li s :-V 
 
 
 ^-■kS/^v^-iJS^-^' 
 
 ,^^o %
 
 LI E> RAR.Y 
 
 OF THE 
 
 U N I VER.SITY 
 
 or ILLI NOIS
 
 a^d^/. . /dy/ f/k^^^ /^^^^^^^^ i ^ y ^ _ ^ // 
 
 IL^'^^Ula.-^c.z^ ^/ n^%^.>t. , /^^/^2--^. ^vw^^, ?/
 
 THREE POLITICAL ADDRESSES 
 
 DELIVERED 
 
 AT EOTHESAY, AT MILLPORT, AND 
 IN EDINBURGH 
 
 IN DECEMBER 1879 AND JANUARY 1880 
 
 BY 
 
 CHAELES DALEYMPLE % 
 
 M.P. FOR BCfTESHIRE 
 
 WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS 
 
 EDINBURGH AND LONDON 
 
 MDCCCLXXX
 
 It having been suggested to me that an Address 
 delivered before the Edinburgh Southern District Con- 
 servative Association should be printed in a separate 
 form for circulation, I can only express the hope that 
 it may be of some little service to the Conservative 
 cause beyond the limits of this district. It has 
 occurred to me that I might print with this Address 
 two other Addresses lately delivered to my constituents 
 at Eothesay and at Millport. A sentence here and 
 there may be repeated ; but I believe that while they 
 traverse the same ground of the oft-repeated attacks on 
 the Government of the day, the Addresses are entirely 
 diiSerent from one another. 
 
 CHAELES DALKYMPLE. 
 
 Edinburgh, Fehruary 3, 1880.

 
 ADDKE S S 
 
 DELIVERED IN 
 
 THE NEW PUBLIC HALLS, ROTHESAY, 
 
 December 16, 1879. 
 
 Mr Dalrymple said : — 
 
 We are met according to our annual custom. The 
 prospect of a dissolution of Parliament, as to the exact 
 period of which you know as much, or rather as little, 
 as I, may give a certain tickling sense of interest to our 
 present meeting, and to any expression of opinion which 
 it may call forth ; but I can confidently assert that it 
 adds nothing to the sense of responsibility with which 
 I always approach these meetings of ours. Speaking in 
 this county I will avoid no question so far as it is in 
 my power to deal with it, if only that you may feel that 
 I have kept back nothing from you. After referring to 
 last session briefly, as is usual, it will be natural to refer 
 to topics which of late have been in all our minds, and 
 which are likely to be kept before us in the future. 
 I have no intention of exaggerating the importance of
 
 6 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 the present time, as is the fashion in some quarters. 
 Some eminent persons, and many others not eminent, 
 have been bestirring themselves of late to an unwonted 
 degree; and after taking things very easily for some 
 years, during which, according to them, the country has 
 been rapidly advancing to ruin, they have on a sudden 
 discovered that the present time is the most signal and 
 momentous for our country's interests that the genera- 
 tions now passing have ever witnessed. In view of an 
 appeal to the constituencies, which, for the purpose, is 
 announced to be imminent, we are warned that the 
 questions at stake are vital, and that not only the posi- 
 tion of the country and the character of the Parliament, 
 but the very liberties of the people are involved in the 
 result of the next general election. I am far from 
 doubting that those who so describe the period on which 
 our lot has fallen take this view of it ; but as I do not 
 consider that the fate of our country is bound up with 
 the existence of the present Government, any more than 
 with the existence of the present Parliament ; and as I 
 do not anticipate the arrival of the millennium, even if 
 a Liberal Government should some time or other return 
 to power, I would ask you to keep a vigilant outlook lest 
 you are misled by the prevalent tone of exaggeration 
 which seems to me more personal and selfish than pru- 
 dent and patriotic. Depend upon it, the subjects which 
 we have to discuss need no exaggeration in respect 
 either to their interest or their importance to the country. 
 I have myself a profound distrust of those who are for 
 ever aspiring to be the prophets of their time, and the 
 very last of the prophets ; who stand upon their watch- 
 towers and discern the ruin of their country ; or who,
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 7' 
 
 in tumultuous concourses in engine-sheds or markets, 
 are continually heralding some great deliverance, the 
 attainment of which, as you are told, tarries and is 
 hindered till you, the people of the country, perform 
 your part of expelling this Ministry and party from 
 power, and putting me and my friends (the only good 
 and true men) in their places ! 
 
 Let me once for all dispute the notion that a Parlia- 
 ment, even if it be a long one, ceases to represent the 
 country when there is no change in the relative strength 
 of parties in it. A Parliament like the present, which 
 will not for five months to come have run the length of 
 the Parliament of 1859, has been recruited again and 
 again since 1874. More than one-fifth of the whole 
 has undergone re-election, and so on many different 
 occasions there has been an opportunity of feeling the 
 pulse of the country. If it be not answer enough to 
 those who deny that the vast parliamentary majorities 
 in recent years represented the feeling of the country, 
 when they were composed of a varied support from both 
 sides, then I would ask whether the elections which 
 have continually occurred show any sign of disapproval 
 of the action of these remarkable majorities ? You will 
 have seen many of the ordinary criticisms of the last 
 session of Parliament, which describe it as barren and 
 profitless, and it is not so much stated as assumed that 
 the cause of this state of things is the barrenness and 
 unprofitableness of a Tory Government. In truth, 
 trusting to the gullibility of his hearers, many a speaker 
 during the last few months has classed all the years 
 since 1874 together, and described the period as desti- 
 tute of legislation. I have no time to argue with those
 
 8 ADDRESS AT EOTHESAY. 
 
 who can forget the quiet and useful legislation of these 
 years. I leave them to the candour of men like Mr 
 Cowen, the member for Newcastle, who is above that 
 sort of indiscriminating vituperation which is too often 
 indulged in, and to his remarks about the legislation in 
 regard to the labour question alone, for which he gives 
 the present Government credit. Some of their other 
 social legislation has before now obtained the admiration 
 of one who is hardly to be classed among the political 
 friends of the Ministry, I mean Mr Chamberlain. It is 
 worth while to remind you in a sentence of the more 
 important measures which the Government introduced 
 this year, to show you how much business, had time 
 permitted, would have been done. Bankruptcy, County 
 Boards, Valuation, Elvers Conservancy, Banking, Sum- 
 mary Jurisdiction, Public Works Loans, Poor Law, a 
 Criminal Code — these are among the subjects which 
 were attempted, and a few of which bore fruit. The 
 opposition to the Public Works Loans Bill shows how 
 the friends of economy will resist a measure which aims 
 at economy of a most important kind where their own 
 interests or the interests of those whom they represent 
 are involved. A session is not unmarked that witnessed 
 a successful attempt to deal with the question of Uni- 
 versity Education in Ireland. The O'Conor Don's Bill 
 proposed to endow denominational education, and to 
 pay for it out of the Irish Church surplus. This was 
 supported by Mr Porster and many others. The Gov- 
 ernment introduced a Bill of their own which dissolved 
 the Queen's University, and instituted a new university 
 which is to grant degrees on examination to all comers, 
 with a Senate to be nominated by the Crown. The
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 9 
 
 Senate is to draw up a scheme of education and of 
 examining machinery. To show how general was the 
 support given to the measure, it may be remembered 
 that an amendment, moved by the then leader of the 
 Home Kule party, and supported by Mr Gladstone, was 
 defeated by 257 to 90. The nomination of the Senate 
 will require the greatest care ; but I cannot doubt that 
 the same skill which avoided, in the framing of a 
 measure at once simple and effectual, the thorns and 
 perils of the religious difficulty, will be shown in the 
 selection of a Senate that will command the confidence 
 of all parties. 
 
 Passing to a very different subject, I think it cannot 
 be disguised that there is an increasing interest in 
 measures that concern the liquor traffic. Dr Cameron, 
 who has been active in this department before, suc- 
 ceeded in passing the Habitual Drunkards Bill during 
 last session. Owing to the circumstance that my name 
 is the same as that of the late member for Bath, who 
 formerly promoted that measure, I have often, by mis- 
 take, been the recipient of correspondence on the subject. 
 I should have thought that there could have been little 
 doubt as to the necessity for such legislation : but the 
 liberty-of-the-subject theory is carried to such an extent, 
 and found such support, in the House of Commons, that 
 it was not easy to secure for those who are their worst 
 enemies, and the ruin of all connected with them, even 
 the chance of such an asylum as the Bill proposed. If 
 the safeguards which bristle at every turn are not 
 enough to render it inoperative, I believe that Dr 
 Cameron's Bill may be of great service to a very unfor- 
 tunate class of persons. Much interest was taken in
 
 10 ABDEESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 the discussion of Sir Wilfrid Lawson's resolution in 
 regard to " local option." I had no difficulty in sup- 
 porting the resolution, which I think is in the right 
 direction ; and the Government admitted that some 
 effect must be given to the principle. It seemed to me 
 the beginning of a wiser course that the Permissive Bill 
 was withdrawn, for it will never pass through Parlia- 
 ment, and it has long been a hindrance to more prac- 
 tical proposals. Por purposes of restriction if not for 
 prohibition — for the sake of giving people a direct 
 influence in a matter which affects society and public 
 tranquillity and property — " local option " may well be 
 conceded, and ought to be conceded. What fills me 
 with misgiving as a difficulty in the path of reasonable 
 legislation, is the oft -repeated attempt to make tem- 
 perance a political cry, and to endeavour to establish 
 that the interests of temperance are more identified 
 with one party than another. 
 
 Half of the session, it would be no exaggeration to 
 say, was spent over the Army Eegulation Bill. The 
 measure w^as to codify the military law which had 
 hitherto, every year, been re-enacted by the Mutiny 
 Bill ; and it was not unreasonable that a thorough 
 discussion should attend the progress of the Bill, which, 
 though it will still have to be ratified afresh every 
 year, was, notwithstanding, meant to be in all its main 
 features a measure of a permanent character. A pro- 
 tracted and heated conflict arose over the question of 
 corporal punishment in the army. To hear the language 
 frequently used you would have supposed that flogging 
 was a matter of everyday occurrence, that no one was 
 secure against it, and that the best and bravest of the
 
 ADDKESS AT ROTHESAY. 11 
 
 defenders of our country were every moment liable to a 
 degrading punishment. I remember at a burgh election 
 in England three years ago a cartoon being flaunted 
 about the town representing a candidate for parliamen- 
 tary honours, who had formerly been in the army, against 
 whom it was desired to raise prejudice, in the act of 
 flogging a first-class soldier. Well, it may suffice to say 
 that no first-class soldier could be flogged. All the best 
 authorities say that for a certain class of offenders, and 
 for offences in the field, where imprisonment is impos- 
 sible and unfair, because throwing more labour upon 
 others, no punishment is more effective and appropriate. 
 The Government, yielding to the advice of men on both 
 sides, reduced the number of lashes that may be given, 
 and there took their stand as to continuing the form of 
 punishment. A promise afterwards made to reconsider 
 the subject led to a mistaken belief that the Ministers 
 were going to yield to the pressure put upon them by 
 a few to abolish corporal punishment ; and thereupon 
 the leaders of the Opposition determined to be before- 
 hand, and proposed an amendment in favour of abt)li- 
 tion as against the Government's plan of limiting it 
 to crimes hitherto punishable by death. I think that 
 Lord Hartington and those who followed him must 
 have repented this step when they found themselves 
 in a minority of 106. The part played by Sir W. 
 Harcourt was specially noticeable, for he had been 
 chairman of the committee who prepared the Bill for 
 the House, and had supported it steadily all through. 
 When a party advantage was to be gained he changed 
 his ground entirely; and, being followed by sundry 
 military men who had been conspicuous defenders of
 
 12 ADDEESS AT EOTHESAY. 
 
 the Bill up to that time, cut a very poor figure indeed. 
 The division was of a most damaging kind, for it showed 
 that many of the best men on the Liberal side were 
 not to be dragged through the dirt, and the loss of their 
 support far outweighed in value a reconciliation with 
 Mr Chamberlain and those who had supported his 
 revolt against the Liberal leaders. We have heard 
 mighty little of this subject since Parliament was pro- 
 rogued, and I don't think that we shall hear much 
 more of it. 
 
 If, as has been said, " the Government have no reason 
 to be proud of the manner in which they conducted the 
 Army Bill," what is to be said of those who upon a 
 sudden, and, as it turned out, under a misconception, 
 saw an opportunity of embarrassing the Ministers, and 
 struck a blow at the discipline of the army, in a direc- 
 tion the reverse of that which they had for weeks been 
 following, and after all, were hopelessly and signally 
 defeated ? I am not disposed to detain you with my 
 speculations upon obstruction to parliamentary busi- 
 ness. The " party of exasperation," as Mr Butt called 
 them, appear to me to be masters of the situation, and 
 I am sorry to have to say it. It is all very well to say 
 that an overwhelming majority in Parliament disap- 
 proved of their conduct, and out- voted them times 
 without number; but the fact remains that they 
 brought legislation to a stand-still, and the proceedings 
 of Parliament into something like disrepute. No doubt 
 the disinclination to alter rules which, as it has been 
 said, " were made for gentlemen," is very great, and the 
 unwillingness is even greater to subtract any of the 
 liberties of individual members and of minorities ; but
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 13 
 
 the evil is not only as yet undiminished, but it has 
 been so mischievously successful that it has gained 
 strength. I don't feel able to say how far the Govern- 
 ment are to be blamed for not taking steps to quell the 
 mischief ; but I feel sure that a Government could have 
 little success in that direction unless they had the great 
 bulk of the House of Commons with them, and I do not 
 know how far they could reckon on the sympathy and 
 co-operation of the Opposition. It is the custom to 
 connect obstruction chiefly with a section of the Irish 
 members of Parliament, who, of course, are the leadino- 
 offenders; but they are very constantly supported by 
 certain other members, not Irish, who are glad to use 
 them as instruments of opposing Government business. 
 More than this I need not say ; but the truth of it 
 is patent everywhere. The Irish obstructionists have 
 been fortunate in finding a defender in Mr Gladstone, 
 who throws the aegis of his name and fame over them, 
 and, in his headlong desire to damage the Government, 
 says that they are themselves the real obstructionists 
 with their foreign policy. The ' Nineteenth Centui?y ' 
 for August contained an article which appeared while 
 Parliament was still sitting, and which, according to 
 the new fashion, belaboured the Ministry from its 
 author's retirement, in a violent and passionate manner. 
 Whether the new custom of letting oflF the steam, for 
 which Parliament is not deemed a sufficient valve, as it 
 is also a less remunerative channel than the pages of a 
 well-paid magazine, is one which tends to raise the 
 character of political life, is a question on which I don't 
 venture to pronounce. It may, perhaps, be compared 
 with the other custom, of which the last few months
 
 14 ADDRESS AT EOTHESAY. 
 
 have given ns many instances, of delivering vehement 
 harangues in the country, in which language is used, 
 and motives are imputed, and accusations against truth 
 and morality are levelled at political opponents, which 
 would not be tolerated for an instant within the walls 
 of Parliament. "When I read the report of expressions 
 used by the Duke of Argyll at Leeds lately — to take 
 one instance — for some of which he has been sharply 
 called to account, I could not help wondering how 
 many of them he would have used, or what would have 
 happened if he had used them, with Lord Beaconsfield 
 sitting opposite to him. The late Lord Derby once said 
 of similar utterances by the same distinguished indi- 
 vidual, " They please him, and they do us no harm." 
 It must be a very bad cause indeed that needs such 
 violence to support it. As one of the French journals 
 said the other day, " If Mr Gladstone be in the right, 
 surely it does not need such avalanches of words to 
 prove it." George Eliot, the clever writer of ' Middle- 
 march,' says in one place, " Oppositions have the illimi- 
 table range of objections at command, which need never 
 stop short at the boundary of knowledge, but can draw 
 for ever on the vasts of ignorance. What the Opposi- 
 tion said about a certain Administration had certainly 
 a great deal of echo in it, for heaven has taken care 
 that everybody shall not be an originator." In all the 
 denunciations of our Government by your enlightened 
 Liberal critics, the thing has been a little overdone. 
 In every picture something should be allowed for light 
 and shade. I am sure that you must have seen what is 
 called a missionary map, in which all that is Chris- 
 tianised more or less is marked white, and a far larger
 
 ADDRESS AT EOTHESAY. 15 
 
 part, still in a state of heathendom, is represented as 
 jet black. I always suspect that the black ought here 
 and there to be whiter, and the white here and there of 
 a more gloomy colour. The other day a friend gave 
 me a small book with an account of the Parliaments of 
 the present reign, and containing a map of Scotland in 
 which the counties which were represented by Liberals 
 were coloured red, and those which are represented by 
 Conservatives an elegant blue. Well, the colours in 
 both these cases are too strong ; a little light and shade 
 is needed. In like manner, unless you are destitute of 
 a sense of humour — I put it no higher than that — do 
 you really believe what the vehement orations which 
 have lately been hurled at us appear to suggest, that 
 the Queen's Ministers are undermining your liberties, 
 are fastening upon you new and heavy burdens, are 
 besotted with power and love of conquest, and strange 
 imperial notions such as this country is unaccustomed 
 to and would never endure ? In sober truth it must be 
 said that while it is sometimes convenient to attribute 
 to the people of this country all possible enlightenment, 
 and intelligence, and political insight, the exaggerated 
 tone and the extravagant imputations of the last few 
 months would presuppose in them alike an ignorance of 
 the events of recent history and of the character of 
 English statesmen. 
 
