New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-10
MR.. MORLEY ON THE WAR

Mr.. Morley is less satisfactory as n DoIitica,
leader than as a man of letters. In the latter
capacity he is always a source of pleasure and
enlightenment. In the former it is to be feared
he now and then gives his friends cause to re-
greet that he ever assumed it. His political ut
terances are always marked with lofty integ-
rlty of purpose and with distinction of literary
style. They are not however invariably as
effective in logic in rhetoric nor character
Hed by that reasonableness and breadth of view
which are intrinsic qualities of the best states
manship. In letters he is philosophic and catho-
lie; in politics he too often descends to the status
OF the special pleader, and of a pleader whose
view would in man of less commanding rank
be reckoned hopelessly narrow.
These unfortunate traits appear strongly In
the speech recently made by Mr. Morley at
Forfar, of which the text has now come
to hand 1t was an important speech, being
devoted to consideration of the war in South
Africa, and being the first one he has made on
1t since the war began. It's tone and temper and
It's exposition of the speakers sentiments-or
convictions, in Mr.. Morley's case the two are
ldentcal-were unmistakable 1t left not the
slightest doubt In any ones mind as to what he
thought of the war; its causes it's progress and
It's probable outcome. But its logic was more
than once of a kind that must cause the Judi
cous to grieve and to wonder how so clear
sighted critic of things past can thus regard
the things of the present day. Thus he declared
that, now the war was on, there was no course
but to fight it out and vindicate British author
ity. Neither Mr. Chamberlain nor Lord Rose
berry could have made that point more clear and
emphatic. Yet he devoted the major part of his
speech to an arraignment and denunciation of
the Government and the gold miners for the
policy which made the possible In sub
stance he told his hearers that their fool of
government had been tricked by a pack of
knaVes into wicked war, and that il was their
duty to stand by that Government and help il to
win that war Is 1t conceivable that he thinks
that logical, effective for attainment of the
desired endI Surely 1t should occur TO him that
II Is now either too late or too soon to criticise
the policy which led to the war. 1t was fitting
to do SO before the war began, and it will be
fitting TO do so after it is ended But while the
war is on one must either be for or against It's
prosecution, and if he is for it he should hold in
allegiance all utterances calculated to ALLEVIATE
support from the Government
Mr.. Morley also rang the changes upon the
''sordid plot" and conspiracy" of the gold
hunters and land grabbers." No argument
II so it may be called-on that side of the case
Is more frequently employed than this, and no
other seems so pitiably weak and self-contradic-
tory. Why, pray, should the gold hunters be so
uncommOnly eager for Great Britain to own the
Rand? They already own the mines lust as
much as the Klondike and Colorado miners own
theirs. 1t does not appear that British rule at
Pretoria could make their titles more perfect
and secure. And we have the assurance of the
Beers and their champions in England and
America that the miners have no real grev-
ances, but are actually better treated, more
lightly taxed and subjected to smaller royalties
than the miners under British rule in British
colonies. In such circumstances what would
they have TO gain by the subversion OF the
Transvaal Government? And Is it not lust a
trife unworthy Of Mr. Morley to argue that
shrewd business men have deliberately brought
on n war-which as was certain from the be-
ginning is costing them millions of dollars-for
the sake of grabbing what was already their
own undsputed property and of establishing
over themselves government less favorable to
them than the one they are upsetting?
Equally Illogical is the attempt to dispose Of