New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-07-27

| clIly went down TO his constituents
| and from a platform in their presence
| repeated the question word for word as
! he had uttered 1t in Parliament. That
was some weeks ago. but Mr.. George
has taken no proceeding to vndicate
! his impugned honor
| In the debate of last Wednesday. the
| Chancellor of the EXchequer whose
| idea Of defending himself is always 10
assault some one else. flung out an i'm
! putation against Mr.. st. Loe Strachey
! editor Of The Spectator" 1t was MOI
/ the first. He some time since called
! Mr. Srachcy pompous and futile per
1 son; which Mr.. Strachey. who likes
! publicity, complacently reprinted in his
! own paper as so much testimony TO his
own importance. What Mr. George
now says. in his apologize To the House
Of Commons is that Mr. ST. Loe
! Strachey is a confederate Of Mr.. Chcs-
terton and Mr.. Maxse,--that these
| three gentlemen have been working
| this together" Mr. Chestcrton, who
has lately been convicted of criminal
libel on Mr.. Godfrey Isaacs was one of
; those who set ahoat charges of cor
! rupton. This present accusation 10y
| Mr.. George Mr. Strachcy republishes in
THE Spectator" of last Saturday, but
this time i'm a different spirit. saying:
I'VE can, of course, quite under
stand Mr.. Lloyd Georges annoyance
because we have refused to make
charges which he can answer. but have
stuck steadily 10 charges which he cam
| not answer and which at heart he
knows TO be true. But Is il fair is it
decent even. for a man in his position
to make the deliberate mlsrepr,senta-
! tions which he made in the House Of
! Commons on Wedncsday--tha is. i'm
place where we could not answer him
and under conditions Of privilege which
| forbid our taking action against him
and holding him responsible for his
libelous words? Let him repeat them
outside the House and We will then see
| that he either substantiatcs them or
pays the penalty he deserves 10 pay"
Which THE Times" and other papers
copy: 50 that Mr.. George can hardly
escape seeing il: but the challenge re-
mains unanswered.
No doubt Mr.. Lloyd George has been
a conspicuous and sometimes a brill
liant figure on the political stage. No
art Of the dcmagogue is to him un-
known. Whatever you may think OF
his manner or Of his manners. ne Is an
effective speaker alike on the platform
and in the House Of Commons. AS
party manager he is entitled TO rank
with Colonel Roosevelt or. in respect Of
astuteness. with Mr.. Murphy himself
No man knows better how 10 appeal 10
class prejudice and to inflame IT, or TO
selfish interests, or 10 ignorance The
scruples which ordinarily restrain the
tongue Of an English Minister arc to
him so many hindranccs which he puts
aside. If the end seems 10 him good
the means to II are also good There
was a time when he had practically
wrested the leadership Of the party
from the hands Of the Prime Minister
from the chief to whom he owed ODE
Gience and from the colleague 20
whom he owed loyalty. A story was
current some two years ago that Mr..
Asquith. reused by an act of extreme
INSTRUMENTATION, gently called Mr.. Lloyd
George 10 order. His recalcitrant re-
tainer answered:
THAT is a rebuke ! have not de-
served, but II YOU wish me 10 resign 7
will resign. only, II I go, I shall take
two hundred members Of your party in
the House with me-"
A threat which at the time he could
perhaps have made good But that
time IS past II passed even before the
Marconi scandals put Mr.. George on his
defence and so profoundly alarmed the
party that he was no longer possible
leader Upon il he has brought dis
aster after disaster, Of which the po-
Htical discredit and loss arising largely
from the Insurance Act arc perhaps the
most serious. To pauperize and de-
moralize the people Of England by old
Age Pensions and brides Of ninepencc
for fourpence is not the way TO secure
a permanent hold on even the people
who profit by extortion from those
richer than themselves.
But the scene Of last Wednesday
! showed how strong a hold Mr.. Lloyd
George still has upon the party. When
he and Sir Rufus lsaacs, having made
each his explanations. left the chamber,
the Ministerialists rose and cheered
them. The admitted improperly which
came dangerously near TO misconduct
seems 10 have endeared them 10 their
Radical associates. They did far worse
BY party majority Of IS they rejected
: Mr.. Caves resolution expressing the re-
gret OF the House and adopted another
accepting the two ministers expressions
| of regret, which strictly speaking, they
had never made, declaring further they
had acted in good faith, and reprobat-
ing rightly the accusations Of corrup-
ton. What they deemed in the In
, terest Of the party was more TO the
majority than the traditions and honor
Of the House. Can You conceive such
thing happening under Mr.. Glad
stone? Would anything but the resig-
i nation of these unfortunate ministers
have satisfied the leader who not only
led but had created and educated the
p | In. hn m