 There is a very common practice at present which 
 may be politically profitable, but which is productive 
 of much confusion and misconception, — I mean, that 
 of describing the Government of this country as a sort 
 of general aggressor. The present Government came 
 into power, say their opponents, pledged to a spirited
 
 16 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 foreign policy — I don't voncli for the truth of the 
 assertion — and in order to carry this out they have 
 had to push their influence here, and interfere there, 
 till it is assumed that all the world is in a state of ex- 
 citement and commotion, somehow or other through our 
 agency, and every nation is either our open or secret 
 foe ! If we are not at war with each and all, it is more 
 by good luck than good guiding. If only time enough 
 be given, the conflagration will be general. And then 
 people who read a particular class of newspaper only, 
 and believe what they read, gradually embrace the 
 belief that in addition to all their other sins this 
 Government has a special ambition to encroach on 
 other nations, a lust of territory, an indifference to 
 bloodshed, a reckless disregard of human life and other 
 people's money. Is there a man here to-night who 
 will say that I am imagining all this? Why, on a 
 platform in this very town, last winter, you were asked 
 to denounce this sort of conduct. Even Holy Scripture, 
 not for the first time in the world's history conve- 
 niently travestied, has been pressed into the service. 
 " Scatter the people that delight in w^ar," it was said. 
 What people? Let me answer the question of the 
 speaker I am quoting. Why, the Government, of 
 course, and those who support them. I ask you to 
 consider well who you take to be the people who 
 delight in war, and whether you may not by any 
 possibility be misled by this sort of wild declamation. 
 Mark the twofold error that is at the bottom of charges 
 like this. The language that is used would lead you 
 to suppose that the Government of this country can 
 keep us out of war, if it pleases, not merely by abstain-
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 17 
 
 ing from aggressive and pugnacious courses, but by 
 determining that nothing will induce us to go to war. 
 Well, I say that that idea, which has been openly 
 expressed of late, is both fallacious and dangerous. 
 Circumstances may arise which may scatter to the 
 winds the most pacific intentions, and compel the 
 most peacefully - disposed of Governments, with an 
 empire like this, to take up arms. Take an instance 
 from recent times. Will any one, except the Duke 
 of Argyll, assert that there was not such a state of 
 things in the East last year as compelled us to look 
 v^ after our interests? There are those who appear to 
 ^ suggest that our Government brought about a state of 
 things that compelled them afterwards to interfere. 
 In like manner, in Afghanistan, if the facts are ad- 
 mitted, that the Ameer — how, I care not to inquire — 
 had become alienated from us, and was making terms 
 with Eussia, were we to acquiesce in such a state of 
 things ? and if not, is the train of events that followed 
 to be merely accounted for by a wicked preference for 
 a state of hostilities to a state of assured tranquillity all 
 the world over ? 
 
 But a second misapprehension arises from the habit 
 of ascribing to our Government greater power than can 
 rightly be claimed for it. They have been blamed 
 sometimes of late years for a policy of isolation, and 
 at other times when the Powers of Europe were acting 
 together. If our Government (Lord Derby and all) 
 held aloof from the proposals of the three Emperors, we 
 were said to be occupying an unworthy position ; and 
 if, in common with the other great Powers, we met in 
 conference at Berlin, we ought, it was .said, to have 
 
 B
 
 18 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 resisted this and conceded that, as if we could have 
 our own way on all occasions. You must remember 
 that we are only one of several great Powers, desiring 
 certain definite securities, but not pursuing selfish or 
 exclusive advantages, or disposed to make difficulties 
 needlessly. The very neutrality of our position before 
 the Conference was the measure and the limit of our 
 success in negotiations which followed it. This state 
 of things is thoroughly well known to the critics of 
 the Government, and to none better than to their 
 predecessors in office, who know what are the limits 
 of the influence of a neutral Power, and how often the 
 very lips of a Government must be closed, when self- 
 defence would be possible and easy. With the incon- 
 sistency of unreasonableness the objects of all possible 
 censure and obloquy are at one time described as all- 
 powerful, and at another time as helpless and impotent. 
 The removal of diplomatic mountains is demanded at 
 the hands of those who at other times are styled the 
 mere tools and victims of foreign diplomatists. In like 
 manner the Treaty of Berlin is subjected to capricious 
 treatment. We cannot afford to blow hot and cold in 
 reference to this great subject. Either our Government 
 together with the other Powers accomplished great 
 things by the Treaty of Berlin, or they did not. Last 
 year the fashion was to say that the Treaty was of little 
 worth; that neither peace nor honour had come of it; that 
 after the gilding had worn off, the poverty and imposture 
 of the results would appear. This year, in spite of 
 occasional criticism, the scene has changed. No longer 
 is the Treaty despised, but its slow fulfilment is com- 
 plained of. So eager are some of our legislators now to
 
 ADDRESS AT EOTHESAY. - 19 
 
 see the Treaty carried out, that they demand from it con- 
 ditions and results that formed no real part of it. Con- 
 tempt for the Treaty is exchanged for impatience over 
 its gradual development. Unfortunately this line of 
 conduct entails responsibility in reference to other coun 
 tries as well as our own. The same influence which 
 for months together misled Eussia, and made her doubt 
 whether our Government would stand to its word, which 
 again and again hindered the effectiveness of our re- 
 monstrances and the exhibition of our determination, 
 has, I do believe, greatly retarded the beneficial action 
 of the Berlin Treaty. The habitual disparagement of 
 its provisions paralysed their execution ; and the very 
 Powers whose co-operation it was thought so necessary 
 to secure, were encouraged to doubt whether we should 
 exact the fulfilment of their obligations. The perpetual 
 imputation at home of unworthy motives and principles, 
 which even the most jealous of our foreign allies never 
 attributed to us, has been another source of difficulty. 
 Do you think that reforms in Asia Minor or in European 
 Turkey were likely to be undertaken when doubts were 
 continually expressed whether they are expected, or 
 even possible ? Was not a sympathy openly expressed 
 here with Eussia, because she had been defrauded of 
 the legitimate profits of war, likely to deter her from a 
 withdrawal beyond the Balkans ? Was the charge of 
 sharp practice in our acquisition and occupation of 
 Cyprus behind the back of the Conference — a charge 
 made by our home critics, not by the nations of Europe 
 — likely to help the objects for which alone the Turkish 
 Convention was devised? The condemnation of the 
 policy of this country all along by those who, if they
 
 20 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 had the power to-morrow, nevey intend to reverse it, has 
 been as uniform and persistent as it has been perilous 
 and mischievous. 
 
 I want you to observe and remember this, when the 
 foreign policy of the Government is arraigned, and when 
 you take account of the difficulties which attended the 
 accomplishment of their task. Do not let it be forgotten 
 how great the difficulties have been. The Government 
 had to maintain a position of neutrality in Europe, 
 while labouring — and labouring successfully — to resist 
 Russian ambition. They had to endeavour to preserve 
 the existence of Turkey, which was important to more 
 than one great Power, without defending misrule or 
 championing the decaying empire of the Porte. They 
 had both to resist inducements to co-operate with other 
 Powers in methods of action which were imprudent, and 
 would probably have been disastrous, and at the same 
 time to grasp the right opportunity for united action 
 whenever it offered itself. And all this had to be done 
 in the face of some indiscreet friends, and many unre- 
 lenting opponents. Every step of the difficult course 
 was dogged, and every success cheapened and mini- 
 mised, although on many occasions the failure of the 
 Government w^ould have been also the discomfiture of 
 the country. Except on the hypothesis that to place 
 the Government in difficulty was regarded as the great 
 desideratum, how are we to explain the perpetual de- 
 fence of the aims and actions of Eussia both in Europe 
 and in Asia ? Else what mean the imputations of bad 
 faith kept with the Ameer of Afghanistan, while he 
 himself was represented as the victim of our tyranny, 
 and the dupe of our devices ? Else what means the
 
 ADDEESS AT KOTHESAY. 21 
 
 disbelief in the insecurity of our South African colonies 
 owing to the military power of the Zulus, and the sym- 
 pathy expressed with that hero of the Liberal party — 
 that brave and enlightened and interesting potentate — 
 the ex-King of the Zulus ? The Cobden Club would 
 fain have welcomed him at their annual dinner, if only 
 it had been possible. In saying all this, am I supposed 
 to assert that an Opposition is not to criticise the foreign 
 policy of a Government ? Nothing is further from my 
 mind. It is their duty to watch every step of it, to dis- 
 cuss it thoroughly, to oppose it if necessary. What is 
 noticeable all through these recent years is this — that 
 no allowance has ever been made for the difficuities of 
 the circumstances ; that even when the most critical 
 moments arrived, and a united expression of feeling 
 here would have saved time and negotiation and ex- 
 penditure, because it would have been powerful beyond 
 everything to impress a foreign nation or Europe at 
 large, the voice of carping detraction and divisive coun- 
 sels was never silent. When Parliament, by enormous 
 majorities, had set its seal to a particular act of policy, 
 the attempt was made by baffled statesmen to show 
 both at home and abroad that though Parliament said 
 this, the country meant that : so that, by all these 
 means, negotiations were made harder, and the effect 
 of a firm policy was weakened, and resistance was pro- 
 tracted, and influence was wasted. 
 
 You will remember how it was said that Parliament 
 was not consulted about the Afghan war. The very 
 day on which a statement of Mr Gladstone's to this 
 effect appeared, the proclamation which called Parlia- 
 ment together last winter also appeared. Parliament
 
 22 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 approved both the steps which had been taken before 
 it met and the policy which was announced for the 
 future. There were sneers at the expression " a scien- 
 tific frontier," as there have often been sneers (at first, 
 not in the long-run) at expressions coming from the 
 same quarter. Dr W. Hunter, lecturing before the 
 Philosophical Institution in Edinburgh lately, said — 
 " It might be well for us to realise what is meant by 
 an unscientific frontier. The unscientific frontier of 
 the last century signified that 60,000 square miles of 
 borderland (double the whole area of Scotland) were 
 abandoned to jungle and the wild beasts, not because 
 there were no people to cultivate the soil, but because 
 they did not dare to do so. An unscientific frontier 
 meant a tract which might have yielded £30,000,000 
 sterling worth of food each year, and which lay untilled 
 through terror of the turbulent hill -races. The im- 
 provement effected by a century of British rule in this 
 old unscientific frontier meant that cultivation and the 
 returns from it yielded each year more than the whole 
 cost of the Indian army and of the defence of the 
 Indian empire." And after giving more details, he 
 says — " How melancholy is the inconsistency of those 
 who are ready to run any risk to procure good govern- 
 ment for the subjects of foreign Powers, while they 
 have no word of congratulation on the blessings which 
 we have conferred by good government on the Eastern 
 races who own our sway — who can clamour for the 
 loosing of the Turkish yoke from the neck of the 
 Christian rayah, while almost in the same breath they 
 talk coolly of a surrender of empire which would aban- 
 don the hapless millions of India to worse misery than
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 23 
 
 was ever endured by the subjects of Turkey in the 
 darkest days of Ottoman misrule ! " I am afraid that 
 at a particular time, when a policy is to be condemned, 
 there is an entire forgetfulness of " what England has 
 done for India," and this country is misrepresented as 
 a hard task -master, grinding down a subject -race, 
 exacting cruel taxation, and wasting the substance of 
 the Indian people on needless and mischievous warfare. 
 In saying so, I desire to add that I am strongly in 
 favour of our sharing, if not of defraying, the expense 
 of undertakings of an imperial character, which may 
 be the result of an imperial and not exclusively of an 
 Indian policy; and yet, in all cases where India is 
 required to pay her share, you may rest assured of the 
 advantages to India of our rule, and that in spite of 
 all appearances to the contrary, the best interests of 
 India are bound up with a loyal and faithful adherence 
 to the cause of this country. The war in Afghan ter- 
 ritory was forced upon us by the position which the 
 Ameer took up in reference to Eussia, and down to the 
 latest accounts we have proof of the treachery of his 
 designs. The terrible disaster of the assassination of 
 our Envoy, whose great knowledge of the Afghans was 
 for once at fault, led to a renewal of hostilities, and to 
 a fresh state of disquietude among the tribes. The 
 difficulties of settlement remain, and I hope that our 
 Government, having proved our strength, will guard 
 against temptations to annexation. As defence and 
 not dominion is our aim, it is to be hoped that the 
 Afghans, while they confess our power, will recognise 
 our friendliness, and that instead of the treachery and 
 intrigues of the past there will be security and confi-
 
 24 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 dence in the future. Here, as elsewhere, circumstances 
 were against us ; but will any man (not a bitter and 
 prejudiced partisan) assert that it was not necessary 
 to establish, beyond all doubt, the freedom of Afghan- 
 istan from Russian interference, and the security for all 
 time coming of our Indian frontier ? 
 
