. I see the point of the cry, " Quite right." You .say. Compel tliem to do it ; but how is the plan to work out, proceeding on the principle that every estate must have cottages in proportion to the labourers employed 1 What would a poor landlord do 1 And there are poor landlords, and there Edinburgh, \']th November 1885. 143 •svill be more poor landlords. I don't think there are many land- lords who are very flush of money now, and many of them, after they have paid all the charges on their estates, have got a minimnm margin to live upon. Be that as it may, we must admit there are poor landlords, and avb will suppose them to be compelled to build cottages in proportion to the number of people on their estates. What will they do ? They Avill take their labour list and say, " What is the minimum number of labourers we can do with on this estate % We are not going lightly or carelessly to increase the number of labourers whom we employ." Such a system might in countless instances lead to a reduction in the number of men employed. Again, while insisting on improved houses, you might diminish the number of houses which would otherwise be spontaneously built. Now, whether you agree with me or not in the deductions I Proposed have dra^vn, you cannot contend, no one can contend, that the one ^^-"^'^^y °f way of looking at these plans is an advanced view, and that the ^ .. ^ other is a retrogade view ; that the one is a generous view, and the other a cold-blooded view. You acknowledge, you must acknow- ledge, all these difficulties; and, therefore, in spite of any re- monstrances that may be made, when I see proposals that seem to me to have a nugatory resvdt, I shall still think it my duty to criticise them, and to point out that they are not practical and will probably break down. One more illustration. There are two great advantages desired for the agricultural labourers — one that they should live near their work, and the other — (A voice, "Better pay.") I would like to deal with that presently. You would wish them to live near their work, and to have security against not being turned out of their cottages. It is said. Give every labourer fixity in his cottage. But the inhabitant of a cottage may take to some other work, and his successor — the labourer who has come to work in his place — cannot get the cottage, because you have given his brother-labourer fixity of tenure, and thus you are obliged to impose the difficulty on the one labourer of living two or three miles from his work, because you have given the other fixity of tenure. You see how full of difficulty these matters are when you begin to introduce law and regulation into them. But, having said this much, let me again repeat that I rejoice to see that public opinion is bringing forward the question of the better housing of the poor, and that 144 Speeches by tJic RigJit Hon. G. /. Goschen. I rejoice to see that throughout the kingdom a movement is at work — spontaneous, l)ut stinnilati'il l)y pul)lie opinion — to afford better accommodation for the working-ckisses. Compulsory May I allude to one more of tliese social questions? I was asked Insurance. yesterday whether I am in fa\uur of Compulsory Insurance for the working-classes — a system of insurance with regard to which, for philanthropic motives, a Committee of the House of Commons was appointed, and which contemplates that workmen should receive in their declining years a certain pension as a protection against poverty, on better terms and better conditions than under the poor law. Who cannot sympathise with such an object ? But, on the other hand, are not the friendly societies doing this work to a great extent in a manner which is more satisfactory to the work- ing-classes themselves? (A voice, " Some.") Yes, I am perfectly prepared to say that the greatest care ought to be taken that every one of those friendly societies should be on a sound basis, for I can fancy no more fearful IdIow than that, after a working man had contributed from his savings, there should be a wreck of those savings through the failure of a Society. It would discourage thrift, and cruelly disappoint men at the very moment when they hope to enjoy the fruits of their economy and self-denial. I speak under a great sense of responsibility, but I say nevertheless that I prefer the voluntary system of providing against the various calamities of life, ratlier than State and compulsory provision. What does it mean if the State interferes % It means an order to every working man : " Take a certain amount off your wages ; do not lay it by in the nianner that you may choose yourself ; you must pay it as a premium of insurance to tlie State fund, at the time and in the manner that the State prescribes." I claim, on behalf of the working-classes, that they may lay by their savings according to their own judgment, and as seems niost right in tlieir own eyes. "Where would be the building societies, where would be the co- operative movement, if we were to enact universal compulsory insurance % Again, I plead for the defence of voluntary movements against the undermining process of State interposition. I think I heard a cry a little time ago that the wages of the agricultural classes ought to be raised. I believe their wages have been raised to a great extent. Certainly, in most parts of the country, I rejoice to say that if we look back over a period of years, we shall find a marked and undeniable advance. And what Edinburgh, i^tJi November 1885. 145 is more, eacli sliillin.ij; ciirncil goes nmcli further on account of cheaper food, cheaper bread, cheaper tea and sugar, chea})er clotli- ing, than it used to go. And when I am asked, How can you increase the material resources of the poor ? I answer, let us at all events make sure, by wholesome and judicious and wise economic policy, that we do not strike at the roots of industry, and make dearer many of the commodities of life, while at the same time we inflict other injuries on the people. It is not by direct means The Best that much can be done by the State or by society to raise wages, Conditions but what can be done is, as I have said elsewhere, to establish ^f, '^'^" Industry. Industry in the very best conditions. Renienibor that we are not in the main an agricultural, we are an industrial nation ; and that our trade with the colonies, our trade with India, our trade with foreign countries, are all matters of supreme importance. To any audience, where working men are present, I am prepared to repeat, Avith unflagging persistence, that on them, as much as on any section of the community, devolves the duty of looking to it that our Empire shall be held together. I do not appeal to the vain- glorious sentiment which boasts of dominions on which the sun never sets. But I plead for a close union with the Colonies, and for such government of our fellow-subjects in India as will bind together the different portions of the Empire : that we may be able to keep our position among the peoples of the world, to find markets still open for the industries of our great centres, and to promote the well-being, not only of these islands, but of the millions beyond the seas whose lot has been cast with ours. XL Delivered in the Broughton Ward, Edinburgh, on the 23d November 1885. IVorkin, Classes. Proper Aft i- IMr. GoscilEN, after some preliminary observations, said — The tude totuards present Election has been distinguished l)y the unusual peculiarity, that the main points with which the next Parliament will have to deal are not only agreed to hy the mass of the Liberal party, but that they arc in principle accepted by our opponents, though we have no confidence in the way in which the Conservatives would carry them out. I>ut this agreement has not narrowed down the questions to be discussed in this election. Social subjects have afforded ample material for prolonged discussion and important controversy. I liave endeavoured to deal with a number of these topics. They are questions which interest me deeply, and I have endeavoured to think out carefully the various problems which they involve. In many of my addresses, I have spoken at length upon subjects which may be said mainly to interest the working- classes ; but those who have heard me will know by this time that I have always sought to convey my opinion that what is the in- terest of one class is also the interest of other classes. I can fancy that the independent working-classes of this country, when they are in a good-natured mood, would smile, and when they are in a cynical mood might almost scofF, at the extraordinary interest which candidates at the time of elections seem to concentrate upon them. I think that the working-classes are far too independent and far too intelligent to value at more than its worth any spasmodic in- terest shown upon particular occasions. What they will watch to see is whether, in the general course of legislation, and in ordinary times, legislators give heed to the questions Avhich particularly in- terest them, and follow them witli intelligence as well as make promises aljout them. I have been greatly interested by being Edinburgh, 2 2>d November 1885. 