BRITISH POLITICS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 79, 5 April 1910, Page 3

BRITISH POLITICS.

X 0 THE EDITOR. Sir, — Af a reader of your comments on the epoch-making crisic now proceeding in England I cannot bub conclude that you take much too pessimistic a view of 'the situation. In reality, if all the circumstances are considered, the Government has won a substantial victory at the last elections — ?o substantial that the Lords would now be pleased to pass the Budget if they got the opportunity. The cable agent, though he sends us a great deal about what The Times thinks and what the Daiiy Mail says, has omitted to give us a summary of the voting, but the facts are clear enough to enable us to diagnose the situation. Through a three cornered contest the Unionist gained one seat in Ireland ; by the precarious majorities of eight and fourteen, they gained two Welsh seats, while in Scotland the Government not only gained several seats, including the important Wick constituency, but the aggregate Liberal vote was considerably augmented. Turning to England, we find that, with the exception of Birmingham and its environs, the boroughs have remained steadfast to the great principles of freetrade and land-value taxation. Practically the only turnover of votes has been in the rural districts where the little finger of the landlord is thicker than the- loins of the people. There are circumstances, however, to be considered before we censure the action of the rural constituencies : The studied attempt to side-track the real issue with a vile and wicked war scare; the equally vile and wicked attempt on the part of the reactionaries to brand every friend of popular liberty as an aider and abettor of irreligion ; the unscrupulous tactics of the brewers; and above all the silent but mercilesß Eressure brought to bear on the voters y their "betters." When we consider all these factors the wonder it. that the Liberals have fared so well. In any event the majority of 1906 was so abnormal that the loss of a number oi rural seats was a foregone conclusion. Moreover, we mu«t not forget the restricted franchise — restricted inasniuch as the landless classes are practically voteless, but on the other hand absurdly extended to the length of allowing a person to vote in every constituency wherein be haß landed property ! In the late elections two biothers recorded each twenty-five votes, and they complained that through the remissnoss of the registrars they lost the right to vote in several other constituencies ! But of even greater importance is the question of the redistribution of seats, which will give the teeming populations of the boroughs their proper ">.hore of representation. At present wo find Mr. Hamsfty Mardonald representing 15,000 voters at Leicester, and Mr. Hudson re--presenting 18,000 at Xewcastle-on-Tyne, while a phalanx of obscure squires sits for rural constituencies of 2000 and 3000 voters ! A redistribution of scats will reduce Mie?e reactionaries to the import- j anco which their number* really entitle them to, and redistribution will be a greater blow to the tariff-mongers than any extension of the suffrage. Turning to the situation at St. Stephens, it ie quite evident to any dispassionate observer that Mr. Lloyd-George lias scored haiuUomely. In spite of tno tremulous wiseacres of our squatter press, with whom tho wish for hii downfall U "ftthtr to the thought," the RudictlUm of the Budget hu aroused enthusiasm

enough to withstand all the efforts of the dukes and their newspaper .valets. The proposals for land valuation and taxation compel the support of the Labour party, and, notwithstanding the underground engineering of Mr. William O'Brien and Lord Dunraven, the Nationalists will find themselves unable to take any course other than to support the .Budget. But let us suppose that the Government will be defeated, what will happen? Mr. Balfour will be called upon to do what he is now judiciously anxious to avoid — to form a Ministry on whom must devolve the tank of devising taxes to repair a deficit of £16,000,000. Of course, he must appeal to the country, and does any one m his senses .suppose it possible for him to win with proposals to repair the finances by vaxmg bread and meat? Under no circumstances could Mr. Balfoui- hope to gain ! any seats in Ireland, Wales, or Scotland ; but he must gain 62 seats to get level with his opponents, and to do even that much he must look to rural England alone. It requires no prescience to realise that the ta&k is impossible, for the English boroughs will remain as steadfast to Freetrade and land-value taxation as any of the constituencies elsewliere. With the Liberals no longer on tho defensive, but in the happy position of being able to attack a Budget, the cardinal features of which would consist of taxes odious to the populace, Mr. Balfour would meet such another reverse as he encountered in 1905. Ho knows this very well, and hence it i» a foregone conclusion that the Budget will win and that the Commons >vill maintain their ancient right to the exclusive control of taxation and finance. Reading between the lines, it fa quite evident even from the cable news that thc_ Lords have realised the failure of their "damn-the-consequences" policy. Iramediatelv after the election Lord" Lansdowne gave the hint that if the Commons a sain passed the Budget, the Lords would "expedite its passage." Another hint : We find that the new Ministers are being re-elected unopposed. Sir Rufus Isaacs has chosen to call this chivalry. It may resemble that exquisite quality, but it might more aptly be interpreted as an indication from the Unionists that they do not desire office until the deficit has b*n met. Mr. Balfour is much to astutp to court the honour of facing an election with a huge deficit, especially with food taxes as the alternative to land-value taxation. The prophets of pessimism will be deceived, Mr. Editor ; the n«w Parliament will last much longer than they appear to think. — I am, etc., P. J. O'REGAN. 2nd April.