 In South Africa the state of things is entirely differ- 
 ent. There the Government did not go to war of their 
 own will. Sir Bartle Frere, a powerful and trusted 
 public servant, forced the hand of his superiors at 
 home, and initiated hostilities before the Government 
 were informed of all the circumstances. Mr Gladstone 
 has not scrupled to impute to the Government that 
 they purposely gave the High Commissioner vague 
 instructions in order that he, and not they, might bear 
 the blame of mistake or failure. I say that a charge 
 more recklessly and even coarsely unjust was never 
 brought against a Ministry, and it rests upon nothing 
 stronger than Mr Gladstone's imagination. He con- 
 demns the whole business, including the policy which 
 he considers led to it, forgetting that the annexation 
 of the Transvaal, of which Lord Carnarvon, who is now 
 held in honour by the Liberal party, was the author, 
 was acquiesced in by himself, was supported by Mr 
 Forster and Lord Kimberley, and objected to by a 
 mere handful of legislators. Those whose opinion 
 seems to be worth most, assert that sooner or later we 
 must have subdued the military strength of the Zulus. 
 If Sir Bartle Frere was wrong in precipitating the 
 struggle — as in principle he certainly was — it did not 
 follow that the time was ill chosen ; and the Govern- 
 ment at home, while they rebuked his independent
 
 ADDKESS AT ROTHESAY. 25 
 
 action, had to determine whether, for all that, they 
 would not uphold him, and prosecute his policy. Do 
 you think that the Zulu war is one which a Govern- 
 ment could, in any conceivable circumstances, desire 
 to prosecute if it could be avoided ? Where is the 
 glory (even in the French sense) of such a remote, and 
 perilous, and thankless contest 1 Does it not provoke 
 every thinking man (and, forsooth, are English Minis- 
 ters to be excluded from that category ?) that we should 
 be entangled in such a struggle with a race of savages, 
 and pour forth our blood and treasure in a distant 
 land? In truth, these considerations bring before us 
 the whole system of our relations with our colonial 
 possessions ; and it is at times when we are feeling the 
 pressure of the responsibility which they entail upon 
 us that we ask ourselves whether our mutual relations 
 of defence are or are not on a satisfactory footing. I 
 am sure that we ought to encourage the colonies to 
 maintain native forces, and to rely as much as possible 
 on themselves for defence, looking to us only in serious 
 emergency for our assistance. It is worth remember- 
 ing, when these recent troubles in South Africa are 
 being turned to account as means of attacking the 
 Government, that it was the late Government that 
 withdrew troops from the colonies, and was responsible 
 for disbanding the Cape Mounted Rifles, which were a 
 valuable nucleus of a force. I believe that the main- 
 tenance of a small representation of the British army 
 in the colonies was a great safeguard against disturb- 
 ance and revolt, as it furnished a centre round which 
 a native force might rally. A Royal Commission has 
 just been appointed to consider the question of colonial
 
 26 ADDRESS AT EOTHESAY. 
 
 defences, and I cannot but hope that their recommen- 
 dations may lead to snch steps being taken as will ren- 
 der the necessity of sending troops from this country a 
 rarer circumstance in the future. The cost of supple- 
 menting with a native force some troops from home, 
 resident as formerly in our chief colonies, would be 
 trifling compared to the large expenditure entailed by 
 sending out our brigades as we lately had to do ; but 
 we should also avoid the risk of sending the best of our 
 forces to distant colonies when they might happen to 
 be required nearer home. 
 
 Some idea may be given of the extravagance of 
 recent criticism on the circumstances of the Zulu war, 
 when we take account of the attacks made upon Sir 
 Bartle Frere. I have said that he took upon himself 
 to begin hostilities, and he was not allowed to suppose 
 that such a step was regarded with favour at home. 
 But his opponents, forgetting all his antecedents, in- 
 dulged in reckless statements about his bloodthirsty 
 propensities, about his indifference to the life of the 
 native races, and I know not what besides. Why, Sir 
 Bartle Frere through all his career has been the special 
 patron and friend of the blacks. It was he who was 
 selected to go to Zanzibar a few years ago, charged 
 with a mission, the object of which was the suppres- 
 sion of slavery. Those who knew him in Deccan 
 days in India, or at home, must have almost failed to 
 recognise him in the pictures recently drawn by imag- 
 inative minds of the imperious and heartless English- 
 man in the guise of a wilful and headstrong Governor 
 of the Cape Colony. To sum up what I have said in 
 a sentence, if you grasp firmly the conviction that the
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 27 
 
 possession of a great empire, whose interests, whether 
 we will or no, are intertwined with one another, while 
 it gives us great power, makes us the bearers — often 
 the oppressed bearers — of great responsibilities, you 
 may regret the causes which bring about some tempo- 
 rary collision with distant races, as you will also scru- 
 tinise closely these causes, and take precautions against 
 their recurrence, but you will not seek to shirk the 
 responsibilities, still less will you severely judge those 
 who, in spite of mistakes or embarrassments, or even 
 reverses, are all the while labouring to consolidate the 
 strength and the security of the empire. 
 
 I am now led to refer to the question of national 
 expenditure. It might be thought that if Parliament 
 and the country by every possible indication approve 
 of a policy, they would not be surprised if the neces- 
 sary cost of it has, sooner or later, to be defrayed. JSTor 
 do I believe that surprise will be felt, or that objection 
 will be made. But those who have condemned the 
 policy and have failed to find sympathy with their 
 views, have intrenched themselves in a new position. 
 Wait, they say, till the bill is rendered, and then see 
 how the country likes it; and while magnifying the 
 alleged cost, they hark back upon the policy, and seem 
 to hope for a retrospective condemnation of the one in 
 view of the disagreeable reality of the other. Either 
 way, these critics of policy and expenditure must be 
 met. I have been trying to show that a policy, even 
 though it may be repugnant to our feelings, may be 
 right and necessary ; and you may be sure that a policy 
 of defence, without any ulterior notions of increased 
 dominion or annexation, costs money. "Dishonest
 
 28 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 finance " has been a favourite cry of late. Finance can 
 only be dishonest in one of two ways — by being dealt 
 with behind our backs with some ulterior purpose, or 
 by being made to appear that which it is not. I should 
 have thought that, whatever may be the financial his- 
 tory of the present Government, it was well known to 
 us all ; and yet clearly this cannot be so if we are to 
 judge by the errors which are prevalent about it. I 
 fear that the subject is a dry one, but I cannot consent 
 to pass it by without serious notice. I remember that 
 last winter you were treated to an exposition of the 
 finance of the Conservative Government, which opened 
 with a very common but most extraordinary misconcep- 
 tion. Eeference was made, with every sign of admir- 
 ing recognition, to the handsome surplus of six millions 
 handed to the present Government by the predecessors 
 in office. When Sir Stafford Northcote, as the Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, entered the Treasury, I suppose 
 the idea is that he found six millions there, the hard- 
 earned savings of his predecessors of economical memory, 
 and that forthwith, out of the wicked extravagance of 
 his Tory heart, he proceeded to squander this so-called 
 surplus or chuck it into the Thames. Mr Gladstone 
 had, it is true, calculated that the excess of revenue 
 over expenditure in 1874-75 would prove to be upwards 
 of five millions if no taxes were repealed ; and on taking 
 office Sir Stafford Northcote accepted these figures. 
 But did he ever receive the money ? and did he enjoy 
 spending it ? Nothing of the kind. Why, the supposed 
 surplus w^as never realised, but was given to the public 
 in the form of reduced taxes and relief to rates : 
 £2,000,000 were applied to the abolition of the sugar-
 
 ADDEESS AT ROTHESAY. 29 
 
 duties; £1,840,000 to the reduction of the income-tax 
 from 3d. to 2d. ; £480,000 to the repeal of the horse-tax ; 
 and £1,010,000 to the relief of local taxation — leaving 
 a surplus of about £500,000. You were further told 
 that there had been an increase of expenditure during 
 five years of the present Government of ten millions. 
 It shows the exaggeration used at that time when I say 
 that in his speech at Edinburgh the other day even Mr 
 Gladstone's calculation, which is a very peculiar one, 
 only puts this at eight millions. Further, you were 
 told that the Government had not only not reduced 
 taxation, but increased it. I have told you about the 
 remission of taxation which followed on their accession 
 to office, and additions to taxation since then have been 
 of the very smallest description. As regards the in- 
 come-tax, the Government raised the standard of exemp- 
 tion to £150 of income, and the standard of remission 
 to £400. When it suits him, Mr Gladstone is fond of 
 comparing periods for the sake of financial calculation ; 
 and if he had taken five years of his own administration, 
 he would have found that 22d. in the pound of income- 
 tax were levied, and in five years of Lord Beaconsfield's 
 Government only 15d. in the pound. But that is not 
 all. The Liberals took 7d. of income-tax more than the 
 Conservatives, but without the abatements since granted 
 in the exemptions, at a time when trade was flourishing 
 and the revenue was advancing by " leaps and bounds." 
 And more than that, this was done at a time when the 
 following taxes were levied, which have been abolished 
 by the Conservatives: Sugar, 1869-70, £5,396,000; 
 1870-71, £3,218,000; 1871-72, £3,179,000; 1872-73, 
 £3,284,000; 1873-74, £1,840,000— making a total of
 
 30 ADDEESS AT EOTHESAY. 
 
 £16,917,000, as well as the horse duty, £480,000, and 
 other small taxes about £100,000. This is the sort of 
 comparison which Mr Gladstone never alludes to, and 
 no wonder. 
 
 I will not detain you over the subject of the ex- 
 penditure for the defensive forces, but you would 
 be astonished if you could examine statements re- 
 cently issued by the Accountant- General of the Navy, 
 which give a ready means of arriving at a reasonable 
 conclusion as to the increased expenditure. It is there 
 shown that though the expenditure is undoubtedly 
 increased, the increase began in Mr Goschen's time, 
 who had found out that the reductions of Mr Childers's 
 time had been alarmingly overdone. Forced efforts at 
 economy in the case of services like the navy cannot 
 be maintained. It appears that in the last year of the 
 late Government, the naval expenditure rose from 9J 
 to 10 J millions, while it has since risen still higher ; 
 and yet no one that I ever heard of doubts the desire 
 to regard economy when it is possible, shown by the 
 present Board of Admiralty. If the contribution to 
 the Sinking Fund for paying off debt had been sus- 
 pended for the present, any one can see that the deficit 
 now existing might have been avoided, but the Govern- 
 ment did not wish to do this. 
 
 Has it ever occurred to you to remember the circum- 
 stances which ought to be taken into account when any 
 estimate of our financial position is made ? I am at no 
 pains to compare the finance of the present and of the 
 late Administration ; for I deny altogether that the late 
 Government was a financial model which we are to 
 imitate. A statesman who says of foreign affairs what
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 31 
 
 Pericles said of women — that "they should never be 
 heard of," — a most unnecessary classical allusion, by 
 the way, which Mr Gladstone reserved for West Calder, 
 and took care not to mention before the women of Dal- 
 keith, — and an administrator of the navy who so reduces 
 it that those who come after him, whether of his own 
 party or of another, have by slow degrees to supply its 
 deficiencies, are no models for imitation, in my opinion. 
 But what are the circumstances of the last few years ? 
 The depression of trade, not confined to this country, 
 has largely affected the revenue. The Government 
 is not responsible for a falling- off in the demand for 
 the world's products of industry. What some people 
 thought was a splendid announcement of the days of 
 roaring trade that the revenue was advancing by " leaps 
 and bounds," has long ere now been acknowledged by 
 all sensible people to have been a perilous boast. It has 
 been said with truth that " it had a very considerable 
 share in stimulating that spirit of unhealthy enterprise 
 to which we now owe glutted markets and idle mills." 
 It was afterwards found that what had been advancing 
 by " leaps and bounds " was not " the legitimate trade 
 of the country, but the illegitimate confidence of the 
 trader." But a reaction came, and we have suffered 
 from it in recent years. Again, of six harvests gathered 
 in during the term of ofiice of the present Ministry, four 
 in succession have been bad, and the last the worst. 
 And once more there have been wars and rumours of 
 wars. Say what you will of the foreign policy of the 
 Government, and I for one am prepared to defend it ; 
 but what is to be thought of the fairness of those who 
 leave out of account, besides the considerations just
 
 32 ADDEESS AT EOTHESAY. 
 
 mentioned, the intrigues, the- disquietude, and the am- 
 bitions of other nations and States and rulers ? I would 
 not willingly do injustice to political opponents (it is 
 contrary to all my inclination to do so), but surely a 
 truer contrast than that which is often put before you 
 is this — namely, under the late Government a leaping 
 and bounding revenue, considerable taxation, on the 
 whole a higher income-tax, the services for some years 
 starved, and last, but not least (saving the near prox- 
 imity of the Franco- German war), comparative peace 
 in the world ; while, under the present Government a 
 depressed revenue, greatly reduced taxation, a moderate 
 income-tax, the services well maintained, but (besides 
 troubles in Europe) more than one war in other parts of 
 the world 1 I cannot sympathise with the disappoint- 
 ment experienced by the Opposition last April, when 
 they found that they were not to be able to make 
 capital out of some increase of taxation, or to denounce 
 the particular form that it took. Deferred liabilities 
 can only be defended in exceptional circumstances such 
 as times of war, as Mr Gladstone himself says, and no 
 one less than a Chancellor of the Exchequer is likely to 
 desire to postpone what must be eventually met ; but 
 this year the community was little able to bear fresh 
 impositions ; and I think it possible, terrible as would be 
 the disappointment in some quarters, that if the present 
 dawn of better things in trade continues to brighten, 
 such impositions may prove to be unnecessary or com- 
 paratively light. This, at all events, is the hopeful 
 prognostication of those who are responsible for affairs 
 at the Treasury. 
 
 There are subjects which throng upon us, to which I
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 33 
 
 must take another opportunity of referring. Times of 
 depression, whether in trade or in the fortunes of a 
 party in Opposition, are apt to be fruitful in the manu- 
 facture of political cries. It is marvellous how the 
 sensibilities of politicians are quickened on behalf of 
 nationalities, or class interests, or controversies hitherto 
 slumbering, when the policy of a Government in power 
 has been assailed in vain ; or a nation, unaccountably 
 deaf to all their pleadings, is thought to require new 
 excitements or powerful stimulants. Considerable at- 
 tention was naturally paid to the reference made at 
 Dalkeith by Mr Gladstone to the question of Disestab- 
 lishment in Scotland. The subject has had a curious 
 history in the last two years. You remember how 
 Lord Hartington, who neither knows nor cares any- 
 thing about ecclesiastical matters in Scotland, was put 
 up to referring to them in Edinburgh two years ago. 
 He expressed a willingness to be guided by Scotch 
 feeling on the subject — his own mind w^as blank — but 
 he was in pains to say that in starting the agitation 
 which he seemed to recommend, he referred to Scot- 
 land only, not to England. Mark, I pray you, that 
 saving clause, and the idea of a separate Scotch opinion, 
 for I wdll refer to it again. Lord Hartington's advisers 
 gained their object so far, for they secured that the sub- 
 ject should be brought up whenever a Scotch election 
 took place, or a new candidate was to be launched any- 
 where in view of a general election. The subject has 
 proved more troublesome than its promoters intended, — 
 so troublesome, in fact, that in the Haddington Burghs 
 alone the "burning question" of Disestablishment of 
 July 1878 became " a question not of practical poli- 
 

 
 34 ADDEESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 tics " in January 1879 ; and this last catch-phrase is care- 
 fully copied by others whose opinions are well known, 
 for this very reason — that the question, flung down 
 before the country just for what political grist it would 
 bring to the Liberal mill, proved awkward, and had, for 
 very safety's sake, to be kept for a time in the back- 
 ground. Yes, for a time. But your great free-lance, 
 who knows nothing of awkward questions, and was 
 not going to lose a chance of making political capital 
 on any subject, dealt with it in his own special fashion 
 at Dalkeith. Are his declarations distinct ? Are they 
 such as you would expect, I will not say from him, but 
 from a great statesman ? Does he tell us what he thinks 
 and what he will do ? Nothing of the kind. His state 
 of mind is neutral — his mind is a blank on the question. 
 Was there ever such a case in this world of hiding your 
 head in the sand, and imagining yourself concealed? 
 Mr Gladstone refers to the debate of last year on Mr 
 Holms's motion, and says that I did not defend the 
 Establishment when it was attacked. Attacked by 
 whom? Attacked by friends of his own, he says, out 
 of doors — as in truth it has often been attacked ; but 
 it was not attacked in the House of Commons, least of 
 all in that particular debate. Mr Holms and Mr Parker 
 had both had a bad time of it with a section of their 
 constituents, and their motions were the result of the 
 pressure put upon them. But neither Mr Holms nor Mr 
 Parker nor the member for Greenock attacked — nay, 
 they praised and almost defended — the Establishment. 
 The motions received no favour, because they were 
 founded on no case for inquiry ; and while I, to the 
 best of my power, resisted motions that rested on no
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 35 
 
 case, I saw no reason to defend the Establishment, 
 which was not attacked. Mr Gladstone alone, who 
 who was manifestly hostile, found no one to argue 
 with ; but we had to take the debate as we found it. 
 It may suit Mr Gladstone and some of those who cheer 
 his oracular utterances to represent the Church of 
 Scotland as being on its trial. On its trial it may be, 
 like all other institutions — before God, whom it serves, 
 and the people of this land, to whom it belongs ; but 
 a case has yet to be made out against it, and must be 
 made out, ere the imperial Parliament is asked to 
 meddle with it. I should like to ask three questions 
 suggested by Mr Gladstone's Dalkeith announcement : 
 1st, If the Act for the abolition of Patronage, which Mr 
 Gladstone considers another instance of the disquieting 
 policy of the Government, was a step towards Disestab- 
 lishment, why was it opposed by all the friends of Dis- 
 establishment, and by himself among the number? 
 2d, Why is Scotland to decide upon this great question ? 
 We have not got Home Eule in Scotland ; and the Par- 
 liament of this country, however little Mr Gladstone m^y 
 like the word, is an imperial Parliament. 3d, When Mr 
 Gladstone objects to being asked for distinct answers 
 to questions, because he has fifty years of public life to 
 point to, what part of the fifty years does he wish us to 
 appeal to for proof of his opinions? It is true that 
 he has neither part nor lot with Presbyterianism, — 
 of all living Englishmen, I should think no one has 
 less sympathy with it, — but to what part of these fifty 
 years does he refer us now for his opinions about 
 Church Establishments? It ought to be matter for 
 deep misgiving to all who care for the position of
 