147 brought into contact with large bodies of working men, and having been able to hear their views and exchange opinions with them on social and industrial topics. But I am sure that there is no class who would wish that legislation should simply be occupied with themselves. The working-classes know that it is not sufficient that those questions should be attacked and grappled with wliich con- cern themselves, but that all questions which concern the nation at large must be equally taken in hand. And so, with your permis- sion, I should Avish to say a word or two this evening upon two matters whicli interest the wliole nation, all classics — I Avon't say alike — but all classes in a great degree, and that is National Expen- diture and National Taxation. Our opponents have alleged that most of the Liberal candidates National have occupied themselves mainly with questions of legislation, ^^pendtltire. They charge us with having neglected two great topics which in former times always occupied the minds of Liberals to a very great extent— namely, National Economy and the Efficiency of our Ad- ministration. And surely, gentlemen, I need not remind you that it is not enough for us to pass laws in Parliament. At an election time, perhaps, the mind is mainly concentrated upon laws. But besides legislating, we have much other work to do. In the first place, what is quite as important as to have good laws is to see that you have good administration for carrying out those laws, and that you do not simply write them upon the statute book, and then let them stand there as so-called legislative successes, exercising afterwards very little influence upon the well-being of the people. Xo ! efficient administration is as important as efficient legislation. But we have not only got to deal with legislation and the administration of the laws. We have been, and I trust we shall always be, the guardians of the public purse, — guardians willing even to incur some unpopu- larity rather than be ruthless spendthrifts of the national resources placed in our hands. Sometimes in private life you hear of a man who is said to spend his money like a gentleman, and afterwards you find that he is a man who is deep in debt, and Avhose generosity has not been exercised at his own expense, but at the expense of his creditors. So there may be public administrators of whom it may be said, " There is no niggardly economy there — they spend their money like gentlemen." But why don't they remember at every point that the money they spend is coming from the taxes of the people ? Now-a-days the parts have somewhat clianged ; and while 148 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. formerly the Liberal party used to be charged — and very seriously charged — both by their Conservative opponents and by public opinion, with being too stingy, as it was called, it is now said that they have been too extravagant, and highly-coloured pictures are put before the electors, sometimes even with mechanical appliances, with coloured barometers of expenditure, shoAving how, during the last five years, the Liberals have spent much more money than the Conservatives had done in the corresponding years before. I have in another place — in a very grave place — made a speech upon the use and abuse of statistics. I do not think that you will object if I say a word or two upon statistics in connection with this charge, brought against us by Conservatives, that we have been so extrava- gant with the public money. It is said we have brought up taxation to one hundred millions. Now, when I see the Conservative criti- cisms upon our expenditure, I always perceive that they confine themselves, with great ability and judgment, to totals, and that they do not inform the country or the electors in what respects we have spent too much. Apart from the question of foreign policy, where the issue may be how far the expenditure of the Liberal Govern- ment was due to liabilities left them in foreign affairs by their pre- decessors, — but leaving out these controversial topics, on what do Fallaciotts they say that we have spent too much money % I have not seen Totals. that this has ever been brought home. I see that totals are charged against us, but I do not see much more. Now, here is a point that will strike every one — that is, that, as our population increases, so does much of the work of the State increase also. For instance, if the Post-Office does more work, the expenditure of the Post-Ofiice will be larger. If the number of children increases — and in most parts of the United Kingdom the number of children increases very rapidly — the cost of their education increases also. This always tells against the last occupants of the Treasury Bench : the Conservatives have the advantage that they make up their bill for a period five years ago, Avhile they make up on,r bill for the last five years, and therefore, if there is progressive automatic expendi- ture — an expenditure which regulates itself — it is clear that in the last five years the expenditure must be greater than in the previous five years, without any change of principle, without any neglect, and without any extravagance. I hope I make myself plain. 8ui)pose that the State pays so much for every child, then in the last five years, when there were EdinburQ-Ji, 2 xd November 1885. 149 so many more children at school than there were in the preceding five years, the expenditure of the State could not hut be larger under that head than in the previous five years with fewer children. But ignoring that fact as too trivial — though it is not trivial— the Automatic Conservatives add \m their totals to show that they have spent so ^'^"''■^''"f ^^^ ,^^,-^11 • Expenditure. much less than we have spent from 1880 to 1885. Or look again at the case of the Post-Office, for that is a typical instance. In the Post-Office the figures of 1874 were £2,700,000, and in 1884 £4,500,000, and this increase, due to more letters being sent, due to more telegrams bemg sent, due to the development of the telegraph system, ami which is amply compensated for on the other side of the account by increased receipts, is included by the Con- servatives to show how reckless the Liberals have been in the administration of the public funds. You may go through a large number of other departments, and you Avill find that the great reason for the increase of expenditure, apart from any warlike operations, has been a progress in that expenditure which could not be avoided, but Avhich comes under fixed laws that are common both for the Conservatives and for the Liberals. Here is another point. A further reason why the expenditure in Effect of the last five years was greater than in the preceding five, is because " Grants^ the Conservative Government increased the system of contributions in aid of local government and local expenditure ; that is to say, that, while formerly fewer grants were made by the State in aid of local taxation, now, these sums, through the action taken, not by the late Administration, but by the Conservative Administration before them, are very much larger than they used to be; and, having saddled these extra grants upon the Liberal Administra- tion which succeeded them, they now point to the totals and say, " See what extravagant felloAVS the Liberals are ; they have greatly increased the expenditure." It is well worth while to pomt to instances of this kind, so that electors may not be misled by the mere totals, shown on these coloured diagrams. I saw the other day a statement made by a very distinguished naval officer who has only lately come into office, to the efiect that since the Conservative Government have been in power they have laid do-\\ai fifteen new men-of-war. Well, what will happen ? If, as I think there is every probability, the Liberals have a majority at the coming elections, the Liberal Government will have to pay for these fifteen ships which have been commenced by the Conser- 1 50 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. vatives. (A voice, " They are needed.") Whether they are needed, is not the question I am at the moment dealmg with. If they are needed, why don't tlie Conservatives boldly say, " If we remain in power, we shall have to increase our navy estimates by so MisUading much money T' What I wisli to illustrate is the inconsistency Tests of q£ (.ijii„iing credit for laying down fifteen ships, and at the Expenditure. ^^^^^ ^.