it is the duty of every patriotic citizen, in view of the difficulties with which the country is confronted, to assist the government of the day by every means at his disposal. factious criticism disturbs judgment and tends to unnerve. governments to-day require full command of mind and nerve to enable them to arrive at sound decisions and to persevere in them. faction is, therefore, treason to the country.

that does not, however, preclude a calm survey of the elections and their meaning. quite the contrary, for we must think of the future and prepare for it.

the result of the elections has fully justified those who maintained that no party standing alone could hope to secure the measure of public support which will guarantee stable government. it is true that the conservatives have succeeded in obtaining the return of a majority of members to the new[pg 265] parliament. but the most notable feature of the elections is the return of a decisive majority of members by a very definite minority of the electors.

i observe that the prime minister, in returning thanks to the nation, claims that he has received a vote of confidence from the people of this country. out of a total poll of fifteen millions his candidates secured less than six million votes. making full allowance for uncontested seats, this figure cannot be stretched out to a height much above six millions.

that means that only two-fifths of the electorate voted confidence in the administration, whilst three-fifths voted confidence in other leaders or groups. a party which has a majority of three millions recorded against it on a national referendum can hardly claim to have received a national vote of confidence.

it might be argued that when the question of confidence or no confidence comes to be stated, the national liberals having promised co-operation, the votes recorded by them ought not to be placed on the debit side of the confidence account. the basis of the appeal made by the national liberal[pg 266] candidates for support is practically that stated by me in my manchester speech:

"the supreme task of statesmanship at this hour is the pacification of the nations, so that the people shall have leisure to devote themselves to the peaceful avocations of life, to fill up the depleted reservoirs from which we all draw.

"my course is a clear one. i will support with all my might any government that devotes itself and lends its energy to that task with single-mindedness, fearlessness, and with resolution—provided it does not embark upon measures which inflict permanent injury upon the country, whether these measures be reactionary or revolutionary. that does not mean that i pledge myself to support inefficiency, vacillation, or infirmity in any government or in any party. but any government that does not pursue that course i will resist with all my might. that is my policy."

i have perused the addresses of many national liberal candidates and i have addressed many meetings in their constituencies, and i find that their attitude towards the government is defined in these terms, with purely verbal variations. the address of mr. j. d. gilbert, who won central[pg 267] southwark, is a very fair sample taken out of the bulk:

"if you honour me again with your confidence i will support any progressive measures brought forward by the present government or any other government. i shall not offer factious opposition or nagging criticism while our country is in difficulties at home or abroad."

there may be one or two who went further, but none expressed confidence.

i have made some inquiries as to the number of conservative votes polled by national liberal candidates. i am informed that on an average it represents less than one-third of the total. at the last election 167 national liberal candidates were put up. they polled an aggregate of 1,652,823 votes, that is, an average of 9,897 per candidate. what proportion of this vote was conservative? there is a good practical method of testing this question. in sixty-two seats national liberals were fought by conservative as well as by other candidates. in these cases the average vote polled by national liberals was 6,820. that means that[pg 268] where the conservatives supported national liberal candidates their votes would represent about 30 per cent. of the poll for these candidates. on the other hand, the number of liberal votes polled by conservatives, where a compact existed, at least balances this account, for although the total in each constituency does not equal the figures of the conservative support in national liberal constituencies, still, that support was spread over many more constituencies.

the prime minister and his chief electioneering manager both emphatically repudiated the suggestion that there was any pact between conservatives and national liberals, and urged that there were only local arrangements made between the candidates of the two parties for their mutual convenience.

as the head of the national liberal group i expressed grave doubts as to the composition of the ministry, and much apprehension as to the language in which its policy was defined. that represents the general attitude of the national liberals toward the government. their support, therefore, cannot be claimed in totalling the votes recorded for the government.

[pg 269]

the fact, therefore, remains that those who voted confidence in the government represent only forty per cent. of those who went to the poll and twenty-five per cent. of the total electorate.

i place this fact in the forefront, because it is bound to have a profound effect upon the course of events during—maybe beyond—the lifetime of this parliament. it is the first time, certainly since the reform act, that a pronounced minority of the electorate has succeeded in securing the control of parliament and the government of the country.

it would be idle to pretend that in a democratic country like ours, thoroughly imbued with the spirit of representative government, this does not weaken the moral authority of the government of the day. therefore, if the government is wise it will bear that fact in mind and will not commit itself to policies which challenge the nine millions who between them represent a majority of the people of this country.

it is not a very good beginning to claim these striking figures as a vote of confidence. i sincerely trust it does not indicate a resolve to ignore, if not to defy, what is an obvious and ought to be a governing factor in the policy of the government.