 36 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 religion in this country, and 'for national recognition 
 of religion, to see this great question so triJBled with, 
 and made the tool of political and party convenience. 
 Every one has a right to his opinion upon it. What I 
 complain of is, that Mr Gladstone professes to have 
 none. No living man knows better than he the enor- 
 mous importance of the question, and yet hc' — he of 
 all men — is the sower of dissension, the promoter of 
 agitation, the instigator of religious polemics among 
 the people of Scotland. And this is the great peace- 
 maker who went forth from the very meeting where 
 his vague and mischievous sentences about Disestab- 
 lishment were uttered, to address the women of Mid- 
 Lothian upon peace ! Unfortunately, he did not coun- 
 sel the women of Scotland in matters ecclesiastical to 
 follow " the things that make for peace." The answer 
 to all these challenges, whether openly uttered or veiled 
 in a cloud of words, is the quiet, faithful work which 
 is the duty and glory of any Church. Mr Gladstone is 
 not likely to be aided in maturing his opinions by vio- 
 lence or crime in Scotland, though for the sake of fol- 
 lowing a precedent he seemed to invite both. He may 
 rely upon it that the Church, of which he is the 
 scarcely-concealed enemy, will never lack defenders 
 when the proper time arrives; and that there is no 
 one who is for one instant deceived by his assump- 
 tion of candour, or his boasted neutrality of position 
 in reference to this great question. 
 
 If I have been incidentally defending the Govern- 
 ment of the day in parts of what I have been saying 
 to-night, it was chiefly because it was necessary to 
 vindicate my own course in supporting the Govern-
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 37 
 
 merit, rather than because I am entering the lists on 
 their behalf. They are accountable to the country, as 
 they have all along been accountable to Parliament. 
 If the country adheres to the view of their foreign pol- 
 icy which has been so often sanctioned by Parliament, 
 they have no cause to fear the coming verdict. If their 
 legislative efforts, in spite of the necessary interruption 
 of foreign affairs, and the unprecedented interruption 
 of all business by organised obstruction, are candidly 
 considered by the country, not as drastic and heroic 
 achievements, which they never pretended to be, but 
 as useful and necessary measures, which are neglected 
 in periods of pyrotechnic display, again I say the Gov- 
 ernment need not fear the coming verdict. Still the 
 cry is raised that the times are hard, that the seasons 
 are bad, that no class is unaffected by pressure, which 
 is caused by many different circumstances. What 
 shall be the remedy ? Turn out the Government ! The 
 other day a candidate for the next Parliament in the 
 Liberal interest was making himself agreeable in a 
 market, and a friend on the other side said, " Well, 
 how are you getting on, and what are you telling 
 them ? " The reply was, " I tell them that there will 
 be no change for the better in anything till we get rid 
 of the Government, and it is wonderful how they 
 .believe it." Yes, it is wonderful ! 
 
 " In short, if aught is plain, 'tis this, 
 
 That there are moments when, sir, 
 The question not of measures is — 
 
 The question is of men, sir. 
 We haven't settled what to do, 
 
 "We'll tell you when we win, sir ; 
 At present all you have to do 
 
 Is just to put us in, sir."
 
 ty7^LUl2^/ 
 
 38 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 
 
 Meanwhile, the party that is -so eager • to come in is 
 ordered to agree on the questions that will divide them 
 least, not on the questions which invite them most. 
 The managers of party arrangements administer sooth- 
 ing when it is needed, saying to one, " Keep you quiet, 
 and it will be all right presently ; " and to another, 
 " Of course we shall deal with the question the moment 
 ytmrcome in, but for mercy's sake don't force our hand 
 now ; " and to a third, " You will get all you want, only 
 you must not alarm the arm-chair politicians of the 
 party." What do the thoughtful classes of the country 
 ,,think of all this ? " When the hurly-burly's done," for- 
 sooth, what do they think of the open bid made lately 
 for the Irish Home Eule vote by shadowy references to 
 the necessity for extending schemes of local self-gov- 
 ernment? What do they think of the reminiscences 
 of the explosion at Clerkenwell, and of the murder at 
 Manchester, as the means whereby great questions are 
 ripened for treatment ? What do they think of the 
 indulgent consideration of plans for the expropriation 
 of landlords ? As regards this last scheme, I anticipate 
 that Lord Kosebery, or perhaps Lord Breadalbane, will 
 offer his property for allocation to a number of small 
 proprietors — of course only as an experiment. That 
 would be an example, at once appropriate and impres- 
 sive, of a desire to meet the requirements of the times, 
 which I take it for granted must be of urgent gravity, 
 and will be worth all the theories and all the specula- 
 tions spun for the benefit of crowded and enthusiastic 
 gatherings. A policy of winks and nods, of " open 
 your mouth and shut your eyes, and in your mouth 
 you'll find a prize," and this prescribed truce to awk-
 
 ADDRESS AT ROTHESAY. 39 
 
 ward questions, ought to set you pondering. Depend 
 upon it, there is more at stake than the restlessness of 
 politicians grown desperate with delay, and intent upon 
 party strategy, permits you to see. The scattered ele- 
 ments of a party, at other times warring and sundered, 
 may be held together in view of a single appeal to the 
 constituencies, but you will have to consider whether 
 the results of success, if it were so attained, will tend 
 to the advantage of the people, or to the integrity, the 
 dignity, and the peace of the realm.
 
 A D D E E S S 
 
 DELIVERED IN 
 
 THE BURGH HALL, MILLPOET, 
 
 January 12, 1880. 
 
 Mr Dalkymple said : — 
 
 When we last met here, just a year ago, it was during 
 the period of the adjournment of Parliament, between 
 the short session that preceded Christmas and the re- 
 assembling in February. You will not need to be 
 reminded that Parliament was summoned together early 
 in December on account of the war which had begun 
 in Afghanistan, in order that sanction might be got for 
 the policy pursued there, and that supplies might be 
 voted. In some quarters memory is treacherous and 
 imagination is busy, and so it is worth recalling the 
 fact that by a majority of 136 in the House of Lords, 
 and of 101 in the House of Commons, in a House of 
 559 (including tellers), the policy of the Government 
 was approved. This brief record disposes of no less
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPOET. 41 
 
 than three of the favourite charges, so often refuted and 
 so persistently revived, against the present Government. 
 The very day that the proclamation summoning Parlia- 
 ment appeared in the papers, appeared also a letter from 
 a well-known and prolific letter-writer denouncing the 
 Government for not calling Parliament together. Con- 
 tempt of Parliament was the grave charge levelled at 
 the First Minister of the Crown, and the charge has 
 been echoed many times since. In this case, at all 
 events, the proclamation demolished the letter and its 
 groundless accusation. Again, in the face of such a 
 parliamentary division, what becomes of the familiar 
 taunt against a " mechanical majority " ? Not even the 
 magic influence of the Prime Minister can conjure to 
 his support the more independent members of the 
 Liberal party, and yet in this crucial division they 
 largely swelled the majority. Depend upon it, you 
 must devise a new and more accurate epithet for a 
 majority so composed. But, thirdly, what becomes of 
 the doctrine that the Conservative party have a special 
 sympathy with war, and stand alone in their prosecu- 
 tion of a spirited foreign policy, when you see party 
 considerations give place to the claims of the country, 
 and the Ministry receive from political opponents in 
 moments of grave exigency a loyal and appreciative 
 assistance ? Speaking in Berkshire the other day, and 
 defending his honourable independence on that occa- 
 sion, Mr Walter said — " He frankly made this admis- 
 sion, that he never gave a vote under a keener sense of 
 responsibility, with greater hesitation, or with greater 
 doubt as to its being the right thing, than the vote he 
 gave on the Afghan question ; but looking now at what
 
 42 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 had happened, he felt convinced he had never given a 
 vote the correctness of which was more justified by the 
 result. Never during his thirty years' experience of 
 Parliament had he witnessed a debate in which the in- 
 terests of the country were so much in danger of being 
 sacrificed to party considerations as in the debate on 
 the Afghan question." Mr Walter holds very strongly, 
 as many do, that our troubles in Afghanistan were of 
 the nature of reprisals on the part of Eussia for checks 
 received from us in her European policy. This may be 
 true, though it must be remembered that it was the 
 failure of the late Government to allow Lord North- 
 brook to satisfy the Ameer that practically threw 
 him into the arms of Eussia. If, however, it be true 
 that Eussia was bent upon threatening our Indian su- 
 premacy by intrigues with Afghanistan, how much less 
 tolerable was it that a Eussian Envoy should have 
 been received with honour at Cabul, while we were 
 being refused permission to send one there ! Such a 
 slight put upon us in the face of India, if it had been 
 quietly suffered, as I suppose there are some who say 
 it ought to have been, would have been more disastrous 
 to us than the loss of battles. So far from admitting 
 that the fresh difficulties and anxieties of recent times 
 have reflected unfavourably on our policy, I say that 
 they only show how grave was the peril in which our 
 power in those regions was placed. So much the worse 
 for us that we allowed Shere Ali to escape from our in- 
 fluence and pass under that of Eussia for a time. As 
 was lately said, " Our professors of masterly inactivity 
 would not let us secure a strong, friendly, and in- 
 dependent Afghanistan when it was to be had almost
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 43 
 
 for the asking ; and ' he who will not when he may, 
 when he will he shall have nay.' " The Government 
 disclaim a " policy of annexation," and " desire to see in 
 the country a form of Government that shall be suit- 
 able to the wants of the population, and shall be ready 
 at the same time to maintain friendly relations with 
 ourselves." 
 
 The session of 1879 was unlike other sessions in 
 more ways than one. A message from the Crown to 
 Parliament in December was not followed by any 
 further speech from the Throne in February, but Min- 
 isterial statements in both Houses announced the 
 measures that the Government intended to bring for- 
 ward. The programme contained several important 
 measures, which were introduced without delay, and 
 made fair progress in their early stages. Very early 
 in the session it became apparent that all business was 
 to be obstructed, and the very attempt to alter rules in 
 the interest of some progress of business led to pro- 
 tracted debates. All that the Government gained by 
 three nights' debate and numerous divisions was the 
 use of Mondays for Committee of Supply ; and it was 
 thought by some that the difficulty put in the way 
 even of the smallest change was an encouragement to 
 the obstructive policy. Far before the mischief of 
 delayed and abortive legislation, far before the un- 
 fortunate success of a policy of deliberate obstruction, 
 which was fatal to the course of public business, was 
 to be deplored the frequency of resistance to the autho- 
 rity of the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees. 
 Nor was this evil subdued or outweighed by the over- 
 whelming majority which supported the Speaker, whose
 
 44 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 discretion was directly challenged on one occasion ; for 
 to the very end of the session the nuisance continued 
 unabated, and continues to this day liable again to 
 arise, to the discomfiture of rules of procedure, and of 
 those who are responsible for their observance. In 
 view of the general dead-lock of public business, which 
 was only relaxed towards the close of the session, we 
 have had fewer complaints than usual in reference to 
 Scotland. During the time that I have been in Par- 
 liament, Scotland has received very much the same 
 attention, or rather want of attention, to its affairs 
 from whatever Government was in power. Important 
 Acts have been passed relating to Scotland under both 
 Governments, just as other measures have failed to 
 pass, and still remain hung up for future treatment. 
 Looking to the support which Scotland lends to the 
 Liberal side in Parliament, one might suppose that it 
 would have received special attention from a Liberal 
 Government, but my memory does not recall any 
 special attention to Scotch business. I may say some- 
 thing as to three bills which concerned Scotland during 
 last session. 
 
 It was doubtless owing to the shock to confidence, 
 which was the result of the failure of the City of 
 Glasgow Bank, that some legislation as to banking 
 was rendered necessary. The Government Banking 
 Bill was complicated with provisions that specially 
 roused opposition in Scotland. We are a most peace- 
 able and long-suffering people, but once propose to 
 touch our banking arrangements and we are up in 
 arms. There was the extraordinary proposal in the 
 Bill that the three unlimited Scotch banks were to be
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 45 
 
 driven out of London or lose their right of issue, while 
 the three old banks, which are already limited, might 
 remain. Afterwards matters were not improved by a 
 proposal to leave Scotland and Ireland out of the Bill. 
 At the last moment Sir Stafford Northcote saved the 
 main principle of his Bill — namely, the permission to 
 banks of unlimited liability to register a second time as 
 limited ; and he threw over all the rest, including his 
 own scheme of " reserve liability " banks. 
 
 For the first time, I think, a Bill abolishing hypothec 
 got beyond the second-reading stage, and passed through 
 Committee on a somewhat marked day — I mean the 1st 
 of April. Its third-reading stage was fixed for Friday, 
 April 4, but the Bill proceeded no further, owing to 
 Lord Elcho's opposition, who was one of the only two 
 Scotch members who voted against the Bill on the 
 second reading. It illustrates the very divided feeling 
 that exists on the subject when one remembers that in 
 various quarters what it was proposed to substitute for 
 the present law seemed to be more disliked than the 
 law itself. It would appear as if for the first tin^e 
 people had realised that hypothec touches interests of 
 more than one kind. Both sides of the House of Com- 
 mons agreed that abolition of hypothec could only take 
 effect at the end of existing leases, for if it were 
 abolished during^ a lease a landlord would have no 
 security whatever. Some leases mention that if hypo- 
 thec is abolished the tenant will be called on to pay 
 rent six months sooner, showing that in the matter of 
 contract, hypothec is a protection, and that its abolition 
 would alter existing relations. Of course, the clause in 
 the Bill providing for the landlord's remedy when six
 
 46 ADDEESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 months' rent is unpaid, &c., .was not intended to apply 
 to existing leases in which hypothec was not abolished. 
 The Lord Advocate explained, in defence of the clause, 
 that if the landlord's contract became similar to any 
 ordinary commercial contract, he should have some 
 means of recovering his property if the rent be not paid. 
 No change in favour of the landlord was proposed ; 
 only, if his preferable claim were abolished, summary 
 means of removal were given to him. Many under 
 the new arrangement would be able to find means who 
 could not do it under the existing law, which obliged 
 them to pay one year's rent and find security for five 
 years. If the six months' period in the clause seemed 
 short, it might be said that no landlord would fail to 
 take into consideration what his tenant's circumstances 
 might be, and, as the Lord Advocate said, every man 
 would have the opportunity of showing why his rent 
 was not paid ; and no judge would refuse a man a fair 
 time to pay his rent and to satisfy the law. In a session 
 where business was obstructed, any opposition, however 
 small, was sufficient to stop the bill of a private mem- 
 ber. I think the Government might have found time 
 to take the third reading of the Bill, had they been so 
 disposed. But if different bills contend for precedence, 
 a Scotch bill seldom, if ever, is recognised as having a 
 claim to attention. 
 