^^^ pointing out the great extravagance of the expenditure which they render necessary. I think it is liigldy probable that the new ships ought to be commenced, but I object that the Conservative Government should have made a beginning, or pre- tended to make a beginning, with the ships, when they have not got the money to spend upon them. They will make drawiiigs, and have everything ready, and tlien, when tlic Liberals come into office, the Liberals will begin to pay the bill. Some years hence, when there is another general election, it Avill be said, in the first place, by the Conservatives, " Why, Ave began fifteen slii])S during the six months that we were in office ; but the Liberals began no ships during the next two years." Why not? Because we shall be finishing these ships which tlie Conservative Government began. And in the next place, when the time comes, we shall have more barometric diagrams, showing, in coloured figures, hoAV enormously the Liberals have again raised tlie national expenditure, mthout a foot-note to say that part of the increase was due to the fifteen ships which tlie Conservatives had commenced. Gentlemen, of course I hold that the national expenditure should be closely watched. I confess I am myself uneasy at the tendency, which I see in many quarters, to neglect public economy. The view is even sometimes put forward that, if you can only devise a system of taxation by which you may put the burden upon new shoulders, it will no longer be so necessary to pay that attention to national economy which has been the great boast of the Liberal party in time past. But I am of opinion that wherever you place the taxation, hoAvever you may try to shift it from one shoulder to another shoidder, an exorbitant national expenditure weighs upon the people at large, cripples their industry, and is distinctly a great national disadvantage. I say, therefore, the economical adminis- tration of the national finances must always be treated as a matter of vital importance to all classes of the community. Now, will you permit me to say a Avord oi- two upon the question of Taxation, and the means of raising these large sums Edinburgh, 2 ^id November 1885. 151 whicli arc necessary Loth for our local and for our linpi-rial services? No person will take an adequate view of the situation, who does not put the cost of these two great services together. Some taxes may be placed upon one class of people or upon one kind of pro- perty, others upon another class and upon other kinds of property, but you must take the whole together. I hope I may, before any audience, however Eadical, however democratic, put forward the view, with every chance that it will be accepted, that, while a re- adjustment of burdens may take place, and Avhilo the most rigorous examination must be made as to whether labour pays too much in the present circumstances of the case, never- theless taxation and representation should go together, and representation and taxation, and that no class in the community Avould wish to stand aloof from bearing its share — if it be not more than its just share — of those joint burdens which it is necessary that the nation at large should carry. The most numer- ous class in the country, having come into power, will desire, I believe, a careful examination to discover what is an equitable system of taxation, but they will not hold that the burden should be entirely borne by others. They will stand by the principle, which has always been a principle in the British Constitution, that all classes, according to their ability, should share, not only in the privileges, but in the duties and in the responsibilities of the State. Well, labour, real property, and personal property, all contriljute a share ; and one of the most interesting duties of the new Parliament will be, to bring all the figures and all the facts together, and to examine what property, if any, and what class, if any, is not bearing its full share of contributions to the State. I said the other night that it fell to my lot — I think in the Distributiov year 1871 — to make a very exhaustive examination as to the "/ ^''-*''^''^'*- burdens on land. It was an interestmg enquiry. I had to examine what proportion of taxation Avas being borne by land as compared with other property, and how the burden on the land compared with the burden borne by land in other countries. It was necessary to put both local and Imperial taxation together, and tliis was one of the results — that, as regards Imperial taxation alone, land in this country paid a smaller proportion towards the Imperial revenue than in almost any country in Europe. Land, I think, was paying only 12 per cent, of the total revenue raised by the State, which was clearly an insufficient amount. But it was 152 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschcn. necessary to examine also ^vllat pniportiuu veal iiiiipcrty bore in local taxation. That, of course, \\ a^^ a very large sum. In that year the rates amounted to £10,500,000 in England, or, 1 think, £20,000,000 for the whole of the United Kingdom, a sum which, I am sorry to see — and it shows the immense importance of the matter— has risen from £20,000,000 at that time to £32,000,000 or £33,000,000 ]iow. 1 think it is high time that local taxa- tion should he overhauled when we see these gigantic sums The Burdens spent by local authorities. Incidentally let me say that at that of Land, time there Avere twenty different local authorities Avhich were spend- ing money in England. How far the case may he as complicated in Scotland I do not know. But to- return to the sum of £16,500,000 wliicli rested upon real projierty. This addition brought up the total proportion of Imperial and local taxation l)aid by real property to about 29 per cent, of the Avhole ; and that curiously enough Avas almost exactly the same percentage as the percentage in France. Keal property paid infinitely less towards Imperial taxation in England ; but, adduig local taxes, it paid the same as it paid in France. And Houses. But this is only half of the question. Real property is composed of two great factors — land and houses; and land, as it were, has had the advantage of an extremely rich and prosperous partner in houses. While at the l^eginning land and houses paid almost the same sum in taxes, the increase in the number of houses became so stupendous that the burdens on land were greatly lightened, because the proportion paid by houses was so much greater. When we hear that real i)roperty is bearing such gigantic burdens, Ave must not think that it is real property in land Avhich is paying so much. The enormous value of houses throughout the United Kingdom has immensely relieved taxation upon land. This, then, is the spirit in Avhich I think the question of the readjustment of taxes must be approacluid. You must consider all the elements, you must consider land, you must consider houses, you must consider personal property, and you must consider the consuming classes, and then makes Avhat you think a fair distribution of the various burdens IjctAveen them all. This is, I need not tell you, a highly complicated problem ; but it is not one Avhich ought to baflie politicians if they approach it in a just and equitable spirit. I Avas asked the other day, for instance, Avith regard to land, Ought not the land-tax to be re- Edinburgh, 2 -i^d November 1885, 153 imposed in tlic old fdi'iii ? I i'<'i)ly, That is not an adequate mode of stating tlic question as to what land sliould pay. On the one liand, the value of land has greatly increased since old times. That is an argument in favour oi an increase of the taxation upon it. On the other hand, side by side with this increase in the value of land, there has also been an enormous increase of local burdens. That is an argument against such increase of taxation. All these matters must be ])rought together, and when you have brought tliem tog(3ther, then will be the time to determine what is the proper proportirni that land must bear. We shall not forget, if we have to deal with this question, that land must not hide behind houses. Many a time have I seen in debates in the House of Commons, representatives of land- owners utilising the ratepayer, and saying, " Here are the poor rate- payers in toAvns; they are being rated more heavily and heavily every day." Under cover of this plea to relieve the rates on houses, they urge remissions which include land. But, on the other side, it must not be forgotten that rents may have fallen very seriously since the time when this investigation took jilace, while the burdens have increased. Clearly there are a variety of aspects from Avhich the case must be looked at ; we must not run away with simple cries — that rates are much too high, and must be lowered. It depends on tiHiat rates ought to be lowered, and rates upon what kind of property. The most comi)licated problem Who Pays witli whieli I have ever in my life had to deal, whether in finance or ^^^'^ Rates 1 in economics, has been this — on whom do the rates upon houses really fall — upon the consumers — namely, the inhabitants of the houses — or upon the people who build the houses, or upon the ground landlords? You must find out upon whom the tax falls Ijefore you begin to repeal it ; and that leads me to the point witli which I wish to conclude this jjortion of my remarks. I can imagine candi- dates being asked to pledge themselves against every possible tax that can be imposed. "Will y oil vote against such and such a tax, — it is a tax upon trade?" " Certainly," the candidate says, "it is a horrible tax; I will vote against it." "Will you give your vote in order to relieve the