The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-03-04
vi.

Lord Sallsbury's answer to Lord Ran
dolph's letter was penned at Hatfield House
On December %. He had delayed. 1t APP
pears, in order to write to his principal
collea CUES, sending them copies OF Lord
Randolph's letter. His answer when 1t
came seemed conclusive. II expressed
distinctly the Premier's full concurrence
with the views Of the Secretary Of War
and the First Lord OF the Admiralty. 1t
expressed with equal clearness dissent
from those Of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. 1t proposed no compromises; it
did not even suggest an interview, and the
p~erfunctory expression Of regret, on per-
sonal and public grounds, with which it
closed might he applicable either to an
actual resignation, or to the expressed
intention to resign. Lord Randolph, for
his part, never doubted the significance Of
the response which he received, and treated
it as a formal acceptance Of his letter Of resig-
nation. On December22 he penned a letter
of farewell to Lord Salisbury, who, on
receiving 1t, comprehended that the breach
was definite. With the first light Of the
next morning, the announcement appeared
in the Times,
The fIial author Of this biography sug-
gests that the action OF Ior Randolph
Churchill in resigning the Office he held in
such a manner and on such an occasion has
two aspects-a smaller and a larger. The
smaller aspect Is that OF a proud, sim
cere, overstrained man, conceiving himself
bound to fight for certain issues, at what
ever cost to himself-believing at each
movement that victory would he won, and
drawn by every movement further into a
position from which he could not ,or would
not retreat. The larger aspect receives
here more extended consideration. II Ia
conceded that the differences between the
Chancellor OF the E~xchequer and his COL
leagues In the War and Navy Departments
we're on matters OF detail and might easily
rave been accommodated. On the other
hand, the difference between the leader OF
the House OF Commons n the Prime
Minister was fundamental. 1t was a differ
ence OF belief, Of character and Of aspira-
ton. 1t could never have been adjusted
There had been, to be sure. considerations
and influences which had tended to bring
about cooperation. In the union Of Great
Britain and Ireland they had found a COM
mon cause; In Mr.. Gladstone they faced
a common antagonist. In our authors
opinion, however, athe gulf which sepa-
rated the fiery leader OF Tory Democracy
with his bold plans Of reform and dreams
Of change, with his record OF storm and
triumph, and slender expectations Of a long
life-from the old-fashioned Conservative
statesman, the head Of a High Church and
High Tory family, versed in diplomacy
representative Of authority, wary, austere,
content TO govern was a gulf no mutual
needs, no common interests, no personal
likings, could permanently bridge. They
represented conflicting schools OF political
philosophy, They stood for ideas mutually
incompatible. ooner or later the breac n
must have come; and no doubt the strong
realization Of this truth underlay the action
OF the one and the acquiescence Of the
other"
Why did Lord Randolph's resignation
ruin him politically His son points out
that Ministers in plenty had quilted English
Governments before without d~isgociating