a corollary to this curious working of our [pg 270]electoral system is to be found in the under-representation of the other parties in the present parliament, and unless representative government is to be discredited altogether, the present parliament ought at once to devote its mind and direct its energies to the discovery of some method and machinery which will avert the danger which clearly arises from the working of the present system.

the parliament of 1918 undoubtedly gave a larger majority to the government than the figures warranted. but the majority of votes cast for government candidates was so overwhelming that under any system of voting there would have been a larger working majority for the government than that which the present government can command. so when trouble arose it was not open to any section of the community to object that the government had no authority because it did not represent the electorate of this country.

we are faced with a new danger to constitutional government. what has happened at this election may be repeated at the next—but not necessarily in favour of the same party.

if we are to be governed by a succession of administrations who rule in spite of the protest of a[pg 271] majority of the people, the authority of government will be weakened beyond repair.

the luck of the electoral table has this time favoured the conservatives. next time it may turn in favour of the labour party. they have at this election secured 55 seats out of a total of 141 by a minority of votes.

the conditions were, in many respects, against them. their funds were exhausted by the prolonged period of heavy unemployment. the trade union movement was passing through an ebb tide in its prosperity, both in funds and in members. there was a good deal of discontent with the trade union leaders. many workmen felt they had been let down badly by some of their activities in industrial disputes.

moreover, labour has been committed by visionaries to a rash experiment which handicapped it severely in the election. next time may be the spring tide of labour. they have learnt their lesson at the polls, and are not likely to repeat the blunder of november, 1922.

this time the votes cast for them have attained the gigantic aggregate of four millions and a quarter. supposing under those conditions they add[pg 272] another two millions to their poll. although the other groups may secure between them nine millions of votes, labour may have the same luck as the conservatives at the last election and be placed in power by a decisive majority of members elected by a minority of votes.

i am not going to speculate as to what may happen under those conditions; the kind of legislation that may be proposed; the action of the house of lords in reference to it, provoking, as it undoubtedly will, a fierce class conflict; or the turn given to administration in the various departments of government.

of one thing i am, however, certain. that is, that as a minority administration in 1922 and onwards will help to discredit government with certain classes of the community, a minority labour administration would weaken the respect of other classes for representative government, and between them an atmosphere will be created inimical to the moral authority of all government in this country.

i have many a time warned the public that, in spite of appearances, this country is in many respects very top-heavy. it is over-industrialised. its means of livelihood are in some ways [pg 273]precarious, and depend on conditions over which we have very little control, and once something happens which may have the effect of causing a lean-over either in one direction or in the other, it will be more difficult to recover than in lands where the population depends in the main for its livelihood upon the cultivation of the soil and the development of the natural resources of the country.

i therefore earnestly trust that in the interests of stability and good government, which must be based on the goodwill and co-operation of the community as a whole, this parliament will apply its mind seriously to finding some means of preventing a repetition either in one direction or another of this freak of representative government.

another feature of the election is the heavy vote polled by liberal candidates in spite of untoward circumstances.

whatever the difficulties of the labour party might be in this election they were not comparable to those under which liberalism fought the campaign. it was divided by bitter internecine conflicts. the leaders of one section seemed to be more intent on keeping representatives of the other section out of parliament than on fighting for the [pg 274]common cause. the bulk of their speeches was devoted to attacks on the leaders of the other liberal group, and there was not much room left for a statement of the liberal case.

what happened in manchester is typical. here the rank and file took the matter in hand and enforced agreement. lord grey was brought down to bless it. but the whole of his benedictory speech consisted of a thin and dreary drip of querulous comment on the leaders of the other group, with a distinct hint that the return of a conservative government would be by no means a bad thing in the interests of the country.

the speech was hailed by a tory journal with the heading "lord grey supports mr. bonar law." he then went straight to support mr. mckinnon wood as candidate with a repetition of the same speech. thence he rushed off to reiterate the same performance at bedford in support of lady lawson, and he finished off by reciting it for two days at meetings in support of mr. walter runciman.

no wonder that he succeeded in damping liberal enthusiasm to such an extent that his unfortunate protégés surprised even their opponents in the poverty of the support given them at the polls.

