1873.] DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT. 425 pended in the purchase of pictures, collected by the late Sir R. Peel, and 50,000l. had been devoted to the acquisition of valuable antiquities for the British Museum; 26,000,000l. had been applied to the diminution of the national debt, and yet Mr. Gladstone was able to announce, at the commencement of the year 1874, that the government had at its disposal a surplus of 5,000,000l., and intended to submit to parliament a plan involving a total repeal of the income tax, improved local administration, and a substantial boon to the consumer. When that year commenced, the interest of the country was languidly fixed on the trial of a claimant to the Tichborne baronetcy and estates, which was rendered remarkable by the portentous impudence of the claim, the recklessness with which it was advocated, and the enormous cost and length of the proceedings to which it had given rise. It was known that a general election would take place in the course of the year, but as it was supposed to be still at least three months distant; the thought of it did not dispel the political torpor which had brooded over the country. The announcement that the parliamentary session would commence on the 5th of February, and the rumour that it would be opened by the Queen in person, had no other effect than to excite a considerable demand for places to witness the ceremony. Suddenly the electric telegraph flashed through the country the intelligence that Mr. Gladstone and his colleagues had recommended an immediate dissolution, that their advice had been adopted by the Queen, that Mr. Gladstone's address to the electors of Greenwich was already issued, and that in a fortnight the fate of the government would be decided, and the general election nearly ended. There is no reason to suppose that when the notices announcing the commencement of the session on the 5th of February, a dissolution was contemplated. The resolution seems to have been taken afterwards for the purpose of ascertaining whether or no the ministry retained the confidence of the country, or whether the Conservative reaction which seemed to be indicated by many isolated elections would bear the test of a general election. It was felt by the government that it was necessary, without further loss of time, to put an end to a state of things which paralysed the action of the government and encouraged the House of Lords to reject measures on which the House of Commons had bestowed much time and labour. Whatever may be thought of these reasons, it must be admitted that the decision based on them was advantageous to the country. It compressed into a fortnight the political agitation which would otherwise have been spread over months. It prevented much serious interruption of public and private business, greatly diminished the expenditure at the elections, saved the candidates from a prolonged uncertainty, and probably did not seriously affect the result. At all events it did not prevent the electoral battle from being fairly fought out. The prevailing torpor was instantly changed into the most lively effervescence. Candidates hastened to the places they hoped to represent, and the battle at once commenced. Mr. Gladstone carried his election at Greenwich, but a Mr. Boord, a local distiller, hitherto almost unknown beyond the limits of his own borough, headed the poll. Mr. Bright, with his two Liberal colleagues, was returned for Birmingham without opposition, and expressed his acknowledgments in a speech which showed that, notwithstanding his recent illness, he was still England's greatest orator. Mr. Forster, though repudiated by a large number of his warmest friends, was returned triumphantly at Bradford. Other members and supporters of the ministry were less fortunate. But we will not enter further into the details of the contest; suffice it to say that the Conservative party, which before the dissolution had been in a minority of about sixty-five, could reckon in the new parliament on a compact majority of at least sixty. How are we to explain this great Conservative victory ? How to account for this decisive defeat of a ministry which, in accordance with the clearly expressed will of the nation, had disestablished the Irish Church, settled the Irish land question, carried a national system of education, almost banished from our parliamentary elections the riot, disorder, drunkenness and corruption that had hitherto disgraced them, regulated our public-houses, dealt vigorously with the vexed and knotty question of legal reform, increased the efficiency of the military and civil service, and so well administered the finances of the country that after 1874.] CAUSES OF LIBERAL DEFEAT. 427 effecting repeals of taxation to the amount of 12,000,000. it could announce a surplus exceeding 5,000,0007., promise to repeal the income tax, largely benefit the general consumer, and deal with the perplexed subject of local selfgovernment and taxation-how, I say, are we to account for the summary rejection of a government which had already done so much and which promised so much more in the next parliament ? The answer we make to these questions is, that the merits we have enumerated were the chief cause of the defeat we have described. The progress made was too rapid, not for the interest of the country but for the popularity and permanence of the government. Every great political change, while it benefits multitudes, injures or offends a few, whose sharp resentment is often more than a match for the languid gratitude of the many who are benefited, and so the force of the reaction is proportioned to the rapidity of the progress. Multitudes who at the last election supported Mr. Gladstone because he advocated the changes they desired, supported the opponents of