 A Scotch Poor-Law Bill was introduced as early as 
 the 7th of April, and never advanced a single stage. In 
 the month of July a new Bill, which was but a frag- 
 ment of the former Bill, referring only to medical relief 
 and the superannuation of officers, was introduced ; but 
 not even the smaller measure was dealt with by Gov-
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 47 
 
 ernment. I hope that the larger Bill may appear again 
 in the coming session. I will make only one remark of 
 a general kind — namely, that I cannot share the feeling 
 of jealousy which seems to prevail in some quarters 
 towards the Board of Supervision. Even if some of its 
 ex-offido members do not attend its deliberations, what 
 possible reason is there for suggesting that its affairs are 
 not well managed ? 
 
 When the session was almost over, an extraordinary 
 argument for saving the character of the Obstruction- 
 ists — who, by the way, are by no means exclusively 
 Irish members — was invented by the ingenuity of Mr 
 Gladstone. He contends that it is obstruction to pro- 
 mote any measure to which he objects. He enumerates 
 fifteen measures belonging to the present Government, 
 and charges them with " heaping cares and engage- 
 ments mountain - high upon Parliament, already op- 
 pressed beneath the weight of its necessary burdens." 
 This mode of argument is as perilous as it is fallacious. 
 Whatever he may think of them, all the discussions 
 that have arisen about foreign affairs are of infinijte 
 importance ; and, as was pointed out most forcibly after 
 he had made these strange charges, Mr Gladstone is 
 ministering to most unworthy notions of public duty 
 when he " compares a dififi.culty about army flogging to 
 the difficulty born of the Treaty of San Stefano, and 
 when he places the Afghan war or a Vernacular Press 
 Act on the same level with some wanton cavil about 
 the Irish Constabulary." I will venture to say that, in 
 opposition to these vague assertions, there is great 
 reason for saying that Mr Gladstone is himself, down 
 to this hour, the cause, or " the cause of the cause," of
 
 48 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 much of the obstruction to business from which Parlia- 
 ment suffers. In his period of office the kind of legisla- 
 tion in which he indulged Ireland was likely to evoke 
 vain hopes and expectations of further advantage. Very 
 recently, by that monstrous reference which was made 
 to Fenian outrages in 1867 as a means of ripening one 
 great question for treatment, he has given fresh encour- 
 agement to lawless and ill-considered agitation, and 
 who can wonder if the effect be prejudicial to the pro- 
 gress of public business hereafter ? 
 
 But I must call your attention to a much more 
 serious ground for the counter -charge which I am 
 making. What is it that has made foreign affairs so 
 prominent in the last few years, to the hindrance of 
 ordinary legislation, apart from the intrigues and am- 
 bitions and movements of other nations, over which we 
 have no control ? I say that the system pursued by 
 Mr Gladstone's Government in reference to foreign 
 affairs was to let them mind their own business, and it 
 was to a great extent the complete neglect of them that 
 rendered them afterwards so tortuous and so trouble- 
 some. It does not lie with statesmen to be at once so 
 captious and so critical who never lifted a finger to- 
 wards getting better government for Turkey, though 
 they were in office fourteen out of eighteen years. And 
 yet now, as Mr Bourke said lately at Leeds, for the first 
 time in their lives they discover that to secure this is the 
 first duty of English statesmen. The same men who 
 first charge our Government with baffling the holy and 
 beneficent designs of Eussia, and afterwards of being 
 unconsciously her best friends, are those who, by their 
 precious do-nothing and yield -everything policy, in
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPOKT. 49 
 
 1871 conceded the full extent of Eussian demands, and 
 frustrated the whole scope of the policy which we con- 
 tended for in the Crimea. Considering the haphazard 
 method by which foreign affairs were managed when 
 the late Government was in office, the marvel is not 
 that we have heard so much of them of late years, but 
 that we have escaped the difficulties and the horrors and 
 the costly expenditure of any European war. Nothing, 
 I am persuaded, but firmness and skill, combined with 
 the measures of defence and preparation which have 
 been often animadverted upon, has kept us from so 
 terrible and so disastrous a contingency. 
 
 I see that it is the fashion to represent the speeches 
 wiiich it is the custom or the duty of members of 
 Parliament here and there in Scotland to make before 
 their constituents, in accordance with annual custom, 
 as so many replies to the recent electioneering addresses 
 of Mr Gladstone. I can only say that my speeches, 
 such as they are, would have been delivered at this 
 season if Mr Gladstone had never made his progress 
 through Scotland ; but, looking to the circumstances of 
 the time in which we are, and to the general character 
 of the attack which Mr Gladstone's recent raid in 
 Scotland was intended to have, it would be strange 
 indeed if some of his statements and arguments should 
 go unchallenged in the weeks that follow. The chief 
 part of all Mr Gladstone's speeches was answered by 
 anticipation both in Parliament and in the country. 
 The foreign policy of the Government, which was the 
 main object of attack, has been vindicated over and 
 over again in Parliament, where it received the indepen- 
 dent support of Mr Gladstone's friends. The country, 
 
 D
 
 50 ADDEESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 which he many times over tried to rouse in opposition 
 to the decisions of Parliament, gave no sign of sympathy 
 with his views. The violence of language which cul- 
 minated months ago, for it has not since been quite 
 equalled, in the assertion that " in the management of a 
 great crisis of human destiny it would have been better 
 for the interests of justice and liberty if the British 
 nation had not existed," never roused a spark of corre- 
 sponding excitement in any quarter, while other nations 
 in Europe or Asia showed no sign of being animated 
 by the view so ferociously expressed as to the character 
 and conduct of our country. I met a friend on the day 
 that Mr Gladstone's fortnight of electioneering ended, 
 and I made the commonplace remark, that it was a 
 relief to think that we had got to the end of the 
 speeches for the present ; but I found that he did not 
 agree with me. He said — " On the contrary, I would 
 like to have compelled him to go on speaking for an- 
 other fortnight, by which time people would have 
 learnt how little there was to be got from it all ! " Have 
 you ever considered the effect on foreign countries of 
 the language used by Opposition leaders in regard to 
 recent foreign policy ? Nothing would be farther from 
 the wish of men like Sir W. Harcourt than that their 
 sayings and doings in Opposition should be remembered 
 against them if they came into office again ; but it is 
 both vain, and insulting to other countries, to suppose 
 that they are both forgetful and unobservant. " Foreign 
 opinion," as it has been pointed out, " took the language 
 that has been so freely used at a great deal more than 
 it was worth ; and a Liberal Government, if it assumed 
 office, would be taken abroad to be a Government of
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 51 
 
 languor, concession, and retreat." Let the intentions 
 for the future of Mr Gladstone and his friends be what 
 they may, this and no less is the result of their head- 
 long violence in Opposition, and by this standard will 
 they and their country be judged if they should here- 
 after be called to guide its destinies. If Scotland is 
 made the arena for an ex post facto revival of all the 
 old charges which have hitherto made little way, it is 
 a poor compliment to the intelligence or the patriotism 
 of the North. 
 
 But what is to be said for the bids for particular 
 support of which a Scottish audience has been made 
 the channel of communication to the country? Are 
 they of a kind that recommend themselves to hard- 
 headed, thinking men, who have memories and brains, 
 and some stake in the security and integrity of this 
 country of ours ? I say " memory " advisedly. Mr 
 Gladstone referred, at Dalkeith on the 26th Nov- 
 ember, to the inadequate representation of Scotland 
 in respect to population and revenue, which no one 
 denies, and a voice said, " Whose fault is it 1 " • 
 Presently came the reply that it was the fault of those 
 who framed and carried the Eeform Acts of 1867 and 
 1868. The fairness and the impartiality of this in- 
 formation are sufficiently shown when we remember 
 that those who framed the Act gave seven additional 
 seats to Scotland in those years, which was not a 
 small addition to her representation. I want to know 
 what is the value of considerations of distance which, 
 Mr Gladstone says, entitle a part of the country to 
 special representation. I should have thought that 
 the intelligence of a coustituency would have been of
 
 52 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 more importance than its distance from Westminster, 
 just as a university constituency — for whom in 1868 
 the Conservative Government secured representation 
 — would, in the view of most people, have a claim to 
 be considered before the recognition of the principle of 
 head-counting by thousands which weighs so much in 
 some quarters. It would not have suited Mr Glad- 
 stone's purposes to say anything about Irish representa- 
 tion, but if justice were done to Ireland (the very last 
 thing that Ireland would really desire), its representa- 
 tives ought to be, not 105, but 70. A very able writer* 
 has lately pointed out that the excessive representa- 
 tion of Ireland is a great mischief to the whole country. 
 He says that it gives undue influence to Ireland, and 
 thwarts the naturally stronger forces of the whole 
 nation. Because Ireland has so great a power to 
 force its affairs on Imperial notice, the Irish people 
 have an undue notion of the comparative importance 
 of their local concerns. If Ireland had a smaller 
 number of representatives they would really be more 
 united, whereas now the weight of the Irish vote is 
 artificial. 
 
 But next, what is to be said of the handling of the 
 proposal " to cut up the land of the country into a mul- 
 titude of small properties ? " The language used on this 
 subject amounts, as it has been said, to "as distinct an 
 encouragement to revolutionary demands and visionary 
 hopes of social reconstruction as it was easy to offer." 
 To state propositions, even though Mr Gladstone after- 
 wards states that he has no doubts in his mind about 
 them, is to indicate a friendliness towards them which, 
 
 * Mr GifFen — 'Essays in Finance.'
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 53 
 
 coming from him, is startling and ominous. If I am 
 wrong in this impression, then I would ask what 
 language is so calculated to promote agitation on a 
 subject upon which, according to himself, the mind of 
 the speaker is not made up ? What is the effect likely 
 to be produced at the present time in Ireland alone? 
 I hope that the scarcely-concealed bid for the support 
 of the Home Rule party will not be lost sight of. 
 Compliments to the principle of local self-government, 
 when followed by a reference to Home Rule, are quite 
 understood, and we know were at once hailed with satis- 
 faction in the quarter towards which they are directed. 
 How different is the language held at Leeds by the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer — " We will not allow our- 
 selves to coquet with Home Rule or with any other of 
 those dangerous and alluring topics which politicians 
 are sometimes in the habit of approaching as near as 
 they can, trying how near they can go without burning 
 their fingers," &c. The difference between these modes 
 of speaking is quickly seen in the result. In an election 
 where neither a Conservative nor a Liberal will concede" 
 anything towards the demands of Home Rule, you see 
 the " solid vote " go for the Advanced Liberal candidate, 
 and an election carried by that means. As it has been 
 well put, " a lesson of this kind " — the lesson of how to 
 bring Irish grievances within the range of practical 
 politics — "is not likely to be thrown away, and the 
 Home Rulers may well believe that, if at the next 
 election they can secure a Liberal victory for Mr 
 Gladstone, and place him at the head of affairs, they 
 need not trouble themselves to insist upon pledges 
 from the Liberal candidates for whom they vote." It
 
 54 • ADDEESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 should be remembered tliat*the cause wliich the Home 
 Euler of to-day represents, is the " cause of agrarian 
 Communism as promoted by incendiary agitation ; and 
 such is the political object with which their combina- 
 tion is entered into." In younger men to bid for sup- 
 port in this way would be c&,lled levity, and in men 
 of extreme opinions, on whom the restraints of respon- 
 sibility and of ofi&cial life have never been laid, it would 
 be called recklessness. What is it to be called when 
 he who holds such language is an ex-Prime Minister, 
 electioneering in Scotland, and addressing thousands 
 of his fellow-countrymen ? But, before all things, I 
 believe that the mind and conscience of this country 
 were shocked at the admission that Fenian crime and 
 violence brought the disestablishment of the Irish 
 Church within the range of practical politics. Mr 
 Gladstone distinctly states that violence and crime 
 " called attention to the question," and so extorted the 
 legislation of 1869 ; and the moment at which this 
 allusion was made was when Irish agitators again are 
 at work, inciting their deluded victims to resist the 
 law, and even to proceed to crime and rebellion. 
 
 In his attack on the Indian policy of the Govern- 
 ment, Mr Gladstone referred to the Vernacular Press 
 and the Indian Arms Acts, and he contended that the 
 restriction upon the press, as well as upon the use of 
 gunpowder and other explosives, should be removed. 
 My friend Mr Stanhope, the Under-Secretary of State 
 for India, made a capital reply to this at Leeds. " We 
 can recollect," he said, " that no longer ago than 1870 
 another Government felt it to be its duty to pass Acts 
 relating to another portion of the Empire of a very
 
 ADDKESS AT MILLPOKT. 55 
 
 stringent character, and in those Acts were found con- 
 ditions, first of all, for dealing with the press of the 
 country, although written in the English language ; and, 
 in the second place, imposing very severe restrictions on 
 the possession of firearms and ammunition." This is 
 no mere tu quoque argument. Mr Stanhope adds — " It 
 is difficult to understand why it is so wicked to sanction 
 Acts for India which the Government of that country 
 declares to be necessary for public safety, and which 
 are analogous to those that Parliament in its wisdom 
 has thought fit to pass for Ireland." Yes, in this way 
 Mr Gladstone's strictures can be both cleverlv and 
 effectually parried; but the shabbiness of the attack 
 on measures like these can only be understood when 
 we remember that Ministers must be silent for the most 
 part as to the real motive of such legislation. Is it 
 likely that Mr Gladstone does not know of the steps 
 taken by native princes, on the plea of self-preserva- 
 tion, to increase their military strength at a time when 
 our relations in Afghanistan were of a troublesome 
 character ? He will not lose a chance of raising pre- 
 judice against political opponents in any part of the 
 world, even though the power to answer him be denied 
 to them, unless they are to be guilty of indiscretions 
 worthy even of himself 
 
 It would be unpardonable to make all these allusions 
 but for one reason, that every one knows that the case, as 
 put by Mr Gladstone against the Government, must be 
 considered as the case for the prosecution, so to speak, 
 on behalf of the Eadical party. If we are to judge by 
 the apparent acceptableness of all the extreme and 
 violent statements which were lately made, of the
 
 56 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 loaded flattery of the audiences, of the dimly-sketched 
 outlines of changes and invasions of property, which (as 
 some one said of them) go far in the direction of Com- 
 munism or Nihilism, it would give one a startling idea 
 of the political mind of Scotland. But has your atten- 
 tion been called to the election which took place at 
 Sheffield very soon after Mr Gladstone's Scotch cam- 
 paign ? Mr Gladstone had had his say to the full, and 
 no answer that was given to him could have been in 
 time to affect the election, and yet what occurred ? In 
 one of the largest and busiest of constituencies in Eng- 
 land (the largest that is represented by only two mem- 
 bers), where in 1874 a Conservative candidate did not 
 venture to come forward, a young Conservative barrister,* 
 and an untried politician, polled 13,584 votes — more than 
 sufficed to seat one of the present Liberal members in 
 1874 — and ran the Liberal candidate so near that he won 
 by but 478 in a constituency of some 40,000. And this 
 was at a time when the Afghan war was troubling us 
 afresh, and the Ministry was liable to be blamed for it ; 
 when financial difficulties are supposed to hover around 
 us ; when depression, though somewhat lessening, w^as 
 very generally felt; when all the different interests, 
 which somehow or another become dissatisfied with any 
 Ministry of the day, may be supposed to have reached 
 the acme of ruffledness ; and when, last but not least, 
 the long-promised Mid-Lothian assault, hot and strong, 
 and no mistake, had been made on the citadel of Scotch 
 Conservatism, and through it, on Conservatism all over 
 the country. Here we have the answer, in the strong- 
 
 * A son of the Right Hon. J. S. Wortley, M.P. for Buteshire, 
 1842-59.
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 57 
 
 hold of Eadicalism, to the overdone criticisms of months 
 past ; and here, as I confidently maintain, we have the 
 proof, which Scotland may lay to heart, of the positive 
 service done to his opponents by Mr Gladstone's recent 
 appearances in Scotland. 
 