ratepayers of burdens that are really be- coming intolerable?" "Certainly," the answer is; "I will vote to reduce these burdens." The Chancellor of the Exchequer when about to propose his Budget is in a like predicament. He gets letters suggesting the repeal of every possible tax. But take care, when you are shooting at the pigeon, that you do not kill the crow ; 154 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. Taxes 1 ami tliat \\\w\\ you art- trying to relieve some one, you do not re- lieve the wrong person ; and take care, when you want to strike at some man or some class, that you do not impose the tax in such a way, thai Ik- \\\\\ be able to shift the burden upon a totally different And Bears the class. For instance, you may wish to tax a particular class of tradesmen. AVell, but the tradesmen may pass on the tax to their customers at once ; and, while you thiidc you have been taxing the tradesmeji, you have been taxing the consumers, and you may pos- sibly be taxing yourself. So, again, you may wish to strike at capitalists, but the capitalist may move his capital to some other place, and you have simply reduced the amount of capital available for the payment of wages. Have I made myself intelligible to you? What I wish to convey to you is this, that, in these matters, a superficial view is frequently a wrong view, and that you require a real examination of one of the most difficult problems — namely, who ultimately pays a particular tax — before you can deal with problems of this kind. 1 make this remark, because when I am asked, Will you vote for the repeal of this tax or that ? it may be thought, that I give less satisfactory answers than some of my com- petitors or some of my opponents ; but the reason is that I am so convinced of the necessity of avoiding that great fault of striking at the wrong man, and of finding that you have made a great mis- take when it is too late. But remember, gentlemen, that one of the best means of avoiding the cruelties of taxation is to avoid any violent increase of expen- diture. No tax can ever be defended by an abstract argument. You Avill always find that any tax, if it is pulled to pieces by a clever man who is put forward by those Avho have to pay the tax, can be shown to be the most injurious, and the worst tax, in the Avhole Avorld, And so I say — in the strongest terms — that those will not be doing their diity to the country who do not keep a sharp, even a stern, look-out as regards the increase of expenditure, Avhether Imperial or local. The industry of the country is deeply in- terested in light taxation; and I rejoice to think that the pro- ducing classes are now, to a great extent, also holders of deposits in savings banks, and arc interested not only as Avorkmcn, but also, if I may use the phrase, as capitalists, as property oAvners— in the credit of the State and in the incidence of taxation. I am told that in Edinljurgh, as in oilier cities, the working-classes have large investments in the savings banks, and thus are largely interested in All Classes Utter est ed in Economy, Edinburg]i, 2-^d November 1885. 155 the credit of the State, iiiid in the securities of the State. Let me mention a case -which came into my mind at this moment. There are places on the Continent wliere tlierc has been great local expenditure, and great local expcaiditure for good objects. Wliat has happened? The savings of the working-classes in the Savings Banks have been taxed, and even the wages of domestic servants. They have run up their local taxation to that extent that they have been obliged to tax the economies and the savings of some of the poorest of the Avorking-classes. I say, therefore, that all classes have an interest in assisting Parliament to keep down expen- diture Avhich, in some form or other, will otherwise weigh upon themselves. Do not let us run away with the idea — I do not think I need say many words upon it — that taxes iipon property are for the benefit of the poorer classes, or of the producing classes. So deeply has the danger of such a notion been recognised by our cousins in the United States that in their Constitution, democratic as it is, they have provisions carefully guarding the property of individual men. They do not look upon such a system as simply protecting wealth. They consider that the poor and the iiadustrious have equally got the greatest interest in the accumulations of labour being protected by law. And in the same way, I hold tliat all classes are deeply And Efficiency interested in the efficient administration of the laAvs which exist. ofAdminis- Take the case of the housing of the working-classes. The examina- Oration. tions we made- during over two years' inquiry showed us that if the laws as they exist had been properly administered there would not have been those frightful scandals that were discovered in many parts of the United Kingdom. The laws were there, but they were not properly set in motion. Many other laws are in the same case besides. We are going to pass new laws, we have passed new laAvs, there is a constant demand for new laws, based iqion noble views of improving society, and of improving morality ; but let us at least take care that the laws that we have shall be properly executed. A law has been passed during the last few months — the Criminal Law Amendment Act — a law by which we hope better to protect poor girls. I am continually asked questions with regard to amending that laAv ; but let us first see to it that the law as it now stands is administered Avith rigid impartiality, and that those who are responsible for its execution take care that the exertions Avhich have caused that law to pass shall not be without fruit. liCt us look to it that the guardians of the law and the public I 5 6 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. all work together in order to stamp out some of the fearful evils which nhtsorj' have been revealed. Depend upon it, enlightened public opinion, Legislation. keeping its eye firmly upon this question, and vigilance on the part of the representatives of the people that the law shall be effectively carried out, will be more powerful for good than continuing from month to month to make new suggestions to improve the law before we can see what Ave can do under it in its new form. Efficient laws rather than many laws — practical laws rather than Utopian laws ! Depend upon it that, unless we take care, we shall not realise all the hopes that we entertain. The last Parliament began with great expectations; it ended in many disappointments. May the Parliament, the election of which will Ijcgiu to-morrow, begin with practical hopes, and end with duties discharged. XII. Delivered in tlie Music Hall, Edinburgh, on the 24th November 1885. Mr. GoscHEN said — Electors of the Eastern Division of Edin- Critical burgh, — as the Chairman has said, the time of preliminaries is Character over. The decisive day will come to-morrow. The time is past ^, '"P"^ ^"^ Election. for cheering and hooting, for speaking and hecklmg, and to-morrow the hour w'ill have come for the voter, in the seclusion of the polling-booth, to drop his vote into the ballot box, and to deliver his verdict on the respective merits of the candidates, and on the soundness of their opinions. But what a narrow view it would be of the events of to-morroAv, if we here in this Eastern Division were simply to think of the personal considerations involved ! It is not only in the Eastern Division that to-morrow there will be a great contest ; but from all parts of the country telegrams will be coming in declaring who are the victors in the struggle in which we are to be engaged — whether it is that party to which most of us — I hope nearly all of us — in this hall belong ; whether Ave have been able to attain such a majority as will enable us to carry out the great Avork in which we hope to be engaged. But beyond the personal considerations of all these contests, beyond the party issues Avhich may affect us to-morroAV, there remains for the great bulk of the nation, Avho will not look merely to per- sonal or party considerations, the great question. Whether the issue of these elections Avill be for the credit, the honour, and the interest of the nation at large 1 All of us who are here as lovers of our country, Avill take such an interest far beyond the i)ersonal contest in which Ave are engaged. Language is held which conveys tlie idea that, as soon as aa'c have been elected, the key A\'ill be turned upon us, and that Ave sliall be kept inside the Avails of the House of Commons for the 158 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. The Nr.v Parliament probably sltort-livcd. Definition of Personal Position. span of five years, to agree or disagree, as best -we may, upon all the problems of the clay. I do not think this forecast probable. I do not believe in arguments based on the supposition that no dis- solution is possible till after our five years have run. Alas for electioneering efforts ! Alas for the comfort of candidates ! I fear that, before many years are over, Ave candidates