Evening Post. WEDNESDAY. MAY 30, 1900.

Evening Post, Volume LIX, Issue 127, 30 May 1900, Page 4

Evening Post. WEDNESDAY. MAY 30, 1900.

THE COMMONS AND THE CON- • STITUENCIES. ♦ According to a cable message published on Monday, there is a growing feeling in favour of an early dissolution of the Imperial Parliament. For some weeks the idea has been freely mooted in the Old Country. Mr. Henry Lucy, who is an experienced political journalist, has alluded to it on more than one occasion in his letters to our Australian contemporary, the Sydney Morning Herald, and in the last number to hand of a leading London journal we observe a significant cartoon from the pencil of Mr. F. C. Gould. It is entitled "The Social Programme," and depicts Lord Salisbury in the centre crowned and throned. Over his head hovers an angel oeanng a scroll with the inscription, "General Election! " On either side of him stand Mr. Ritchie and Sir Matthew White Hidley, each of them holding out a Bill, one inscribed "Railway Accidents Bill" and the other "Extension of Compensation to Agricultural Labourers." Underneath is 'the legend, "King Sarum, being conscious of a]jproaching dissolution, permitteth his Ministers to give boons to the people." In England political cartoons have for years done more than anything else to locus and express shortly public opinion. When the cartoonist tormulates a suggestion such as that in Mr. Gould's "Social Programme," we may rest assured that dissolution has been a current topic of conversation in London, and that the Opposition has not been slow to find indications of an approaching general election in the progressive social legislation that is now receiving the attention of the Government. Where there is Parliamentary Government political gossip is manufactured as freely as social gossip at the proverbial afternoon tea, and too much credit may easily be given to plausible rumours built upon the passing utterance ol some exalted personage. But the talk of a general election is certainly very persistent in the Ola Country, and many thoughtful observers seem to think a dissolution possible at the end of the pre-ent session. Rumours of a similar character were afloai in 1878 when Lord Beaconsfield returned in triumph from the Berlin Congress. The great diplomatist was thnn at the height of his glory. Hp was believed to have humbled Russia and outmanoeuvred Bismarck, to have gained all that Great Britain wanted without firing a single shot. He was welcomed with shouts of "Peace with honour" and for the moment the un-English Oriental wa£ the hero of the English people. Many of his followers, it is said, urged him to dissolve Parliament and obtain a new lease oi power. Lord Beaconsfieid I refused to do so, and in 1880 drifted out of office on the ebb-tide of popular favour. Why he did not seize the opportunity offered has always been somewhat of a- mystery. He was not an over scrupulous observer of Constitutional conventions, and he was usually a. shrewd judge of public opinion. It has bean alleged, however, that he objected to dissolving Parliament after the Berlin Treaty because such a course had no constitutional support. He had a majority in the House of Commons, Parliament had still two years to run before it expired by effluxion of time, and there was no difficulty of any kind either between the two Houses, or the Ministry and the Commons, which would seem to justify an appeal to the people. Had such an appeal been made, it would have been evident that it was dictated by pure grjed of power, by a feverish desire to seize the moment of popular excitement. Lord Beaconsfield probably felt that to the average Briton the Constitution is a satred thing that should not be converted to the convenience of any particular politician. He feared that if he dissolved Parliament a revulsion of feeling would immediately occur, and his temporary popularity would not be enough to cover his crime against custom. The legal life of Parliament in the United Kingdom is limited to seven years, but the House of Commons never dies a natural death. A convention of the Constitution exacts that it should be dissolved about the end of its sixth year, bu.t not before unless a cogent reason for such a s>tep can be adduced. Lord Beaconsfiald, whatever the reason for his conduct, respected this convention, and is Lord Salisbury, a far greater stickler for custom, likely to set it at nought'/ The present House of Commons was elected about the middle of 1895, and its term would therefore not expire until August, 1902. According to constitutional practice, however, it should be dissolved next year. The question is whether Lord Salisbury vvill advise Her Majesty to dissolve this year instead of 1 next. This July, as far as can be ( judged at present, the Government will j have to its credit the successful operaI tions of the army in South Africa, a ! strong Imp rial sentiment which forgets ■ lh" home policy oi the Liberals in dread of their supposed "Little England" leanings, and also the confidence always felt in leaders wlm ha.v« wpathered a national

crisis. This year, too, the country will not have realised to the full the cost of the war whereas next year the shoe may begin to pinch. This year enthusidsm is still warm, next year criticism may bo in the ascendwant. The franchise, too, has been widened since 1878, and the new "electors are of a kind to care li-s' for constitutional precedents. If n T)'au«"'We excuse can be found there niii.V '-ot be the same fear as Lord Beaconfcfield is alleged to have felt. And an excuse may be found in the problem of the final settlement of South Africa. The Government with a certain show of reason may urge that it requires a popular mandate in order to strengthen its hand in/ dealing with the Boers. No doubt, if Ministers really desire a dissolution, this or some other pretext might be discovered. But then, the crowd is notoriously fickle ; ' the war spirit has been carried to such an extreme that a reaction must come sooner or later; and the electors may think it well that men who were not responsible for the war should have the settlement of the quarrel. These considerations as well as Constitutional precedent may influence the Government against a dissolution. War is often fatal to British Ministries, and Lord Salisbury may prefer to take his allotted time, and then leave the net result to* the judgment of the people. His Lordship is growing old, ill-health and bereavement have told severely upon him, and it is unlikely that he is anxious for another long term as Prime Minister. His retirement from the leadership might lead to a serious split in the party, and this thought again would prompt him to avoid unnecessary experiments.