 As far as I can make out, the great effort of Liberal 
 orators at present is directed to proving to how low 
 a point of fortune our country has sunk. One who 
 stands high at present (far higher than he stood two 
 years ago) in their estimation — I mean Lord Derby — 
 has just made a speech which ought to set them thinking. 
 Lord Derby asks three questions — 1st, are we, on the 
 whole, as a community, growing richer or poorer ? 
 2d, What is the proportion which the profits on our 
 foreign trade bear to the entire earnings of the nation ? 
 and, 3d, Is our foreign trade really falling off ? As to 
 the first point. Lord Derby says the general view is too 
 gloomy, and that we must not judge by a single year; 
 and taking any test that people please, he says the 
 people of this country, man for man, are better off than 
 ten years ago ; secondly, he proves that the statements 
 about the decay of our home trade are in no way justi- 
 fied by the facts of the case ; and, thirdly, he says that 
 the language used about our waning foreign trade is 
 the same that has been used one hundred times before. 
 There may have been a check ; there is not a falling 
 off. And not even does the competition of other 
 countries alarm Lord Derby. Eeally you should bear 
 these statements in mind, when, to suit their own pur- 
 poses, the politicians are for the nonce sounding the 
 commercial death-knell of their country. 
 
 No one who addresses you at this time can avoid
 
 58 ADDEESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 ike subject of finance, and I believe that the expendi- 
 ture of the country interests us all, whether we contri- 
 bute to it directly or indirectly. Only I would beg of 
 you to be sure that you are not carried away or de- 
 ceived by one-sided statements about it. You will 
 hear that the country is groaning under heavy taxa- 
 tion; that our finances are confused, embarrassed, 
 ruinous ; that the system on which they are managed 
 is without precedent and dishonest ; and a master hand 
 describes the present condition of our national expendi- 
 ture as utterly deplorable, and requiring instant atten- 
 tion and complete reversal. In presence of such asser- 
 tions, one who pretends to no authority on such matters, 
 and who yet has a responsibility towards you on the 
 subject, must be satisfied with a plain statement. I 
 want you to guard against misstatements and exaggera- 
 tion, and I will take care to indulge in neither myself 
 It is fortunate that Sir Stafford Northcote spoke so 
 recently at Leeds ; that we have his account of the 
 alleged increase of expenditure to go by ; and that the 
 public press has admitted the completeness of his vin- 
 dication of his financial policy. I referred lately to the 
 so-called surplus, of which this Government did not 
 have the spending or the wasting (if you like), for the 
 best of all reasons, — that they gave it to the country in 
 relief of taxation and remission of rates. In dealing 
 with the excess of expenditure of the present Govern- 
 ment over that of his own, Mr Gladstone took the 
 extraordinary course of deducting the war expenditure 
 from his own side of the account and calling it " extra- 
 ordinary," but declined to deduct the war expenditure 
 of the present Government. Was ever anything so
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 59 
 
 transparently one-sided ? In truth, a fair deduction, 
 not from one side but from both sides, is almost fatal 
 to his case ; for when you have deducted the war expen- 
 diture — expenditure of an extraordinary kind — in both 
 cases, the explanation of the increase of VJ millions 
 becomes easy, and some of it does not really represent 
 increase at all. I will not trouble you with the details, 
 but as to the first large item of that amount — namely, 
 above two millions for charge for debt — it was shown 
 that, with the exception of £129,000 (the interest on 
 the five or six millions of Exchequer Bonds to meet 
 the war expenditure), there is no real increase on our 
 burdens. The increase on the army and navy has 
 been £2,300,000, which includes a very proper increase 
 of pay to our soldiers, in the best form possible for 
 them — in the shape of pensions ; and the increase on 
 the navy dates back to the time when the late Gov- 
 ernment was in office. The excess in civil expenditure 
 has been 3 J millions — of which 1| million is due 
 for increased charge for education, and 2 millions to 
 charges taken off the ratepayers, and taken into^the 
 Consolidated Fund. A speaker at a meeting here last 
 February referred in a lofty and contemptuous way to 
 the idea that increased charges for education could make 
 any appreciable difference in the national expenditure. 
 Well, my idea is, that out of a sum of 7 J millions, IJ 
 million is a very definite amount, not lightly to be passed 
 over. When the relief of local taxation is spoken of, it 
 is well to remember "that ratepayers are also tax- 
 payers," as Sir Stafford Northcote said, " and what is 
 charged upon the taxes generally is relief to the great 
 body of ratepayers on whom such heavy burdens are
 
 60 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 thrown. It is impossible to notice all statements that 
 are made, but the Eothesay Eadical paper of Saturday- 
 week gave us some figures which require notice. It 
 was said that Mr Gladstone "governed us cheaper" 
 than the present Government. If this means that the 
 expenditure of the country was less, it may be true ; 
 but if it means that we were more lightly taxed, the 
 reverse is the truth. It is confidently stated that 
 " Mr Gladstone reduced the National Debt £26,197,000 
 during his term of office, while the Tories have only 
 reduced it £1,205,000 during the last five years." And 
 some very large figures are then quoted, the accuracy 
 of which I have verified, and in no way dispute, which 
 bear out the statement. 
 
 But there is a little more to be said on the subject, 
 which is also drawn from official documents. I will 
 not trouble you with distinctions between funded and 
 unfunded debt ; but the truth is, that of the unfunded 
 debt of more than 25 J millions, no less than nearly 16 J 
 millions raised for local works, Suez Canal, &c., during 
 the five years, must be regarded as investment and not 
 expenditure ; and hence the reduction of debt is in 
 reality a great deal more than appears — namely, up- 
 wards of 17 millions. So far from £1,205,000 repre- 
 senting the reduction of debt in five years, the reduc- 
 tion of debt between 31st March 1878 and 31st March 
 1879 has been upwards of £4,000,000 alone, made up 
 by decrease in the value of terminable annuities and 
 by the new Sinking Fund. The reduction of debt is 
 on a steady and distinct principle, from which, even in 
 years of difficulty, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has 
 not departed. If he had departed from the principle,
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPOET. 61 
 
 he might have squared the deficit that now exists. 
 The remark which I made at Eothesay to this effect 
 is strictly accurate, though I took no credit to the 
 Government for it ; for I think they would have been 
 very foolish if they had abandoned the Sinking Fund, 
 which, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer said last 
 April, must not lightly be trenched upon. 
 
 Two other references are interesting : and, first, as to 
 deferred liabilities. When Lord Palmerston's Govern- 
 ment in 1860 had to lay out a large sum on fortifications, 
 instead of raising it, Mr Gladstone spread the amount 
 over twenty-five years ; and you will hardly believe it, 
 but the Government that has paid off the largest pro- 
 portion of this very postponed burden of Mr Gladstone's 
 making, has been the Government of Lord Beaconsfield, 
 to the tune of £2,467,000. And once more : there has 
 been a great deal said against the present Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer for not calculating the Zulu war 
 more closely, and then having to ask for a vote of 
 credit at the end of the session. When Mr Gladstone 
 brought in his Budget in 1860, he made no arrange- 
 ments whatever about the China war, though every one 
 knew there was going to be war. At the end of the 
 session he asked for £3,800,000 towards the expenses 
 of it, and when told he had practised a delusion on 
 Parliament, he said — " Parliament knew just as much 
 as we did about the matter, and therefore we were not 
 bound to tell them." Sir S. Northcote had £1,900,000 
 in hand this year, and said that he must leave the 
 extra expense of the Zulu war (if any) to be arranged 
 for afterwards; and the only difference between his 
 method and that just referred to is this, that " Parlia-
 
 62 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 ment knew just as much as he did about the matter ; " 
 but he told Parliament plainly what he intended, and 
 what his expectations were. 
 
 There are some people who seem to think that 
 finance is an awkward subject for a Conservative. I 
 dispute it entirely, and I challenge the attention of all 
 who are disposed really to look into the question, to 
 the explanations of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. 
 Of course, if people are determined to believe all that 
 Mr Gladstone says about the country and its finances 
 and its debts, there is no more to be said. If they 
 choose to hear the other side — and they are bound to 
 hear it if they are going to form and to pass a judgment 
 upon the subject — the scene entirely changes, and in 
 spite of difficulties and depression and bad harvests 
 and wars and rumours of war, there is nothing to 
 cause ultimate anxiety as to either our expenditure 
 or our indebtedness. The banner of " Peace, retrench- 
 ment, and reform " is ever and anon unfurled among us 
 by the Liberal party, and it seems to be thought suf- 
 ficient to hoist it, and to insist, without qualification, 
 on the imperative necessity for rallying round it. I, 
 for one, am prepared to enlist myself in its service if 
 I know what is meant by it. Who is not desirous of 
 peace whe'n it can be obtained? We cannot always 
 remain at peace even if we wished it ; and if we are at 
 war, a patched-up and temporary peace is no peace at 
 all. Mr Pitt once said — " As a sincere lover of peace, 
 I cannot content myself with the nominal attainment 
 of it ; as a sincere lover of peace, I will not sacrifice it 
 by grasping at the shadow when the reality is not in 
 truth within my reach." Those who vapour about
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 63 
 
 peace as a mere cry and nothing else, if pressed as to 
 what they really mean, would have to admit that they 
 contemplate a state of things in w^hich we are never 
 to go to war at all. This state of things is simply 
 visionary, and however we may desire it as an abstract 
 theory, it is not ours to theorise about, for it is not 
 within our control. Depend upon it, this country will 
 never stand a policy of effacement ; and circumstances 
 may arise, as they have often arisen heretofore, which 
 may compel us to go to war, however inconveniently, 
 and however unwillingly. Eetrenchment is a thing 
 much to be desired, as much for the nation as for the 
 individual, and expenditure must be rigorously watched. 
 But we must not confuse things that are not analogous; 
 and you may be assured of this, that the most extrava- 
 gant of all policies in the long-run is economy without 
 efficiency. A Conservative Government has no disin- 
 clination for reform, whether parliamentary or any 
 other kind. The country received at its hands the 
 last measure of parliamentary reform, and its present 
 term of office has witnessed many social reforms none 
 the less useful because they are not the fruit of agita- 
 tion or wrung from a Government which could not 
 resist them. The claim to a monopoly of peace, re- 
 trenchment, and reform on the part of the Liberals is 
 as old as it is unfounded, and those who would have 
 you believe that a transference of power from one 
 party to another at the present time would necessarily 
 inaugurate an era marked by these characteristics, are 
 taking liberties with your credulity, and are indulging 
 in the higher flights of bunkum. I should despair of 
 persuading any one who differs from them politically
 
 64 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 
 
 how preposterous is the charge that any portion — I 
 will not say of the irresponsible talkers of the Con- 
 servative party, but — of those who are responsible for 
 the government of the country prefer a state of war, 
 prefer extravagant expenditure, and are opposed to 
 necessary and useful reforms. And yet this, and 
 nothing else, is the position taken up by those who 
 claim for the Liberal party a monopoly of peace, re- 
 trenchment, and reform. I can at least speak for 
 myself with certainty, and say that I yield to no 
 man in my distaste for war, especially for war that 
 is carried on with native races of India or of Africa — 
 races that, could they but know it, have everything to 
 gain and nothing to lose by being on terms of amity 
 and confidence with us. But I believe in my heart 
 that the Afghan war was absolutely necessary, and 
 that good will come of it yet, notwithstanding all its 
 difficulty and peril and cost. As regards the Zulu war, 
 I can but endorse what a resident in this county, who 
 was for long in Natal, said to me ten days ago — that 
 Sir Bartle Frere, though he was wrong in precipitating 
 hostilities without consulting the Government at home, 
 knew right well what he was about, and chose the right 
 moment for action, because if we had not subdued the 
 Zulu military power, ere long it would have been im- 
 possible for an English colonist to remain in Natal. 
 Try, I beg of you, to be a little more liberal-minded 
 and generous than some of your so-called Liberal 
 counsellors. Try sometimes to imagine the position 
 of the Queen's Ministers in difficult times, who have 
 not only to contend with the intrigues and ambitions 
 of other countries and statesmen and rulers, but have to
 
 ADDRESS AT MILLPORT. 65 
 
 bear the carping detraction and the baulking criticism 
 of political opponents at home (for in these later days, 
 not even at the most critical moments for the country's 
 weal do your Liberal statesmen hold their hand), and 
 you may come to the conclusion, not that the Govern- 
 ment have been always right, but that they have done 
 the best that was in their power for the credit and for 
 the honour of the country. The country will deliver 
 its verdict on their policy as a whole before many 
 months have passed. As to the exact time of the 
 general election, you know as much, or rather as 
 little, as I do. When that time arrives, I shall ask 
 for a renewal of that trust which was first confided 
 to me more than eleven years ago, which I again 
 received six years ago, and which I have constantly 
 endeavoured to fulfil by devoting myself to the sei- 
 vice of this constituency. 
 
 E
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 DELIVERED BEFORE THE 
 
 EDINBUEGH SOUTHEEN DISTEICT 
 CONSEEYATIYE ASSOCIATION,* 
 
 January 30, 1880. 
 
 Mr Dalrymple said : — 
 
 I have been honoured with invitations to address 
 more than one of the district Conservative associations 
 of this county, and it is in response to one of these 
 invitations that I have come here to-night. I am very- 
 glad to have an opportunity of contributing such small 
 support as I can give to one of the Conservative associa- 
 tions of Mid-Lothian. I address you as being an elector 
 of Mid-Lothian, and a warm supporter of the noble 
 Lord who is member for the county, deeply interested 
 in the present political circumstances of the county, 
 and anxious to assist the Conservative cause which we 
 all have so much at heart. It is impossible to exag- 
 
 * The Earl of Dalkeith, M.P., presided.
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 67 
 
 gerate the importance of associations like this, whether 
 as centres of political organisation or as channels and 
 sources of political information. I have said before 
 now that the party has yet to be invented that can do 
 without organisation ; and there never was a time when 
 our party will derive greater profit than now from the 
 corporate action, and the spread of information, which 
 are the direct results of such associations as these. 
 We have had to contend in Scotland with a consider- 
 able prejudice — dating from times now gone by — 
 against Conservative opinions. That prejudice is 
 rapidly passing away alike under the influence of in- 
 creased political knowledge, and as people begin to see 
 through the hollowness and unreality of many of the 
 claims and pretensions of the Liberal party. That 
 which is most encouraging and hopeful in regard to 
 such associations as yours is the activity and earnest- 
 ness of the younger members, who can exercise a most 
 important influence on their contemporaries ; and who, 
 at this time, when a special assault is being made on 
 the Conservative party, must be prepared to defend our* 
 position with all the force of their convictions and all 
 the resoluteness of their united efforts. 
 
 Does it occur to any of you that there is but little 
 novelty in all the defences of the Conservative position 
 which are made at the present time ? I would ask 
 whether there is novelty in tne attacks which we have 
 to meet? When Sir W. Harcourt recommends and 
 puts in practice his particular device for weakening the 
 Government — viz., to keep pegging away at them, he 
 exactly describes the character of that " political nag- 
 ging " which has been the characteristic of the last few
 
 68 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 months. The points of attack are extremely few, and 
 they afford no opportunity for varied defence ; though 
 I make bold to say that there is not one of them on 
 which we cannot show a good defence, and may not 
 unhesitatingly offer a united front. Now, I will not 
 to-night pay any attention to charges, too often made 
 for the credit of those who make them, of moral defects 
 in political opponents — charges which it seems possible 
 to make in public, on public platforms, and in crowded 
 assemblages, but which no one would dream of making, 
 or would ever dare to make in private life, or within 
 the walls of Parliament. There are various public men 
 among the leaders of the Liberal party who are pre- 
 paring for themselves in the future some very difficult 
 and awkward issues, which will be quite a sufficient 
 punishment for them for the " desultory revilings " in 
 which they have been indulging in the last few years. 
 If they should hereafter be called upon to assume the 
 reins of power, it will be no justification of their action 
 in regard to foreign nations, whom they have fre- 
 quently misled and deluded, that they before all things 
 desired to turn out the Conservative Government. "We 
 can very well afford to leave them to the result of their 
 own proceedings when we know that they will have to 
 do one of two things — either to carry out the policy of 
 those whom they have thwarted and abused, or else to 
 fulfil the part which public opinion abroad will expect 
 of them — of being " a Government of languor, conces- 
 sion, and retreat." 
 