shall stand •before our constituents again. I do not believe in a long continu- ance of the Parliament -which is about to be elected. And I will tell you why. It is on account of that difficulty on which i\Ir. Gladstone spoke in this hall not many hours ago. We are in face of this tremendous dilemma. If we were to make concessions to the Irish party which would satisfy that i^arty, they would have to be concessions touching the legis- lative union between the two countries, and no siich concessions can ever be made without submitting them to the verdict of the country at large. But if they are not made — and I trust they will not be proposed — then we are threatened with an opposition which may render all government so impossible, which may render all Parliamentary action so ineffective, that no other course may remain open, but to appeal once more to the judg- ment of the country. And so, gentlemen, I regret to say that I am afraid that, as regards the next Parliament, we shall have a short life, though possibly not a merry one. To that Parlia- ment, for however long it may last, I ask the electors of the Eastern Division of Edinburgh to return me. I wish to sit in that Parliament, and to share in its work. And I have come hercy gentlemen, not to ask for your suffrages under the shelter of any other man's name, however great and honoured that man's name may be — I come here to ask your suffrages on the strength of the address which I have issued to the electors — on the principles which I have enunciated in all the meetings that I have held — on the utterances to which many of the electors have been good enough to listen. To those utterances I adhere. These are the pledges by whicli I am prepared to stand. I have endeavoured to show to the electors my mind upon almost every prominent poli- tical question of the day. I wish them to take me upon those principles, upon those opinions, and upon no other grounds. I have been asked to give my views also upon a number of sub- sidiary questions, but here I have found myself compelled to refuse to give jiledges in many cases. I thiidc that if the various can- Eduibii7'gh, 2^th November 1885. 159 didates stainliiig before the constituencies were to be arranged in order of merit, according to the number of promises that they have made, I should stand rather low upon the list. Prince Bismarck once told me a story of a friend of his, who was so afraid of committing himself, during his sleep or in his dreams, to questions that might be put to him, that when he got np early in the morning he said "No" three times over. "]S^o! no! no!" that was his first morning utterance. Gentlemen, I am afraid that there are a good many candidates who, after Ijoisterous and excited speeches at their electoral meetings, may feel inclined, at the conclusion of those meetings, to say to themselves and to their friends, "No ! no ! no !" lest they should liave been guilty of too exuberant utterances in their electoral somnambulism. I do not envy the condition of candidates or members who, when they shall walk up the floor of the House of Commons to take the oath of allegiance, and to sign their names upon the roll of the Commons, shall hear behind them the clank of many chains, which they have imposed upon themselves, and consented to wear, as tlie price of their admission to Parliament. (Cheers and slight hisses.) I hear expressions of dissent. Are they in favour of the man who wears the chains ? For my part, I believe that the electors of this division Avill wish for a representative, and not for a servant who Avould go in chains to Parliament. ^Yell, yuu know the authoritative programme of the party of The which I have fully accepted all the points— namely, Eeformed Pro- ^«^>^^^''^«^'^'-' •' ^ -^ <• 1 1 Programme. cedure in the House of Commons ; the reform of local government and local taxation ; improved registration laws ; and large reforms in the land laws. All these points I accept cordially and from my heart. Most of them have formed long since a part of my political convictions. One word as regards registration. Reformed regis- tration means the granting of greater access, easier access, to the exercise of the franchise to those to whom votes have been given. It means that by no technical difficulty are you to take away with one hand what you give with the other. It does not mean that under cover of a registration law there should be a new Reform Bill, but that the Reform Acts which have been already carried should be made effective. Then one word, and one word only, on the question of Procedure. Procedure. I cannot tiuuli this sultject without on every occasion protesting against the insinuation, so often made, tliat we Liberals, of all i6o Speeches by tJic RigJit Hon. G. J. Goschen. people in. the world, wish to stifle freedom of debate. That is not the point. What we feel is that, except with reformed procedure, we shall not be able to legislate at all. And, on this question, why should not botli the great parties in the State work to- gether. By the joint action of the two great jiarties it was po.ssible to carry out the Redistribution Act with extraordinary smooth- ness, though it largely affected almost every constituency in Great Britain and Ireland. Why should not all parties combine to see whether they cannot make their common instrument — the House of Commons — efficient for the pur])ose for which electors, whether Conservatives or Liberals, send up the members to the House? There can be no reason whatever why both parties should not take an equal interest in this great question. Local As regards the third point — the Reform of Local Government — Govern Hunt. J have spoken so often that I do not propose to trouble you upon it to-night, beyond this observation, that we must beware lest we so overcharge any bill for the reform of local government, by dealing with all the duties that may be placed upon local authorities, that we may not be able to pass the bill at all. There are two separate branches of that reform. . There is, firstly, the constitution of our local authorities on a new, a popular, a uniform, and an intelligible basis ; and secondly, the redistribution of the attributes and duties which are to be assigned to local authorities when reformed. The first stage must come first, and no obstinacy in insisting that particular duties ought to be placed i;pon those local authorities should be allowed to jeopardise that which is the chief point, the immediate reconstruction of our system of local government and local taxation. And the inhabi- tants of this city of Edinburgh will not object that some of the time, and I fear a large portion of the time, of the new Parliament should be devoted to a great object — a difficult and conqjlicated object — the reform of the government of London. That will be one of the first duties to be undertaken by the Parliament which will be summoned in some weeks. A few words upon the fourth item in the authorised programme — I mean the subject of Land. We are all agreed — though I have seen, by questions that have been put to nic, that some electors still seem to be unaware of my views upon the subject — we are all agreed to use our utmost endeavours to make land accessible to all purchasers, large and small ; and by various reforms, such Edinburgh, 2 /\th November 1885. 161 as "reater facilities of transfer, reductiun of cost of transfer, and other means, to bring land, which is cheap now, witliin the reach of every one who cares to invest in it. I was asked a ques- tion last night with regard to the views of jNIr. Chamberlain upon this subject. I was asked to what extent I should agree to his views, if they should be endorsed by Mr. Gladstone ? That I call a very hypothetical question. I do not know, even if I attempt to judge by his Manifesto, what is Mr. Gladstone's atti- tude towards the land programme of Mr. Chamberlain. But now, Land. one serious word upon this matter. We must distinguish between two important proposals. The one is, to promote, to the very utmost of our ability, a system of allotments which shall be attached to the cottages of working men — allotments which will increase their comfort, Avhich will increase their happiness, and which every one desires should be conferred upon them. The other proposal is somewhat different. It is to supply diminutive farms of three or four, or ten acres, or whatever the size may be, for the purpose of what one may call agricultural enterprise. The one plan is to supplement the resources of a family otherwise engaged, by giving them an allotment of land. The other is an endeavour, artificially, to stimulate what, if produced naturally, we probably all of us desire — namely, the increase of peasant proprie- tors, and the increase of men who would cultivate their own small properties. I am entirely in accord with the objects aimed at in both respects ; and I rejoice to think that, under the influence of spontaneous feeling, and under the influence of public opinion, the system of allotments is daily receiving a greater and greater develop- ment, and that day by