The Press. SATURDAY, APRIL 23, 1904. A LIBERAL STALWART.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 11875, 23 April 1904, Page 6

The Press. SATURDAY, APRIL 23, 1904. A LIBERAL STALWART.

The impending retirement from the House of Commons of Sir William Vernon Hurtuv.it i.s an incident of English politics <>f won; than ordinary interest. Sir William will rot resign, but ho will not sovk iv-t-leeti.'n after the present Parliament ciLsgjlves. The burden of age—he is seventy, jfvon—and a persistent throat trouble which renders impossible any attempt at sustained speaking, have contributed to a decision which will rob the Housa of Commons of one of its most' distinguished members, and which has been received throughout the country with sincere regret. In tlia characteri-iic letter in which he bade, good-bye to his constituents, the veteran statesman admits that he is no lci:ig«T to the exertion to which he has been accustomed during the thirty-five years for which his energies have been devoted to public life. He concludes with ihoi conviction that the prospects of the Liberal party were never brighter than they aro at the present time, when a •• period of re-action is coming to an end." There is something significant in the coincidence of the reunion of the Liberal party with the final exit of the " Old Reservist " from the political stage, for an absolutely homogeneous party would have been imjios.'ible eo~Tcng as the leader of one of the ehkf sections remained on the political ;t;igv. Sir William realises the awkward petition to which his presence might give rise as regards the eucces-ion to the Premiership in the event of the Liberals bang returned to power, for he deeply fell the slight when, in 1894, ho was passed over in favour of Lord Rosebery. His services to the party he and many others Ix'lievvd, deserved better requital. Sir William Harcourt's retirement obviates the possible repetition of a situation which cnuld only be painful to himself and embarrassing to his colleagues. Thirty-five years is a long time to look back, and in the present ca:.e it appears much longer than it realiy is, owning to the very marked change for the worse which Las in that time come over the character of Parliament. Sir William Harcourt belungs essentially to the beginning rather than to the end of the period. He has the broader manner of an earlier day, and h-a embodies traditions of -which, unfortunately, there are to-day but few exponents. In the heroic times iv which he first, entered Parliament, party leaders were nn.n who had an immense respect for Parliament, and -were seriously devoted to public life. To-day, it is true, the House of Commons nominally fulfils the, same functions as it did then, but actually Parliamentary government has been gradually converted into government by executive. To-day Ministers frequently ignore the House, nor do they hesitate to burke discussion, to apply the closure indiscriminately, even to prevent altogether discussion on questions they do not want debated. One of the main reasons for this change, we are asked to believe, is that nowadays the pace of politics is too fast. At least as plausible an explanation is to be found in the fact that many men enter Parliament now who are either engaged in important commercial or professional .pursuits,, and can only give their spare , time to their Parliamentary duties, or who, attracted to politics as a pastime, are mere dilettante legislators. Others there are again who only look tipon Parliament as a. club, the membership of which confers a social distinction, and who never trouble themselves seriously about politics at all. It was far otherwise that Sir .William Harcourt viewed the duties of a Parliamentarian. " The post of a representative "of the people," he says in the letter already referred to, " is a high trust and a "great responsibility, not to bfi lightly undertaken or imperfectly discharged." It would bo difficult to estimate the financial loss that Sir William's political career has cost him. He has made enormous sacrifices. When he entered Parliament he relinquished his pro-f-.sdon of Parliamentary counsel, in which he was pre-eminent, and thereby abandoned an income of some £15,000 a year and prospects of the highest positions in the legal world. Ever since, with the mest unselfish and admirable singlemindedness, he has devoted himself to serving his country. There is yet another cause springing out of the previous one, of the deterioration of Parliament —the gmeral lack of that knowledge and education on the part of members once looked upon as the necersary and indispensable adjunct of a Parliamentary career. Few men in the House of Commons to-day have the equipment, let alone the gifts, of the Squire of Mahvood. Profoundly verged in Parliamentary history, he is declared to be the last of the famous line of constitutional Liberals ever ready at hand with appropriate precedents. His speeches were always plain, terse, forcible, and to till point—such as any man could understand —yet sparkling with wit and humour, and adorned by a wide knowledge of history, literature, and fcnv, sa that in comparison with those around him, Bir William Harcourt seemed to belong to that period of which he is so great an admirer, the eighteenth century, "the goldca age of

reason, patriotism, and liberal learning." It is as the Chancellor of the Exchequer that Sir William Harcourt's name will gn down to posterity. When, in 1894. he proposed the famous death duties, which last year produced for the Exchequer £14,000.000. and in the past eight years close on £100,000.000, he fought tooth and nail for three months with the Unionists, who have since had cause to be grateful for so excellent a source of revenue ; so that, as a financier, Sir William Harcourt enjoys the unique distinction of having earned and received the warm praises of his adversaries. In the House of Commons ho showed the true spirit of the skilled advocate. He was not at first by any nuans universally popular with the members. His vehement, masterful, dashing speeches, full of witty taunt, brilliant epigram, and biting epithet, produced a false impression as t<) his character. But the sarcasm, paiador. and phrase with which h'.s language in debate abounded, were no index whatever of his lvul character. He fought fur the love of fighting, and the fighter w;»» lung mistaken for the man. and gradually the House of Commons came to know him better. Behind the fighter his colleagues long ago discovered the kindly, warm-hearted, and generous friend, ever ready to come to the aid of those in distress, ever more inclined to believe in the goodness, rather than the evil, of a fellow-being. When the man ''who never "spared his ad%*ersary, and always fought " fair' , leaves the House of Commons at dissolution, he will leave nothing but friends behind him. Martial save that a good man increases the span of his own life; he lives twice who can enjoy the memory of his past. In this light Sir William Harcourt's retirement will be as pleasant as it is possible for any man's to b<s