The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-02-05

would Do rather potent engine In tho nanos
of seducer who might justify her departure
from virtue on the score Of reprisals. II Til
ton is unworthy of belief 1t would 3e quite
proper for Mr. Beecher's counsel to establish
that fact to the satisfaction of the jury; but
1t can be no proof of Mr. Beechers innocence
to show that Tilton held loose notions on the
subject Of marriage. II would be o curious
doctrine indeed, that inAdelities on the part
Of husband are . conclusive proof Of the
chastity of his wife. and 1t would be still moro
singular If witty and playful verses of an
amorous cast were to be seriously regarded
- proving tho loose morals of the writer.
The new Leader OF "Her MaJesty's
Opposition"
The selection of the Marquis Of Harrington
a. the leader Of the liberal party in the House
Of Commons suggests . wide difference be-
tween tho methods of party management in
Great Britain and the United States In this
country We have no experience Of any such
thing as leadership of either house Of Con-
gress BY formal selection. Neither the party
in the majority nor tho party in tho minority
recognizes any other claim to leadership than
that which is founded on political talents and
skill in debate and the natural ascendancy
Of vigorous abilities in . Legislative assembly.
Clay was leader. not by any formal choice Of
the wing party, but solely by the force of his
eloquence and his great dexterity as politi-
cal manager. Webster and other eminent
wings were also leaders in the same
sense that Clay was In proportion 10
their political capacity and debating
power. The leadership Of the democratic
party has always been equally divided
and distributed. In Clay's time Ben
ton, Wright, Cass, Buchanan, Douglas
and their oompeers led tho democracy in
virtue Of no other title than their talents; the
party submitting 10 guidance by none of them
in consequence Of previous understanding
or agreement. So, at . later period, Thaddeus
Stevens led the House of Representatives
simply by his vigorous will and skill in par
liamentary tactics, but without any exclusive
claim or declared consent which bound the
party to defer to him rather than to any other
of its members The only formal arrange
ment for unity in our politics is by q caucus,
held as occasion may from time to time arise,
binding the party to some particular measure
or course Of policy, but never pledging it to
follow the guidance Of an individual member.
The English method is SO foreign to our ideas
and practices that we cannot conceive the
possibility of its introduction in our politics.
In our next House Mr.. Blaine will be the leader
Of the opposition, but that will be mere
silent concession to his Legislative experience
and dexterity. His party, on any particular
occasion. will follow him or not, just as it
pleases, without the slightest breach OF party
loyalty, whereas, if the republican members
should assemble and formally designate him
as their parliamentary leader, no important
movement could be made without consulting
him and securing his consent Whether our
caucus system is better expedient for secur-
ing party unity than the English plan Of Sc
lecting q recognized leader may admit of
question, but it is so fxed in our political
habits that it is not likely to be changed.
Lord Harrington has been selected by the
English liberals as their leader in the House
of Commons for other reasons than his
abilities, which are understood to be barely
above mediocrity. he owes this honor entirely
to his political connections He is the rep
resentative of the great aristocratic whig
families, which, until Gladstone was made
Prime Minister, controlled the action of the
party. The conservative victory in the
last parliamentary election expressed the
sense of the English people that the liberals
under Gladstone had driven the chariot of
nation desires repose. Earl Russell, in
book just published, considers that he made
a mistake in consenting to be transferred to
the House of Lords, instead of retaining his
leadership in the Commons This is sup
posed to indicate his opinion that Mr.. Glad
stone has gone too fast and too far, and that
this reaction against the liberals is conse-
quence of the impetuous zeal with which
Gladstone drove the government forward in
the direction pointed out by the radicals.
After disestab lishment in Ireland it was feared
that the Church of England was not quite
safe, and it is to meet this recol of public
feeling that the liberals have selected for their
leader man like Lord Harrington, whose
family connections and personal sympathies
are a guarantee that the party is
disposed to give the country period of rest
from agitating innovations. The selection of
Mr.. Forster, who is the lineal heir of Mr.
Gladstone's ideas, and is more progressive
than Gladstone himself would have strength
ened tho feeling which brought the conserva-
tives into power and have postponed in
definitely return Of the liberals. Besides
the pledge implied in Lord Hartington's
aristocratic family connections the compare
tive feebleness Of his talents is an additional
safeguard against innovating tendencies. 1t
is only man Astounding in ideas and con-
scious of intellectual strength that ventures to