day, and week by week, more allotments are handed over for cultivation to industrious labourers. But, having said this much, let me ask you to consider whether we are justified in looking for a remedy for the depression of trade from the pro- cess which is alleged to be at the bottom of this movement — the restoration of the agricultural labourer to the soil % To restore him % It would be, as I say, most desirable that you should multiply the numbers of agricultural labourers cultivating their own land, but you cannot restore a population which is five or six times as large as it used to be when they cultivated the soil. The parallel between the two periods, between the two situations, is perfectly illusory. You cannot restore these additional millions to the same ground which was held by a far smaller number of millions ; and 102 Speeches by the RigJit Hon. G. J. Cose hen. if you could, do so, supposing you restored them now, who is not aware that the popuLation of this country increases by some 300,000 or 350,000 souls a year, which means an addition of three or four millions to the population in ten years ! Are they all to he placed upon the old soil? It i.s impossible! You may wish it, and I say let as many as possible be placed on the land — I won't say be restored ; that is not the right word — but let as many as possible be placed upon the soil. But surely it is absolutely Utopian to think that, in this small island, our teeming millions can be so planted upon the soil as to relieve us from the necessity of looking mainly to the industrial energies of the kingdom for the supply of the population with adequate wages and sufficient food, and for the general prosperity. I will work in the direction of doing what can be done, but I will not be misled by a Utopian belief in impossibilities, while ready to consider and anxious to suggest every practical proposal that may increase the numbers of those who are interested in the soil of the United Kingdom and Ireland. Ireland. Well, gentlemen, we have not to look only within the authorised programme for the subjects which are interesting the public at this naoment. Other subjects crowd upon us, and some of them cannot be put away. Foremost amongst these is one upon which most eloquent words were used m this hall to-day — the subject of Ireland — and perhaps I can say something that Mr. Gladstone could scarcely say himself, and it is that to him, personally, the action which is now being taken towards the party which he leads by the inhabitants of that country Avhich he has so largely benefited is simply the height of ingratitude. If there lives one stat(!sman of this co;intry to whom the Irish ought to be grateful, it is Mr. Gladstone. "What has he not sacrificed on their behalf? Only those who know the abuse to which at many times he has been exposed ; only those who have seen him standing in the House of Commons endeavouring to hold his own against the insults of the representatives of that country which he has tried to conciliate ; only those can realise to what a height of ingratitude politics in Ireland have come, when a manifesto such as that which we have all lately read is issued by the Irish leaders against a statesman who is known to be so great a friend of the Irish nation. We all know the fearfully anxious issues that are pending in Ireland. We see, and we regret to see, Edinburgh, 7. i\tli November 1885. 163 tlie chasm — the yawning chasm — which still divides us i'lom our fellow-subjects — from our Lrothers, in Ireland. We behold that chasm, and from its depth there rise up cries against the injustice committed to Ireland in former times ; but we have endeavoured to redeem the past, and into that chasm "\ve have thrown down, in order to fill it up, concession after concession by which we thought we might conciliate the Irish people. We have toppled down into it great boulders of principles ; we have made gigantic Parliamentary sacrifices ; and I venture to say — I would say this in the face of Europe, in the face of the world — that no <;ountry has ever shown such toleration under great provocation as has been displayed by the self-contained, steady public opinion of these islands. Under tremendous provocation we have not wished to retaliate, and if we are met — as we are sometimes met — by cries of "Coercion/' you know what our reply must be — that the coercion is on the other side, and that so long as the loyalists of Ireland are not permitted liberty of action, liberty of purchase, liberty of marketing, liberty of dealing with whom they like ; so long as their lives are beset by the coercion of the Parnellites, so long it is the bounden duty of this country to stand up in favour of liberty and law. It yawns still — that chasm of division — though into it have been thrown the lives of statesmen and the efforts of Parlia- ments ; but w^e will not be turned aside from the task of endeavour- ing to bridge it over by justice ; nor shaU any action upon the part of Irish malcontents divert British statesmen from the endeavour still to secure that union wdiich lies at the base of the pros- perity of the United Kingdom. But a special duty rests upon us — one sacred duty — amongst the Otir Duty many we shall have to perform. However far we may go in t° ^^'-^['^ conciliation, and in endeavouring to allow the Irish to govern °^'°' " ^' themselves, I do not think that we ought ever to be parties to placing at the mercy of the National League, the property or the lives of the loyalist classes in Ireland. We know that the ISTation- alists have called certain classes in Ireland robbers. We shall not, I trust, allow them to treat the property of these classes as stolen goods; and so I say that, from wdiatover (quarter such proposals juay come, I shall never consent to any arrangement as regards the transfer of powers to the Irish local or central government, which would place at their mercy the property or the happiness of Lhe loyalist classes in Ireland. 164 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. The House Let me say one word upon another subject, wliicli also lies out- of Lords. side of the official programme, — the very delicate question of the- Constitution of the House of Lords — a subject referred to in the manifesto which is before the country, and which has formed the subject of animated debate between a great and popular Scottish peer — Lord Eosebery — and some leaders of the advanced section of our party. ]S'ow, I agree with Lord Rosebery in the opinion that the House of Lords ought to be reformed. I believe one of the best reforms would be an internal and spontaneous reform, which would mean its ceasing to be a simple Tory club. The misfortune of the House of Lords, I believe, is not that it is aristocratic, but that it is simply Conservative ; and that, if the country looks to the })eers for their decision, it knows beforehand, precisely up(tn the lines of party, what that decision Avill be. That seems to me in the long run an intoloral^le situation ; and so I say that unless the Lords can take heart and shake off" those shackles of party, which constitute them a simple Conservative assembly, their reform must be undertaken in order that tlie institution may survive. But another plan is suggested — abolish the House of Lords. On that point I say to my Radical friends, "If the Lords are tO' be abolished, let the verdict of the country be taken upon that subject by a straight issue." It was suggested — I think by Sir Charles Dilke in controversy with Lord Rosebery — that you ought to leave tlie House of Lords unreformed, so that,, remaining unreforuKHl, it might get into bad repute with the country. A kind of paralysis was to seize it, and it would die an inglorious and ignominious death ! Sir Charles Dilke added tliat, so long as there were Radicals in the Cabinet, they would not consent to a reform of the House of Lords. But is that a fair way in which to deal with what, after all, is one of the great institutions of the country ? I am not prepared to see any single part of our Constitution perisli l)y humiliation and decay. Let it,, if it must end, end by the verdict of the country that it ought to cease to exist ; but do not say, We will neither reform it, nor bring forward a motion to end it, but we will sec; it get deeper and deeper into the mire, so that it may perish from the humilia- tion it has incurred. That is not the mode in which any of us ought to deal with any part of our Constitution. Let me touch ujioii one more subject, which is even more deli- Edinburgh, 2 /^th November 1885. 