 The points of attack, I say, are few. The foreign 
 policy of the Government — and under that head fall 
 those assertions about contempt of Parliament, the pro-
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 69 
 
 gress of personal government, and the like, which one 
 by one have been exposed and refuted, and the expen- 
 diture of the Government — these two are really the 
 case for the prosecution on the part of the Liberal 
 party. It ought to be one result of your association 
 that through interchange of views between its members, 
 or through addresses that are delivered to you, you 
 should be aware — and not only aware, but deeply per- 
 suaded — that on neither of these counts has the Gov- 
 ernment any cause to be ashamed. Speaking as one 
 who has endeavoured to act as a conscientious but in- 
 dependent supporter of the Government, I say in regard 
 to their foreign policy, that whatever mistakes they 
 may have made, whatever modifications the course of 
 events abroad may have made in their programme, 
 they have followed a course which has been dictated 
 by a desire to maintain the high position of this coun- 
 try among the nations ; that they have been earnestly 
 labouring to maintain peace, where peace was possible ; 
 and, where the alternative of war was forced upon 
 them, that they have prosecuted the war with the 
 twofold object of limiting it to the purpose for which 
 it w^as undertaken, and of concluding it in a manner 
 favourable to the security and to the tranquillity of 
 the State. Our Liberal friends figure as the advocates 
 of peace whenever a Conservative Government is in 
 office ; and they wish it to be supposed that the Con- 
 servative party loves war, and has an exclusive respon- 
 sibility for it all the world over, at such a time as this. 
 For purposes of criticism, the whole past is a blank ; 
 inconvenient retrospects as to the Crimean war, for 
 which a Liberal Government, with two very notable
 
 70 ADDRESS AT EDINBUEGH. 
 
 living men members of it, - was responsible, must be 
 avoided studiously ; even more recent wars are glossed 
 over; and, in addition to this, all the ambitions and 
 intrigues and disquietude of other countries, with their 
 armed hosts and their divided aspirations, which so 
 widely affect the peace of the world, are quietly left 
 out of view, if only it can be shown that during the 
 time that a Conservative Government is in office the 
 country has been at war, with the necessary results of 
 anxiety, and interruption of ordinary business, and some 
 increased burden to our finances. 
 
 Now, I would fain hope that when through the 
 months past, in view of a coming appeal to the constit- 
 uencies, all the extravagance of assertion, and all ex- 
 aggerations of such a kind as I describe, have been in 
 fullest progress, the real facts may be remembered, and 
 will yet make themselves heard. Eemember that there 
 is nothing in the indictment — that is the favourite 
 word — now brought against the Government which has 
 not been discounted over and over again in Parliament 
 and in the country. In Parliament, I say, where un- 
 precedented majorities, composed not of the following, 
 however united, of the Government of the day, but of 
 independent Liberals who preferred their country to 
 their party, backed up and vindicated the firm policy 
 and the defensive measures of the Ministry, and in the 
 country too. Be the decision of the country at the 
 coming general election what it may, the country has 
 during the last few years shown its sympathy with the 
 foreign policy of the Government in the plainest man- 
 ner, both negatively and positively. Public meetings, 
 the bulk of the press, bye elections, all these have
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 71 
 
 testified to it in turn. Men go about saying that while 
 Parliament said tliis the country meant that, in the face 
 of those oft-repeated vacancies in the representation of 
 the people which gave opportunity for showing what 
 the country felt. If the Parliament which is soon to 
 enter on its seventh session had not been of the people's 
 electing^ in the first instance — a statement which not 
 even the most cock-sure among all the Liberals has yet 
 ventured on — it has been of the people's recruiting and 
 renewing on wellnigh one hundred and fifty occasions 
 since 1874 ; and disapproval of that policy which has 
 been the chief occupation of this Parliament, whether 
 we like it or not, has been hitherto unmistakably want- 
 ing, in spite of all the attempts of its opponents to 
 blacken and to discredit it at home and abroad. One 
 is sometimes driven to believe that the success of the 
 foreign policy is the secret of the immeasured hostility 
 with which it is assailed. 
 
 " The Indian troops from India brought, 
 And back to India sent, sir ; 
 
 In darkest secret this was wrought, * 
 
 Against our freedom meant, sir. 
 I did not like it first of all, 
 Yet I had minded less, sir. 
 But what annoyed me worst of all, 
 I felt 'twas a success, sir." 
 
 As to Cyprus, I believe that it has become matter 
 of serious alarm to the Liberal party lest Cyprus should 
 turn out to be a success. If it is not to be retained 
 unless Turkish reforms are really carried out ; if it is 
 not to be a great expense to this country, because, if 
 properly cared for, it will pay its own expenses ; if, in
 
 72 ADDEESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 spite of every lugubrious prophecy, men who are known 
 to us all can live there in perfect health ; if, in spite of 
 the passionate assertions to the contrary, credible eye- 
 witnesses can testify to the good harbourage, why, 
 there is nothing left to our Liberal friends but the 
 terrible conviction that they have been mistaken. 
 Except Eussia, I suppose that no European Power 
 would hail with satisfaction the return of the Liberals 
 to office. Kussia would rejoice, because she doubtless 
 has been misled into thinking that under a Liberal 
 regime she might enter Constantinople, tread Turkey 
 under foot, make short work of Egypt, threaten India, 
 carry all before her in Afghanistan. But the general 
 feeling towards this country entertained by Europe is 
 the very reverse of what our home critics express. 
 Liberal orators say that our Government has uncon- 
 sciously assisted Eussia. Why, then, does Eussia 
 desire the overthrow of this Government? Liberal 
 orators, in their desire to damage the Government, 
 don't hesitate to hold up their own country to scorn as 
 having played a dishonest part when the Great Powers 
 were gathered at Berlin. Where are the signs that the 
 Great Powers shared this opinion, or felt themselves 
 deceived ? Our Government (with a recklessness yet 
 more perilous) is represented as approving, or else 
 authorising, oppressive legislation in India as regards 
 the press and the acquisition of arms. Where are the 
 signs of discontent that have followed such legislation 
 in India ? The people of India do not even respond to 
 the temptation which such patriotic representations 
 (patriotic indeed !) hold out to them. It is, in truth, 
 because we are showing India our firmness and our
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 73 
 
 resolution that her people are loyal, and are showing 
 their belief in us and their attachment to us at a time 
 of trial and difficulty. Do you think that if we had 
 submitted to such a state of things as was represented 
 by a Eussian Envoy being honoured at Cabul, while 
 we were ignominiously refused permission to send one 
 there, this would have been unobserved in India ? It 
 has been said, with truth and force, that it would have 
 been more disastrous than the loss of battles. I think 
 that, of all the difficulties which the Government has 
 had to contend with in the last few years, the Afghan 
 war is the one for which they deserved the greatest 
 indulgence. All that has happened there is the direct 
 outcome of previous mismanagement, and of the break- 
 down of that policy of masterly inactivity which in its 
 inception may have been well intentioned, but which, 
 in this particular instance, has been so disappointing 
 and so perilous. When we consider the share which 
 the late Government had in creating the difficulty 
 which in the time of their successors assumed so seri- 
 ous a scope ; when we see how grave had become tke 
 estrangement from us of the Afghan people, and how 
 complicated by the intrigues of Kussia, the marvel is 
 not that we were involved in war, not that the war has 
 been protracted one way or another until now, but that 
 any one that knows all that has occurred can fail to 
 rejoice that the Government of India and the Govern- 
 ment at home boldly dealt with the difficulty before it 
 had passed beyond our control. 
 
 I have referred to the choice of issues which Liberal 
 statesmen are preparing for themselves in the future, if 
 they should ever return to power. But it is extremely
 
 74 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 important that you should bear in mind how hollow, 
 and at the same time how mischievous, are all their 
 denunciations of the so-called " spirited foreign policy " 
 of the last few years, unless hereafter they are prepared 
 to reverse it. Lord Hartington, in his straightforward 
 manner, declared that his party would have to carry out 
 the policy of their predecessors ; and yet for months 
 together his colleagues and political associates (I will 
 not call them friends) denounce this very policy, and 
 apply to it all that " anthology of abuse," to use the 
 Duke of Somerset's phrase, which they have in such 
 luxuriant abundance at their command. What a com- 
 mentary is all this upon the relation of Liberal speakers 
 throughout the country towards the present Parliament, 
 which has stood so firmly by the .Government ; towards 
 the country, which, as I have said, has never by any 
 token of disapproval shown its divergence of opinion 
 from the Parliament ; and towards the constituencies, 
 which are soon to be consulted afresh ! What these 
 men desire to bring about is that the constituencies 
 should at the next election throw discredit, retrospec- 
 tively, on the policy which has been so widely approved 
 in the last few years ; that after having profited by the 
 patriotic tutelage of our country's interest, which has 
 been the Government's chief care and most earnestly 
 cherished concern through successive crises and ses- 
 sions and years, they should proceed to spurn from 
 them the party leaders who have been responsible all 
 the time ; and not only that, but who have been, to 
 their enemies' consternation, on the whole successful in 
 their undertakings before the eyes of their country and 
 of the world. 1 believe that the country is not de-
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 75 
 
 ceived by the suggestion which underlies all the criti- 
 cism of the Government, that it is in the power of a 
 Government to keep us out of war if it likes. The 
 country knows better than that ; it knows that circum- 
 stances may arise which may scatter to the winds the 
 most pacific intentions, and compel the most peacefully- 
 disposed of Governments to have recourse to arms. It 
 knows, too, that great as is our power, and audible as is 
 our voice in the councils of Europe now, our Govern- 
 ment cannot compass impossibilities. The very measure 
 of our neutrality in any European complication, not 
 excepting the war between Kussia and Turkey, is the 
 measure of our influence afterwards. IsTeutrals are not 
 popular at the time that they are neutrals (how should 
 they be so ?), and nothing but a close adherence to 
 treaty rights and a due assertion of legitimate claims 
 can entitle any country, however great, to proffer its 
 councils and insist on concerted action in grave and 
 difficult junctures. Be on your guard, then, I beg of 
 you, against the hollowness of these attacks on a policy 
 which has been watchful over the country's interests-r- 
 a policy which, even when war has occurred, has been 
 steadily aiming at a secured peace, and which, despite 
 all the objurgations of our Liberal counsellors, would 
 have to be imitated and emulated by themselves, unless 
 they would forfeit hereafter the favour of their fellow- 
 citizens and the safety of the Empire. 
 
 We have heard a great deal of the way in which Par- 
 liament has been taken by surprise at one time, or 
 treated with contempt at another, of late years — of 
 course, through the mischievous and high-handed action 
 of Lord Beaconsfield. This is part of that sort of mys-
 
 76 ADDRESS AT EDINBUEGH. 
 
 terious iniquity which is not often formulated in dis- 
 tinct charges, but rather hinted at and shuddered at, 
 and then left in a hazy and vague uncertainty. It 
 might suffice to remind you that whenever any charges 
 of that sort were made in Parliament, they were ab- 
 solutely blown to the winds. In some cases Parliament 
 was consulted as soon as it was possible, and in others, 
 where it was shown that the Crown, by advice of the 
 Ministry, was fully entitled to take certain steps, Par- i 
 liament was only asked to approve, in so far as it had 
 to grant the supplies necessary to carry them out. Mr 
 Gladstone, in one of his railway- station utterances, 
 during a hurried quarter of an hour at Perth, con- 
 demned the use that was made in recent times of the 
 treaty-making power of the Crown. He laid down that 
 this power is wisely used " when it is in conformity 
 with the well-understood general tendencies and con- 
 victions of the people." Exactly ; but how such an 
 idea is compatible with the statement made just before, 
 that " the nature of negotiations with foreign States is 
 frequently so complicated and so delicate that it hardly 
 can be carried on except by a single agency concen- 
 trated like the agency of Ministers, and that agency 
 invested with a large discretion," it was doubtless im- 
 possible to explain in a quarter of an hour outside Perth 
 Station, and certainly I shall not attempt to conjecture. 
 Of this I am quite sure, that the exercise of the war 
 and treaty making power of the Crown during the term 
 of office of the present Government never exceeded the 
 limits which the Constitution has laid down, or else it 
 would not have received the fullest endorsement by 
 Parliament ; and I am equally sure that Mr Gladstone's
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 77 
 
 objection to it arose not from any abuse of the power, 
 but because he dislikes and condemns the engagements 
 into which the Government entered. 
 
 This point of attack is taken up by smaller men at 
 other times. In speeches by two Scotch burgh mem- 
 bers of late I have seen allusion made to this abuse of 
 power, to the depreciation of the rights of Parliament, 
 and I daresay the honest folk who came together to 
 listen are conscious of some disquietude when they 
 hear of such far-off and recondite depravity in high 
 places. I would ask two questions of a very obvi- 
 ous kind in regard to this charge of contempt of Par- 
 liament. Is it likely that Parliament by the over- 
 whelming majorities of 1878 would have condoned it 
 if the Government could have been proved guilty of it ? 
 And do you think it likely that if Parliament could be 
 (as it is sometimes asserted) hoodwinked and deceived, 
 that a Minister would adopt such a line of action 
 towards Parliament when it must meet with eventual, 
 if not immediate, discovery and condemnation ? (A 
 Voice — " Mechanical majority.") That is the old stouy, 
 and I am much obliged to you for naming those two 
 words, because it gives me the opportunity of remind- 
 ing you that on all occasions when Parliament had the 
 subject before it of the alleged transgressions of the 
 rights of Parliament, the Government has been sup- 
 ported by a great number of votes from the Liberal 
 party. Well, but whether the scene of such disquisi- 
 tions was Perth Station, or anywhere else in the United 
 Kingdom, I say that from no man comes less justifiably 
 a reference, just or unjust, to liberties taken with the 
 authoritv of Parliament, than from Mr Gladstone. It
 
 78 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 has been said that " Lord Beaconsfield may not antici- 
 pate a consent certain to be granted, while Mr Glad- 
 stone may override a dissent actually expressed." Lord 
 Beaconsfield's policy received over and over again the 
 sanction of Parliament ; but who was it that, when the 
 House of Lords threw out his Bill for the Abolition of 
 Purchase in the Army, snapped his fingers at Parlia- 
 ment and passed it by the exercise of the Eoyal War- 
 rant ? Is it better, think you, to consult Parliament 
 whenever it be possible, and receive its approval, or else 
 its disapproval ; or to consult Parliament in the usual 
 manner, and when Parliament disapproves treat it with 
 contempt, and snatch a measure by the high-handed 
 exercise of irresponsible prerogative ? 
 
