The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1895-08-24

Inc SeNefe Netcut cApCstcUCcu ~
the British Liberals in the recent
election is, no doubt, largely due TO
the fact that a strict adherence to
party is going ont Of fashion. and
that in our day a large and grow
ing fraction OF voters are inclined
to pass from one side To the other
as they are prompted Ivy hope Ur
disappointment. The reverse, how
ever, could hardly have attained
such re markable proportions had
not the Liberals entered the con-
test in an extremely disorganized
condition.
There was on the part of the
Liberals no unity of programme or
of leadership. At Newcastle home
rule was kept in the foreground by
Mr.. John Morley; at Durham Sir
| William Harcourt declared that
local option was the paramount Is
sue; elsewhere the mending, Il not
the ending, of the House of Lords
was pronounced the primary need
! of the hour; or, again, stress would
be laid on the expediency of much
larger concessions to the advocates
of State socialism. If we are to
Judge by results, we should have to
assume that every one Of these
proposals has been rejected by the
electors, and yet it is by no means
certain that any one of them, ex-
cept possibly local option, would
not have been accepted, had all the
leaders of the Liberals combined
to press it, instead of pulling differ
ent ways. 1t is certain that one of
these proposals, home rule, did OBJ
tain the sanction of the electorate
in 1892, when the Liberals went to
the country with a definite issue,
and dominated by a single person
ality, that of Mr.. Gladstone.
. Leadership is a question of fact,
|, and all discussion of mans merit
is irrelevant, if in practice he
, proves unable to discharge the
functions of a leader. The decisive
objection to Lord ROseberry's lead
ership of the Liberals is that he did
j, not lead. But if he could not gov
ern his colleagues on his assump:
, tion of power with u majority OF
!. nearly 40 behind him, how can he
be expected to control his COM
a panions in misfortune with ma
+ jorify of l52 against them? The
proof III 1t he cannot control them
is that he and the other members
of the late Cabinet have been un.
, ablesto agree on the subject of q
collective amendment to the ad'
dress moved on the part of the
Governments, but have left the role
of criticism and inquiry to subordi
. nate members of the Opposition
Such an attitude is not calculated
|. encourage the rank and file; wha
they need in this hour of their ad
: versity is to see the ranks closet
!, up, the standard advanced, and ,
war cry sounded.
If Lord Roseberry is not the maj
to do this, he will have to Civ,
place to another; otherwise wha
has begun as discord will end in dis
, integration. He is still, to be sure
supported by some influential Lon
don n newspapers, the Chronicle an,
the Speaker, for example, but thei
D support, probably, is only provis
ional, and due to their recognition
Is of the difficulty of agreeing ON ,
'e successor. Mr.. John Morley is ou
s. of tue question, but their are ST
= William Harc0urt, Mr.. H. Camp
70 obell-Bannerman, and Mr.. Asquith
10 each of the three has u consider
e able following, and the last name'
e would probably be backed by wha
L ever influence Lord Rosebery ma,
E. yet retain. There is an abler ma
le than any of them, who Of late ha
s begun 10 emerge from the cloud q
q obloquy which for q season threat
e ened to cut him of irreparabl.
It from public life. We refer, of c0urs
,; to Sir Charles Dixie, who Is view
e ed by q considerable section of tn
g Radicals rs the man for tn
u emergency, and who has siknifie,
; his willingness to frame q program
a for the opposition, If the ex-Minis
) tiers are unable to provide one.
= The fact that Sir Charles Dix,
has already gone far 10 retriev,
the political position, which he los
through his connection with we'll
a known divorce case, has melan
3 choiy bearing on the fate of MI
Q Parneli and that of home rul,
r movement. Had the Irish patrio
listened to his wisest and most de