16^ cate than the reform of th(; House of Lords — the (iuestion of the Churches — the Church of England and the Church of Scotland. I The Churches do not propose to enter upon arguments, but I wish to clear up my 0/ England personal position in respect to this matter, in a very few words. '^"' It has been said that my opinions and position upon this point are ambiguous. I deny it altogether. I say my position with regard to it is perfectly clear. Conservative speakers have endeavoured, in their comments on my statement with regard to the Churches, to mix up the questions of the Established Church of England and the Established Church of Scotland. But I have not concealed from any elector, nor from any meeting, my view that the two stand upon a totally different footing. I have said straight out, without reservation and without hesitation, that in England, as a member of the Established Church, I was against the abolition of that Churcli. I have said with equal clearness that, as regards the Established Church of Scotland, I agree with those who declare it to be a matter that must be settled by the Scottish nation. That is the view which has been taken by the leaders of the party ; but I have not adopted it sim})ly because it is the view of the leaders of the party, but because I think it just that the people of Scotland should decide this question for. themselves. "Well, then, it is said, " Is it right that you should leave a question of that kind to be decided by those whom you represent, instead of having an opinion upon it yourself?" My answer is, that it is their Church, and not mine ; it is the Church of Scotland. If I thought that such an issue as the predominance of Christianity, or the great interests of the Empire, were at stake, then it would be my duty, not only as a representative of a Scottish constituency, but as an individual, to say what my opinion was ; but I do not think that the maintenance or the overthrow of the Established Church of Scotland is a question of that kind. I hold it to be one which it is fair to leave to the decision of the Scotch them- selves. And I pledge myself to this, that I will do my utmost to ascertain Avhat the views of the Scottish people are with regard to it, and that I will not allow the sympathies that I may have for one Church or the other to influence me, if I should have the honour of representing a Scottish constituency, but will seek to decide this matter in the direction that seems most in accordance with the interests and the wishes of Scotland at large. Let me pass from legislative proposals to some matters of import- 1 66 Speeches by the RigJit Hon. G.J. Goschen. ance with regard to the administration of the kingdom. One great National P^i'it is that of Expenditure and National Economy — national Economy. economy which is becoming rapidly less popular than it used to be. I confess that I have failed to p;ee in the utterances of many candidates for Parliamentary honours, any assurance whatever that they will be zealous and ferocious guardians of the public purse. Believe me, some little ferocity is necessary in the process, because while many people are extremely anxious for economy in the abstract, when it comes to recommending any particular plan of their own, they are for casting economy to the winds. You can have no idea of the difficulty which a Government meets with in Parlia- ment, in resisting pressure from various sides for increased expendi- ture. From many localities come various demands. I have been asked a great many questions with regard to the interesting point Pensions. of pensions : " Would you consent to abolish pensions ? " and I have always given the same answer, namely, that as regards per- petual pensions, they will never be proposed again; and that, generally, the whole (question of pensions requires careful watching. But I know by experience what often follows. If you don't pension a man, you give him a higher salary ; and if you CTive him a higher salary, and then the time comes that his work is done, members of Parliament come forward and say, "Is it right that this man, Avho has served the State for so many years, should go away without a pension?" And then there come letters to the press and sensational paragraphs — " Here is a man who for thirty or forty years has been in the service of the State, and he goes out a beggar, even without a pension." That occurs over and over again. And I am not sure whether it is not the more econo- mical plan to bear that sentiment in mind, and to remember that servants of the State cannot be turned on to the street at the end of the period of their service. Public opinion won't stand it. People may approve of it in the abstract, but they will not stand it in the particular case. ("Yes.") Well, I hear dissent; but what does that mean 1 Does it mean that public opinion will stand it 1 I doubt it. I am not thinking of the rich men, or even of the men belonging to the middle classes, but of non-commissioned officers, sailors, clerks on low salaries, and so forth. Tlicre is, I perfectly admit, a gigantic expenditure growing up, which requires to be watched from day to day, for the pensions of soldiers, of seamen, of revenue officers, and of every single class of those employed in Edinburgh, 2^th November 1885. 167 Government offices, and there is notliing more (lilficult than to reconcile the idea of the duty i.f the. State towards its servants with the necessary economy that ought to be observed. Don't think that I am indifTcirent to this subject of tlie increase of pensions. It is startling — it is one of those things which must occupy the atten- tion of statesmen. But you cannot neglect, and in any reforms you must take into consideration, the counterbalancing force of public opinion, which is extremely sensitive on the point of sending men who have served the public into the streets without a penny. Similar points present themselves with regard to men employed Government on Government works. I saw a question put to another candidate, Estabhsh- as to whether he would support Government work being given out "'^" ^' on private contract instead of being done in the Government estab- lishments. That sounds extremely popular, but what is to become of the dockyard men in the service of the State'? Are they to be discharged in order to increase the labour in private dockyards % Then, again, you have to consider how you can carry on efficiently a Government establishment under the constant interference of public opinion. Perhaps I am not an impartial witiiess in this matter. I confess when I had to preside over a great department, and I was told that we were not as business-like as private yards, I said to myself : In tlie case of private yards, if a foreman has a dispute with his employer, is it brought immediately before the public? If some of the men are discharged because there is not work enough for them to do, is there at once a Parlia- mentary inquiry ? If a man is taken on to whom an unusually high salary is given because he is the best you can get, is there an immediate public inquiry demanded because other men do not get so much? Yet men saj^, "Look at these business-like dock- yards of private firms, and look at the unbusiness-like dockyards of the Government." Why, the conditions are perfectly different. If I allude to this subject, it is for the purpose of entreating the public, while it exercises the utmost vigilance, in seeing that no wrong shall be committed, and that the public money shall be judiciously spent — not continually to interfere with tlic action of the Executive in its dealings with these dockyards, and not to countenance the dockyard members coming forAvard at every pos- sible moment to interfere with the Executive in the carrying out of their executive duties. If the public wishes to have that inter- ference, its work cannot be done in the same business-like way as in 1 68 Speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. private establishments. I am not only anxious for economy of ex- penditure, l)ut, at the same time, I am most anxious for efficiency of exi)enilituie. It is mucli easier to bring a general charge of ex- travagance, than a general charge of inefficiency. In efficiency, so many tjucstions arc muddh^d up together, that the two parties will never agree as to whether efficiency lias been secured. It is rather difficult to decide on the merits of rival sets of statistics, but even that is easier than to decide upon the respective claims to efficiency. I have alluded to theae points in order to remind the electors in this constituency, and elsewhere where my Avords may be read, that we must not, in our legislative efforts, forget to look to the efficiency of administration. Grmuth of Tliere are other large subjects outside of the legislative Sentiment programme, outside of the administrative programme, on which in Politics. J ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ minds of a vast number of the electors are set, and I am anxious to bear witness to the; unquestionable and interesting fact that in the countless questions which have been put to me, in the many proposals thii;^ have been submitted to me, in the many pledges I have been asked to take, those have been infinitely more numerous which referred to matters of duty, of sentiment, of social reform, than those which had to do with the pecuniary advantages of any class of the community. If attempts have been made in any Avay to excite cupidity in the new electors, these attempts, so far as I can judge, have most entirely failed. The electors take interest in the sufifering of animals; they take an interest in the Parliamentary, municipal, and social position of women ; they take an interest in a number of questions relating, as I have said, rather to sentiment than to profit. But there are very few questions that have been put before me which indicate any demand, that any one class should enjoy a peculiar pecuniary advantage in taxation or otherwise over the other classes of the community ; and I i)oint t(j this as a matter of which we may well be proud. Let us mention another cause for rejoicing. There is a great desire for further legislation on many social questions, but I am glad to think, that, while we behold these efforts after social pro- gress by means of legislation, it is, at the same time, patent that public opinion, in preparing the way for legislative changes, has of itself already achieved tremendous triumphs. Public opinion has increased the safety of ships going to sea, even more than the legis- lation which has been carried with a view to such increased safety. Edinburgh, 2^th November 1885. 