 When every effort to disparage and cheapen the 
 policy of the Government has been tried, the tempta- 
 tion is boldly, if somewhat coarsely, flung down before 
 the country to object to the expenditure which the 
 policy has entailed. No comparison is instituted be- 
 tween the cost of measures of precaution, limited but 
 most effective for their object, and the cost of a great 
 European struggle, which want of firmness and pre- 
 paration might have precipitated. No estimate is 
 taken of the difference between the period when the 
 revenue, as it was vauntingly announced, was advanc- 
 ing "by leaps and bounds," and a period of general 
 depression, not confined to this country alone, which 
 made measures of precaution, however prudent, more 
 onerous than usual to the country. But I complain 
 more seriously of the unfairness of comparisons with 
 which Edinburgh and other places were lately favoured. 
 What do you think of subtracting the extraordinary or
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 79 
 
 war expenditure of one Government and not of another, 
 when a profession is made of comparing their respective 
 financial positions ? Or what do you think of the claim 
 set up here and there, which is so dear to the Eadical 
 disputant, that the Gladstone Government governed us 
 cheaper than the present Government ? If this means 
 that the expenditure of the country was less, it may be 
 true enough ; and the comparison is valueless when 
 the circumstances widely differ. But if it means that 
 the country was more lightly taxed, there is no truth 
 in the statement. Let me repeat once again that in 
 five years of the Gladstone Government (let us call it 
 by that name, if you please, for he is the great master 
 of finance, and made a famous bid for support in 1874 
 by undertaking to abolish the income tax) 22d. in the 
 pound was taken from the country, and only 15d. in 
 the pound has been drawn by the present Government 
 in the same length of time, or £7,680,000 more in the 
 one case than in the other. And with trade flourishing 
 and a higher income tax (all five years taken together), 
 without the remissions since granted to smaller in» 
 comes, taxation was higher also. Beyond all question, 
 if you keep up the income tax in time of riotous pros- 
 perity, and keep up the taxes, and if, added to that, 
 you under - estimate your revenue, you can have a 
 surplus ; and if you have a surplus you can reduce 
 debt, and make a parade of all this for ever afterwards. 
 The question is not whether this can be done, for we 
 know it was done, but whether the country cares to 
 be highly taxed for such a result when it is not neces- 
 sary. The question is further, whether with all these 
 financial feats the great defensive services of the
 
 30 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 country were kept up as thej ought to be ? and if not, 
 whether the burden of repairing deficiencies can be 
 fairly credited to those who come after? I always 
 think it was a proof that our Liberal friends knew that 
 their economies had been carried too far, that in the 
 last year or so that the late Government was in office 
 the expenditure of the navy increased by a million. 
 
 "With all the difficulties of the last few years, taxation 
 has been scarcely raised at all since the reductions were 
 made by the present Government on coming into office. 
 In truth, looking to the nature of the times through 
 which we have been passing — bad harvests, depressed 
 trade, wars and rumours of wars — the only wonder is 
 that our burdens are not greater than they are. The 
 increase of expenditure in the last few years, of which 
 so much has been made, if carefully analysed, turns out 
 to be more apparent than real. Some of it is no per- 
 manent burden at all ; some of it has been caused by 
 improved pay to our soldiers, of which no Government 
 has cause to be ashamed ; and the remainder is caused 
 by relief of local taxation, and a transference of charge 
 from the ratepayer to the taxpayer. Figures are dry 
 work, and I should be inclined to apologise for men- 
 tioning them, but the financial position of the country 
 is, as 1 said at the outset, one of the main subjects of 
 attack, and you should be thoroughly informed and 
 should thoroughly inform yourselves about it, and take 
 care that you are not misled by the exaggerated state- 
 ments that are made at the present time, if in this and 
 in other respects you would show yourselves effective 
 champions of the political faith that is in you. I am 
 unwilling to plague you with quotations, but I saw
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBUllGII. 81 
 
 some sentences in the ' Pall Mall Gazette ' the other 
 day which are worth quoting to you in this connection. 
 They offer a few considerations which are valuable at a 
 time when derision is heaped upon a firm policy and a 
 reasonable expenditure ; and they remind us that both 
 of these may be not prudent only but absolutely neces- 
 sary in the present state of Europe. (' Pall Mall Gazette/ 
 Jan. 22): — " That all the earth would be at peace if the 
 English Government would only be quiet ; that England 
 has nothing to fear except from the rapacity of its 
 Ministers and their greed for military glory ; that there 
 is nothing to justify apprehension of trouble abroad ; 
 that there is no jealousy so absurd as jealousy of Eussia, 
 who never had the faintest idea of disturbing India, and 
 never dreamed of interferincj at Cabul till she found her- 
 self in danger of an English attack ; that England is 
 making herself ridiculous abroad by the armings, and 
 marchings, and all the bluster in general which is so 
 needlessly crippling her at home, — these are not half the 
 assertions by which the Outs seek to discredit the Ins. 
 . . . While Sir William Harcourt and Mr Chamber^ 
 lain were speaking, as is their wont, at Birmingham the 
 other evening, a Frankfort journalist was circulating a 
 comparative statement of expenditure in Europe, which 
 we may be perfectly certain they will never notice. 
 There was nothing new in this statement ; ... its 
 significance is profound, . . . but the plain infer- 
 ences therefrom are such that they are never mentioned, 
 never, by any Sir W. Harcourt or Mr Gladstone, Mr 
 Chamberlain or Mr Baxter, or any of the other gentle- 
 men who tell us they speak for the Liberal party. 
 . . . The Frankfort journalist printed nn account of
 
 82 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 the military preparations of Europe, as represented not 
 by men and guns, but by money cost. Whereas in 
 1865 Eussia spent 22 millions on army and navy, she 
 now spends 36 millions ; France spent 17 millions in 
 1865, 27 millions in 1879 ; Germany 10 millions in 
 1865, 21 millions in 1879. ... As for England, 
 she spent on army and navy in 1865, 27 millions, and 
 32 millions in 1879 — a difference which the vastly en- 
 hanced cost of shipbuilding and armaments would 
 largely account for. 'Now let any one look at these 
 figures, and then at what they represent; ... let 
 him think of the absurdity of supposing that nothing 
 could happen in the clash of those mighty forces, or in 
 the turn of those desperate intrigues to damage Eng- 
 land or mar her prosperity ; and then let him ask him* 
 self whether his Eadical counsellors do not leave a vast 
 deal out of account which no intelligent or honest man 
 should omit in estimating the conduct of the Govern-? 
 ment and the position of the Empire." 
 
 You will have observed how the utmost efforts are 
 being made to secure something like unity for a time 
 in the Liberal ranks. The most amusing instance of 
 an ostentatious display of political unity has been made 
 at Birmingham in the last few days. Sir W. Harcourt 
 has been the guest of Mr Chamberlain, and assures the 
 country with the utmost confidence that his host is 
 like other mortals, and is by no means the terrible 
 individual that was supposed ! Supposed by whom, I 
 should like to know ? I am not aware that the Con- 
 servative party has busied itself particularly about the 
 third member for Birmingham, whose position and 
 opinions we quite appreciate. But ray memory recalls
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 83 
 
 a very unpleasant scene — I think on the 8th of July 
 last year — when the Liberal leaders, having failed to 
 satisfy Mr Chamberlain and his friends, were de- 
 nounced by him, and he proceeded to describe Lord 
 Hartington as their " late leader." Sir Stafford North- 
 cote, at a later period of the same evening, said that 
 he almost hesitated to interfere in what appeared to be 
 a domestic quarrel. At that time Lord Hartington, 
 Sir W. Harcourt, and others, were supporters of the 
 Government Army Discipline Bill in regard to corporal 
 punishment and other details ; but within three weeks 
 afterwards the scene entirely changed. Mr Chamber- 
 lain and his section of the Liberal party had triumphed, 
 and the Liberal leaders (Sir W. Harcourt among the 
 number) had turned their backs on their professions 
 of the whole session, and appeared as direct opponents 
 of the Government bill. Whether the defeat which 
 they then sustained, and the spectacle of numbers of 
 independent Liberals, who were not to be dragged 
 through the dirt, swelling the Government majority, 
 were compensated for by a reconciliation with the 
 "arch-bogey of Toryism" or not, it is not for me to 
 conjecture. We need not occupy ourselves much with 
 these dissolving view^s of Liberal union and disunion. 
 What is more interesting as matter of speculation is 
 what resistance will be made, if any, by the more 
 moderate section of Liberals to their complete absorp- 
 tion by the Eadical section of the party. We know 
 from experience how the tail guides the head, and it 
 is to the growing power of the tail that the country 
 had better turn its attention at this present time. The 
 'Edinburgh Eeview' has just sounded a note of alarm.
 
 84 ADDEESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 and there is something almost pathetic about its tones. 
 It reminds me of a hen that has brought up a brood of 
 ducklings, which have taken to a more dangerous ele- 
 ment, beyond her power to follow them. There is a 
 cheerful prospect before the old Whigs, for there are a 
 few of them left. The wild statements, the startling 
 suggestions, the reckless bids for support of the Glad- 
 stone campaign, — all these the sober men of the party 
 nmst either accept or repudiate. In private life every- 
 whera^ but when a vote is to be given, they repudiate 
 them — goodness knows ! — with a holy horror beyond 
 what the straitest of Tories can express ; they will none 
 of them ; they wish he had never crossed the Border, 
 and that, having turned southward, he may never re- 
 turn ; but will they give effect to such sentiments 
 when a general election comes? Will they make a 
 protest, when a protest is possible, against all the vague 
 and shadowy programme of disturbance and mischief 
 of which that precious fortnight of political autumn 
 manoeuvres was filled to overflowing? I doubt it. 
 Meanwhile, I hope they like the terms in which Sir 
 W. Harcourt refers to them. " Hypothetical dum- 
 mies " he calls them ; and he raises " loud cheers " at 
 their expense by comparing them with Lord Derby and 
 Lord Carnarvon, the great heroes of the Liberal party 
 at the present time, who, for about two years now, have 
 been freed from the vituperation of their present ad- 
 mirers, since the time when they shrank from putting 
 their own words into action. This last is a quality 
 which I hope that some moderate Liberals will show 
 that they do not share with those two eminent persons. 
 The mention of Lord Derby and Lord Carnarvon as
 
 ADDKESS AT EDINBURGH. 85 
 
 heroes of the Liberal party, may remind you that Lord 
 Carnarvon was the author of the scheme for the annex- 
 ation of the Transvaal which is reflected on by Mr 
 Gladstone and others of the Liberal party, who never 
 objected to it when it was before Parliament ; and that 
 Lord Derby, who is now patronising the Liberal candi- 
 date for Liverpool, was for four years a party to that 
 foreign policy of the Government, which that candidate 
 makes it his chief business to vilify and denounce. 
 
 I wonder sometimes that the most thoughtful men of 
 the Liberal party are not disgusted at the tactics which 
 have been pursued in the last two years in regard to 
 disestablishment in Scotland. You all know how it 
 has been bandied about since the day when, in this 
 city two years ago, Lord Hartington first started the 
 question, having been put up to it by those who, as Mr 
 Gladstone expresses it, are responsible for the manage- 
 ment of our affairs, as if leading statesmen were like 
 actors, and played their parts '•' by the kind permission " 
 of Mr Adam. You all remember the different phases 
 of the treatment of the subject, now in a speech a^ 
 Cupar, now during two elections for the Haddington 
 burghs, where it passed in six months from being " a 
 burning question " in the mouth of Lord William Hay, 
 to being " a question not of practical politics " in the 
 language of Sir David Wedderburn. Afterwards there 
 was the dexterous and characteristic correspondence 
 with Principal Kainy, which I hope was satisfactory to 
 those whom it concerned ; and, lastly, there was that 
 wonderful cloud of words at Dalkeith, which left us in 
 no manner of doubt as to what the Liberal party (the 
 Duke of Argyll excepted) would like to do if they were
 
 86 ADDRESS AT EDINBUKGH. 
 
 quite sure that it would answer. From the day, in 
 short, of Lord Hartington's ad captandum reference 
 down to the present time, I do not hesitate to assert 
 that the whole treatment of this deeply important 
 question has been in the highest degree discreditable, 
 and I earnestly trust that it has been observed and 
 will be remembered by the people of Scotland. 
 
 The Church of Scotland, thank God ! is no political 
 organisation. She belongs to the people ; she exists 
 for the people ; and the people of Scotland will take 
 care of her when she is seriously attacked. We are 
 told that she is to have a fair trial, and this sounds like 
 an announcement of a specially gracious clemency. In 
 a trial there is always a judge, and there is a jury, but 
 one would think there must also be a charge and an 
 accusation. The unpardonable offence of the Church 
 of Scotland is that she exists, and has existed for so 
 long, and has been growing through many years in 
 liberality, in tolerance, and in popularity. The latest 
 device of her assailants is to say that the Conservative 
 party have been endeavouring to precipitate the ques- 
 tion of Disestablishment ; and yet, as if even in regard 
 to the most recent matters, the voices of Liberals could 
 not utter the same sounds, we have Mr Gladstone com- 
 plaining that some of us did not defend the Church in 
 the House of Commons, when she was not attacked, 
 and when no one save himself betrayed any feeling of 
 hostility towards her. " It is not a question of practi- 
 cal politics," forsooth ! No ; but how soon would it 
 assume that character if it could appear that it would 
 answer ? Meanwhile it is to be kept in suspense, dan- 
 gled before the eyes of the electors just for what it will
 
 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 87 
 
 bring, and then withdrawn the very moment that it is 
 found to be premature, or likely to create discussion in 
 the happy family of the Liberal party. 
 
 The password that has been given to the Liberals is to 
 avoid awkward questions ; they are to agree on the sub- 
 jects that divide them least, not on the subjects that unite 
 them most. Talk of a " mechanical majority " ! What do 
 you think of the docile minority, fascinated by the quips 
 and jests of Sir W. Harcourt, first lectured, and then 
 vanquished by Mr Chamberlain, or admitted by their 
 great free-lance — tlie Liberal candidate for Mid-Lothian 
 — to a sight and a taste of a whole world of novel and 
 fantastic notions, the outcome of his own restless ima- 
 gination; going forward to the struggle half-gagged, 
 getting their own trumpet blown, how loudly and per- 
 sistently, and hoping against hope that the walls of the 
 Tory citadel will somehow or other fall down ? You 
 must keep your heads when the general election comes, 
 and stand firm to the principles of our party in spite of 
 all the raillery and the eloquence of our political oppo- 
 nents. Happily the most brilliant orations and th» 
 most crowded assemblages are one thing — the polling 
 day is quite another. I was calling about the New 
 Year time on an old couple in Ayrshire, and the good- 
 wife was talking about Ireland. She said, *' I hae a 
 brither in the west of Ireland, and I wrote to him the 
 other day and speired o' him if there were ony of them 
 leevin' yet, for I heard they had been threatenin' them 
 if they paid ony rent." I asked if the brother had paid 
 his rent. She replied, " He didna mention his rent ; 
 but he said, I see ye've had Gladstone bletherin' wi' 
 you, and we've had Parnell bletherin' wi' us, and I think
 
 88 ADDRESS AT EDINBURGH. 
 
 there's a wheen fules in baith countries that listen to 
 them." The issue that will be before us in this county 
 is one which none can misunderstand. The attack 
 which Mr Gladstone's visit to Scotland represented is 
 an attack upon all that is best and most worth preserv- 
 ing in Scotland. The particular interest — family, poli- 
 tical, territorial — which is chiefly assailed (however its 
 extent and its position in this county may have been 
 exaggerated), is one of which every Scotchman may be 
 proud — the noblest, the most unselfish, the most patri- 
 otic that can be conceived ; and in order that this 
 interest may be politically defeated — damaged or low- 
 ered it cannot possibly be — the electors of this county 
 are asked to embark on a tumultuous course of unde- 
 fined changes, of invasions of property, of alliances with 
 — no one knows who or what. Let this Association 
 help — nay, help every one of you — to preserve that 
 which we have, not for the sake of our party in this 
 county only, not for the sake of our party throughout 
 the country only, but for the sake of the country itself, 
 for the sake of the name, and the fame, and the integrity 
 of the Empire. 
 
 PRINTED BY WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS.
 
 O ^^1^* 
 
 
 
 ^0^^"-'*-