further change. The disestablishment of the Irish Church alarmed the clergy, who feared that the Liberal party would make an assault on the English Church. Both the clergy and the Roman Catholic priesthood dreaded that the same party would substitute for the mixed system of education adopted in 1870, a national system of secular or at least undenominational instruction, and the Anti-State Church party was offended because this had not been done already. The economy of the government irritated many whose profits it diminished or whose hopes it blighted. The disorganised state of the Liberal party gave a great advantage to its opponents. Most of the great questions on which its members were united were disposed of, and lesser questions were coming to the front respecting which much diversity of opinion existed. In parliament and out of parliament, in spite of the warnings and exhortations of their leader, each section of the Liberal party pressed forward its particular question and would not hear of its postponement. While they were thus divided, their opponents were thoroughly united. Deprecating change in general, they presented an unbroken front to the advocates of diverse and sometimes contra dictory changes. To all these causes of defeat must be added that proverbial popular fickleness and political ingratitude which will continue until a better education shall have taught the masses to make a more conscientious and consistent use of the electoral franchise. There can be little doubt that many voted against the ministry from no other motive than an unreasoning love of change. The elections being terminated, all that remained to be done was to decide whether ministers should at once resign or meet the new parliament. Many warm supporters of the government were anxious that Mr. Gladstone should lay before the legislature and the nation the financial measures which he had sketched out in his electioneering addresses. But the general opinion, so far at least as it could be collected from the public journals, was in favour of an immediate resignation, and Mr. Gladstone was especially anxious to be at once released from his honourable but laborious position. On Monday, the 16th of February, the cabinet met informally at his private residence; he warmly recommended an immediate resignation. There was some difference of opinion, but the majority agreed with the premier that the interruption of public business which would be caused by a prolonged retention of office should be avoided. They therefore resolved to tender their resignations, which were accepted, and Mr. Disraeli was sent for by the Queen to form a new administration. The year that had recently expired had been peculiarly fatal to men conspicuous for their abilities in almost every walk of human excellence. Philosophy suffered an irreparable loss through the death of John Stuart Mill; the science of geology was deprived of one of her most eminent teachers by the death of Professor Sedgwick, and the medical art by that of Sir H. Holland. The Church lost her brightest ornament by the accident which instantaneously took away Bishop Wilberforce, and the legal profession suffered a loss scarcely less heavy by the decease of Lord Westbury; art mourned Landseer, and literature her ennobled child Lord Lytton. It is now time that we should turn our attention to the course of events which had occurred in the Church since the date at which we last referred to them. During the 1874.] TRACTARIANISM. 429 period preceding that of which this work treats, great religious activity was manifested by the dissenters, with whom almost all the stirrings of religious thought which then occurred in the country originated. The rise of the evangelical party was no exception to the truth of this statement, for it was nothing else but a gradual penetration into the Church of principles which had been proclaimed by Wesley and others outside her pale. But from the time of the passing of the Reform Bill of 1832 the tide turned. The intellectual and spiritual activity which seemed to have deserted the Church when she was in safety, re-appeared in the hour of danger. We have already traced the origin and diffusion of Tractarianism, and have shown its connection with the reform struggle, and the efforts which it made to withstand the advancing tide of religious and political liberalism, which threatened, like an all-devouring deluge, to overwhelm and break down the barriers which had hitherto protected the Church. And we have now to follow the further developments of this movement, which modified, and was modified by, the religious liberalism to which it was originally antagonistic. Tractarianism had a twofold character. It was at once doctrinal and æsthetic; and each of these aspects contributed to obtain for it the adhesion and energetic_support of many youthful and generous spirits. The doctrinal principle of Tractarianism was the authority of the Church enforced by the right of dispensing or withholding the two sacraments-regarded as being 'generally necessary to salvation' by an ordained priesthood tracing, as was affirmed, its spiritual descent through a long succession of bishops to those on whom the apostles had laid their consecrating hands, thereby transmitting an authority and a sacredness which continued in full force and efficacy to the present day. But the ground on which this authority was based, the alleged consent of the primitive Church, was distinctly opposed to the celebrated dictum of Chillingworth, The Bible, and the Bible alone, is the religion of Protestants.' The Tractarians were at once brought into collision with the evangelical party, most of whom accepted the doctrine of apostolical succession as an opinion which was sanctioned by certain warrants of holy writ. Thus the saying above quoted was 6 |