[pg 275]

as soon as the coalition broke up the leaders of this liberal section met to consider the situation. the one positive result of their deliberations was not the issue of a ringing appeal for unity on the basis of liberal principles, but a peevish intimation through the press that efforts at unity were to be discouraged at the election. it was clearly ordained that the coalition liberals should be crushed out. the conservatives spurned them, and the independent liberals gave notice that they had no use for them. they were destined for extinction. lord crewe's speech proceeded on the same lines. may i say how sincerely i rejoice in the tribute to the "amateur diplomatist" which is implied in the conferring by a conservative government of the blue ribbon of diplomacy upon the leader of the independent liberals in the house of lords?

this precipitate and lamentable decision lost at least forty liberal seats, gave to the conservatives their majority, and what is equally important established the labour party as his majesty's official opposition in the house of commons. the latter is much the most serious practical result of the decisions of the independent leaders to debar united action at the last election. if liberals had[pg 276] united when the coalition came to an end, liberalism might have polled five million votes. it would have now held a powerful second position in parliament, and the country and the nation would have looked to it in the future as it has hitherto done in the past for the alternative to "toryism." instead of that it is a poor split third. how could they expect to win at the polls? the national liberals were pursued into their constituencies. thirty-five national liberal seats were assailed by independent liberal candidates. i am not making a complaint, but offering an explanation. whatever the views of the national liberal leaders might have been on the subject of liberal unity they were given no chance to effect it, and although they entered into no national compact with the conservatives their followers in certain areas had no option but to negotiate local arrangements with the conservatives for mutual support. the implacable attitude of the independent liberals left them no choice in the matter.

what was the inevitable result? no real fight was put up for liberal principles on either side. the independent liberals were tangled by the personal preoccupation of their leaders. they had[pg 277] accumulated enormous dumps of ammunition for the day of battle on the assumption that the main attack would be on the coalition liberals, and, although the conservatives now lined the opposite trenches, anger dominated strategy, and the guns were still fired at their old foes, whilst the tory government was only bombarded with bouquets. on the other hand, the national liberal leaders were embarrassed by the engagements into which their followers had been driven by the action of the independent liberal leaders and the two warring factions.

the national liberals, in spite of their enormous difficulties, have not been exterminated. i am not going to enter into a barren inquiry as to whether their numbers are or are not greater than those of mr. asquith's followers. let it be assumed that they are equal. the marvel is that under these fratricidal conditions so many liberals of any complexion have been returned.

i am not setting forth these unhappy facts in order to prolong the controversy which has poisoned liberalism for years, but in order to call attention to the vitality which, in spite of these depressing conditions, can bring up 4,100,000 voters to the[pg 278] polls. electorally liberalism is the balancing power, and if it casts its united strength against either reaction or subversion its influence must be decisive, whatever the composition of this parliament may be.

it is common knowledge that the independent liberals confidently anticipated the return of at least 120 members of their group. the fact that they only succeeded in securing the return of about fifty is naturally to them a source of deep disappointment.

if the failure of high hopes leads to contemplation of the real causes of that failure and a sincere desire is manifested to substitute co-operation for conflict my colleagues and i will welcome it. we cannot force our society on an unwilling company.

during the campaign i repeatedly expressed the hope that one outcome of this election would be to bring moderate men of progressive outlook in all parties to see the wisdom of acting together.

but progressive minds are by no means confined to the liberal party. i have met and worked with them in the conservative party, and the election will have taught many men and women in the labour party that violent and extravagant proposals[pg 279] impede progress. if the limits are not too narrowly drawn, this parliament may witness the effective association of men of many parties who are genuinely concerned in the advancement of mankind along the paths of peace and progress for the attainment of their common ideals. if that end is achieved, the coming years will not be spent in vain.

one word as to the national liberals. when the dissolution came no party was ever placed in a more embarrassing and even desperate situation.

the conservatives have at their disposal a great political machine. the labour party could command the support of all the trade unions, with their elaborate machinery for organising the wage-earning population. the independent liberals had in england and in scotland captured the liberal machine almost in its entirety, and had spent six years in perfecting it, their leaders having no other occupation.

the national liberal leaders inherited no political machinery, and were too preoccupied with great world affairs to be able to devote any time to the improvisation of an effective new organisation.

[pg 280]

conservatives, independent liberals, and labour all alike attacked national liberal seats where they thought any advantage might be gained for their respective parties by doing so. the conservatives only refrained from attack in cases where they thought there was more to be gained by arrangement. there was a great volume of popular sentiment behind our group. i visited britain, north, south, east, west, and i have never witnessed such crowds nor such enthusiasm at any electoral contest in which i have ever taken part; but there was no organisation to convert acclamation into electoral power, and you could not build up a vast political machine in three weeks. our supporters were not provided with an opportunity to test their strength in two-thirds of the constituencies. in nearly three hundred constituencies they could not do so without impairing the chances of liberal candidates. a compact with conservatives ruled them out of others.

it is a wonder that, in spite of these adverse and even paralysing conditions our numbers are twice those of the independent liberals in 1918.

we have now for the first time full opportunity for placing our case and point of view before the[pg 281] country and organising support for them. it is our duty to do so.

every month will contribute its justification for the course we have hitherto pursued, and for the counsel we have steadfastly given to a country struggling through abnormal difficulties.

london, november 20th, 1922.