169 Public (ipinion has done much in rousing landlords all over the country, and especially in the large towns, to devote more care to the condition of their great properties ; and in London at this moment there is a vast reform in the housing of the working- classes, due in a great measure to the pressure of public opinion, and, so far, but little due to those reforms of legislation on which we have been engaged. So again, public opinion has worked in the direction of increasing the number of allotments. Public Triumphs opinion is working in tlie direction of increasing the number of of Public cottages for the agricultural classes. I rejoice in all this efficiency of public opinion, and I like to think how much better it is, if liberty of contract is to be curtailed, to place upon it the fetters of duty and the restraints of i)ublic opinion, rather than the restraints of legislative enactments. We are bound to remember that the Liberal party is called after, and has been baptized into, the name of Liberty. We will restrain that liberty when we see that it is prejudicial to our neighbours, that it is prejudicial to the interests of the State ; biit the evidence which we already have gained of the progress of opinion is a bright and fair augury of the result which we may still hope to see in the future, from a healthy and an enthusiastic pul)lic opinion. Further legislation there must lie. Further legislation there will be; and I am glad to think that in tliat legislation we shall be able to have the assist- ance of many enthusiasts. But we shall hope to be able, if I may use the phrase, to put enthusiasm into harness, and to yoke it to practical measures. We shall have now manj^ recruits M'ho have joined the forces, the old forces of the Constitution. I trust that with these new recruits will be mingled the veterans, and that to- gether, with a disciplined and steady swing, they will march for- ward upon the path of progress; that they will march forward with a steady swing, and not in an undisciplined manner; and that, thus united, we may be able to overtake even the labours of the past, and rival the efforts of the Liberals Avho have gone before us. A few W'Ords only upon another subject (as I am Tiiaking my Foreign h^st confession of faith to you before the poll) — upon a subject ^°^^^y- which cannot be set aside, upon a subject to which T have addressetl myself before every audience of my fellow-countrymen whom I have met — a subject that must always excite great interest — T mean Foreign Policy. You know I am one of those who believe that our duties and responsil)ilities cannot, from our posi- 1 70 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. tion, be confined to the inliabitants of these islands ; and that^ if we wished it^ it is impossible for us to put away the duties, obliga- tions, and responsibilities which Ave have incurred elsewhere. I have put my views as to the principles of foreign policy which The Three ought to be followed by the Liberal party, into three words. I ^'•f — have said that there ought to be clean-handedness, courage, and continuity — three C's which I will run against any three F's in the world. And it is very dangerous of me to speak in this way, very dangerous indeed, because in a speech I made in Edinburgh some time ago, I said there was always a fallacy when you put such rlietovical threes together, and that one out of the three in- variably killed another. For instance, you have liberty, equality, and fraternity — Avell, equality kills liberty, or liberty kills equality; but you cannot have both. So with the three F's, either free sale kills fair rents, or fair rents kill free sale. You cannot have both ; but I am venturesome enough to believe that in my three points, not one will kill another. Continuity will not kill courage; and never shall it be said that courage would kill clean-handedness. Contimiity Continuity — is that a Utopian idea? I have more than once declared that we shall never have a satisfactory foreign policy till we are able to do as we used to do — to lift it above the influence of party, and till both parties shall unite to say that before the face of Europe this country is but as one. Of what use are barren recrimi- nations — of what use is it to prove your own home antagonist in the wrong, if, while you arc proving him in the wrong, you prove your country to be wrong in the sight of Europe ? I wish that upon this point once more a common feeling might animate all classes of the community ; that we might, in the face of Europe^ treat all foreign questions as if we were one, not two nations. I don't care to see Europe on the watch for the turn our elections may take. It is no compliment, either to the one jiarty or the other, to say that foreign capitals are waiting for the result of our elections to see Avhat turn will be given to affairs. Let them know that there is a continuity in our policy, that there are certain ques- tions, and certain principles, upon which the country is agreed, and we shall stand with that strength before the nations of Europe, to which we are justly entitled, and which I hope we may never forego. How are we to play our game, — how are we to play our cards with Continental natidus, if, when Great Evitain plays her card, she has standing behind her severe critics who look over her EdiJidurgh, i/^th November 1885, 171 hand, and discuss loudly and angrily what card ought to be played ? What chance have you with the shrewd players of the world — for, depend upon it, we have often to do with men who play the game of diplomacy with great shrewdness — what chances have we, if we are subject to drawbacks of that kind ? I wish that I could find support for my strong belief, that we should gradually go back to the practice, that while we fight our old party fights over our home affairs, we should not engage in these extremely angry battles over questions where sometimes vast colonial interests, sometimes vast Indian interests, sometimes the lives of brave men, sometimes the fortunes of subject populations, are involved. These are not battle grounds for fierce party fights. These are questions for the unanimous decision of patriotic men. So much for Continuity, gentlemen. One word may I say upon Clean- the question of Clean-handedness — a modern doctrine, a doctrine handedness, worthy of the Liberal party, u doctrine which we have lifted now into what I trust may be considered an accepted position. It is not clean - handedness which has landed us in the majority of the difficulties by which we have been beset, and I think we have still to educate our Conservative friends to a certain extent to this doctrine. If they reply that they, on the other hand, may have educated us a little in the direction of courage and firmness — well, we shall deny the accusation, but we shall take their lecture to heart. But I am speaking of clean- handedness. In the great arrangements of the Berlin Con- ference, the Conservative Government committed, to my mind, a gigantic error in securing Cyprus as a gain for the United Kingdom. "We abandoned there, for the sake of that island — I do not know if it is Avorth much, but that is not the point — we abandoned for the sake of that island our reputation, that we had gone into those famous negotiations, and had come out of them, with clean hands. — and a terrible penalty we paid. The seizure of Cyprus led to the difficulties with France with regard to Tunis, and with regard to Egypt. It was Cyprus which made it so hard for us to deal with the French in the division of infiuence in Egypt, and the concessions, made by us to France in allowing her to go to Tunis, had a most disastrous eff"ect i;pon the Mussul- man world. I have been told myself by men coming from Egypt, that the advance of the French in Tunis, the way in which they seized upon Tunis, had alarmed the ^Mussulmans through- I 72 speeches by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen. out Africa, and liad aT-» L 005 485 050 8 Ur SfiNTHFRN «Fr;;riKi/ii i ipp»pY fft^'! '-^Y AA 000 763 598