ISHMAEL IN THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5314, 6 April 1878, Page 2 (Supplement)

ISHMAEL IN THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT.

(From the World, February 13.)

The atmosphere of the House of Commons is just now charged with some very malignant influences, the nature of which may be briefly explained. The Oppositionists have the mortifying consciousness of disorganisation, overthrow, and indignity—are in many cases equally alienated from their own nominal leaders, and exasperated with individual Ministerialists, against whom they have been pitted in a special degree. The Conservatives are the victims of a natural chagrin at the obvious defects of the policy of the Government—the contradictions and inconsistencies which have thus far marked it, and the small results that are the outcome of great scares and prodigious flurry. They may reflect with satisfaction that they do not lose ground, and that their opponents do not gain it ; but they can hardly look forward to the future with confidence. When a fortnight ago they heard that the fleet was in Turkish waters, they eagerly anticipated a series of strikingly dramatic events ; and now, while the Russians are virtuallly masters of Constantinople, they are obliged to be content with the despatch of half-a-dozen men of war to the Sea of Marmora—nut for a menace to the Muscovite but for the p-ntection of British lives and property from Uttoman outrage. They are also annoyed at some of the results of Lord Carnarvon’s resignation, and the collateral revelations of the iuner life of the Cabinet which it has involved. They therefore made the most of the discussions on the Credit Vote to wreak their vexation upon the chief causes of it.

The entire debate was made up of a succession of duels—has been a species of Parliamentary Inkermau —in which each combatant has sought rather to kill his man than to establish the triumph of his party. When matters will not bear too close an examination there is nothing like a rattling onslaught; and Mr. Cross and Mr. Hardy both “ went' for ” Mr. Gladstone with a vehemence, and in the former case an acrimony, that may have surprised casual students of the Home Secretary’s manner. Mr. Cross has just that superficial suavity and blanduess which gentlemen of his experiences and occupations are apt to acquire. But these qualities have been the veil that has concealed a very bitter and thorough-going partisanship. Mr. Hardy was gallantly determined to show that, as a leading member of the Cabinet, he was unshaken in his loyalty to Lord Beaconsfield, notwithstanding the retirement of Lord Carnarvon. Hence his attack upon Mr. Trevelyan, and the extraordinary train of argument by which he endeavored to convince the House of Commons that the member for the Selkirk Burghs was, as Mr. Mitchell-Henry pithily and coarsely put it, either a coward or a liar. Mr. Trevelyan’s charge amounted to nothing more than an accusation that the Prime Minister had been anxious to go to war for Turkey ; and as Lord Beaconsfield has more than once defined his policy as being the maintenance of the independence and integrity of the Ottoman Empire, he was not without warrant for his declaration. Mr. Hardy's opinion was different, and on the strength of that difference he bade Mr. Trevelyan take his choice of two alternative denominations of infamy. If the Secretary for War had dwelt on Mr. Trevelyan's preposterous statement that the Conservative Government wished for war because it would give employment to the dunces who were their, sons, he would have selected a theme infinitely more capable of satirical treatment, and by his: effective handling of it he would have had the whole House with him.

On the whole, no speaker of any acknowledged parliamentary position can be considered to have advanced his reputation by his share in the wordy war of last week. Sir Robert Peek only proved once more what is pretty well known already—that he has gifts of eloquence, declamatory power, and repartee that remind one of a past parliamentary epoch. Mr. Gladstone’s speech was scarcely up to his usual level, and was a tactical error into the bargain. Having made the Government a present of his confidence, he was logically bound to give them the proof of it which they asked. What ho really did was to repeat in some degree the mistake made by him in the matter of his resolutions last year. He so far yielded to the pressure placed on him by Lord Harrington and the moderate Liberals and Whigs as to disclaim any intention of undermining the Government ; yet at the last moment he was unable to restrain the factious impulse which made him vote against the Government on a petty and insignificant issue. Mr. Childers did tolerably well in his combat with Mr. Hardy; and for the rest, such laurels

as were reaped belong to the younger men. Colonel Stanley has taken his position as a parliamentary power ; and in the rapid skirmish which was witnessed between Lord Edmond Fitzmaurice, Mr. Hall, Sir William Harcourt, and Mr. Chaplin, the two first signally distinguished themselves. Sir H. Drummond - Wolff, who again stood forth as the Galahad of Conservatism, the sole, object of whose crusade is the annihilation of Mr. Gladstone, struck out some remarkably, happy phrases, notably those which are to be found in his peroration. The debate has other features of significance and importance than these. It is noticeable that only 304 members out of between 600 and 700 should have been found to vote on the motion to go into committee ; it is more noticeable still that only 324 should have taken partin the division on the vote itself. The division lists, too, contain some instructive hints for those who are curious as to the future of parties. While the official Opposition has been completely routed, the Radicals have contrived to hold, tolerably well together ; and the only inference to be drawn from the compositi m 1 of the minority, as compared with that of the majority, on last Saturday morning, is that persons who think they may identify the future House of Commons with an assemblage in which the representatives of the Government will be drawn almost impartially from moderate Liberals and moderate Conservatives, and the Opposition is practically dominated by a compact Radical organisation, have at least some grounds for their belief.