the policy of the Government by turning them out it was Mr. Gladstone they would return to potential, if not to actual power. From his soul he believed that there was not a more dangerous man to whom, in their own interests, in the interests of commerce, of trade, and of their position in Europe, they could possibly surrender themselves than Mr. Gladstone."

Sir Stafford Northcote addressed a somewhat tumultuous meeting in the Shoreditch Town Hall on the 23rd, the evening before the formal dissolution of Parliament, and seizing upon a subject the omission of which from Mr. Cross's speeches had occasioned some comment, appealed to the industrial classes to take advantage of "an especially good opportunity of promoting legislation which will be for the advantage of the community."

"It too often happens," he said, "that legislation of an important and valuable kind is interrupted and postponed either by some great constitutional struggle, such a question as a reform of the representation of the people, or the destruction or modification of some great institution, or else it is postponed by some agitated question of foreign policy which so far disturbs the peace of the world, and affects the tranquillity of the country, that it practically shuts out measures of more practical importance. But I venture to say that never was there a time more suitable than the present for dealing advantageously and equitably with measures of domestic importance. There is no likelihood of any great constitutional struggle, nor is it likely that the deliberations of the new Parliament will be disturbed by those agitating questions of foreign policy which have of late taken up so much of our time. This is a time, then, for good, practical social and domestic measures." Whether the contrast between the Chancellor of the Exchequer's expectations of a quiet time untroubled by any great constitutional struggle, or agitating questions of foreign policy, and the tone of the Prime Minister's manifesto, was accidental or designed, it did not escape remark. Sir Stafford Northcote read at the same meeting a telegram from Sir Henry Elliot, saying that Baron Haymerle was most anxious that there should be a contradiction in Parliament or through the press of the language attributed by Mr. Gladstone to the Emperor of Austria.

By the day of the formal dissolution, all the broad issues between the two parties had been placed fully before the country by their leaders, and election committees were in full swing. The comparative statistics of the number of contested elections, given by Mr. W. Saunders, in a narrative of the struggle issued shortly after the results were known, show how great was the political activity of the time. "In 1859, 101 constituencies were contested; in 1865, 204; in 1868, 277, in 1874, 199; in 1880, 352, or nearly double the average number." The number of county seats contested was a great feature of the elections, and was attributed, in some degree, to the example set by Mr. Gladstone and Lord Hartington. How slow Liberals were to believe in the possibility

of gaining any victories in the counties, may be judged from the fact that in one county, North Lincolnshire, the candidate, Mr. Laycock, retired from his canvass, came forward again a quarter of an hour before the nomination took place, and was returned at the top of the poll.

As regards the comparative activity of the different leaders, Mr. Saunders has computed that during the campaign, Mr. Gladstone made no fewer than fifteen great speeches; Lord Hartington twenty-four; Mr. Bright, six; Sir Stafford Northcote, six; Mr. W. H. Smith, six; Colonel Stanley, nine; and Sir William Harcourt, six; besides innumerable speeches on lesser occasions. Of Mr. Bright's speeches, the two which attracted most attention were the first which he made on his arrival at Birmingham, describing what the working classes of England owed to the Liberal party, and a less elaborate effort of oratory, a sort of familiar conversation with a deputation representing the licensed victuallers, which he received on the 20th. Throughout the country, with very rare exceptions, the solid support of the publicans, alarmed by the favour shown to Local Option, was given to the Conservatives. This support had been unmistakably declared before the 20th, and Mr. Bright reasoned with his interviewers on the folly of it from the point of view of their own interests. "Why," he said, "all this temperance feeling in the country is to your great advantage, if you would not rush into violent opposition to it. The temperance feeling is not suppressing your houses-not one has been suppressed by it but is merely preventing the addition of numerous other public-houses to interfere with your monopoly, and it is preventing also the granting of licenses to low houses, and vulgar, careless, and improper men, and thus it tends to keep your business more respectable than it would otherwise be. The whole action of the temperance feeling of the country during the last twenty years, has been to improve the character of your trade, and lessen the number of low and bad houses, to give to your property a greater value, and to your business greater profit, and all that you are doing, in my opinion, is the mere blindness of men who, having in some sort a monopoly, fear, as all monopolists do, whenever it is attacked." Now," he went on to say, as we are all here together, although I may not be at all able to change your views, let me put it to you, why should you array yourselves against one particular party in the State? You may depend upon it, from all past experience, that the Liberal party, whenever it deals, if it ever does deal, with the liquor question, will not do anything that will be in a pecuniary sense unjust to your interests. What it deprives you of in the public interest it at any rate will compensate you for, and will endeavour to do justice, as it does to the whole country and to every interest. You may depend upon it it will not be unjust to the licensed victuallers and those who are concerned in the sale of these things, which unfortunately here it appears necessary in some degree to control." The leader of the deputation remarking

66

that it was no wonder the publicans supported the Conservative party, seeing that their very existence was at stake, Mr. Bright retorted that they, were "more frightened than hurt." He told them that he "should leave them without any expectation that he had changed their opinion one bit," and whatever influence his persuasive eloquence may have had in Birmingham, where the feeling of the publicans was more divided than in other places, it probably did not much affect the solidity of the vote all over England.

One of the most interesting incidents in the campaign was the duel which went on day by day, for some time, between Lord Hartington and Mr. Cross in Lancashire. Mr. Cross was by far the most active of the Ministers in the contest, and went on the principle of carrying the war into the enemy's country. Lord Hartington in his replies to him showed a grasp of mind and a controversial readiness and vigour of which he had never before given such conspicuous proof. As the leader of the Opposition, all eyes were upon him, to gather, if possible, from his utterances, what was likely to be the policy of the Liberal party if the verdict of the constituencies should be in their favour. Mr. Cross challenged him to speak out, and he spoke out with a frankness and statesmanlike sense, which greatly increased his own reputation and helped materially to secure the confidence of the country for his party. When he resumed his canvass of North-East Lancashire on March 20, he grappled directly with the idea that a continuance of the Government in office was necessary to frustrate the ambition of Russia. After censuring the "almost Billingsgate terms" in which Mr. Cross had affirmed that Russia was only waiting for a change of Government to repudiate all the engagements on which she had solemnly entered, he went on to deal with the means by which it was believed that the Government proposed to keep Russia in check. "From hints," he said, "which they got here and there, one might suppose that the policy the Government were going to pursue, if their lease of power were renewed, would be some more intimate alliance between Germany, Austria, and England. He had not one word to say against Germany or Austria. Austria had been a power in the past with which England could have but little sympathy, but its character had of late years entirely altered; and there was nothing which would lead us to feel any distrust towards the Austrians now; but at the same time he doubted whether we could best contribute to the maintenance of peace in Europe by entering into these special and separate alliances. Of course it was the duty of England, when she could, to use her influence for the maintenance of European peace, but he believed she would be best able to do that by having her hands free, and not being entangled or hampered by any special or separate alliance with any power, however much we might sympathise with them."

Replying to this, in a speech at Southport next evening, Mr. Cross maintained that the insurrection in Turkey had been fomented by the Russian Government, and that the interpretation

which would be put abroad upon any change of Government by the elections, would undoubtedly be that England would withdraw practically from interference in European affairs, and that Russian ambition would not be checked. Once more he pressed the Opposition to say what their policy would be if they came into power. To this Lord Hartington answered in a speech at Padiham on the 25th. "If the Liberal party were in power, he might at least say this of what their policy would be their policy would not be a repetition of that which, in their opinion, had so disastrously failed, but which the present Government seemed to think had so triumphantly succeeded. The Liberals would not stake the interests or the honour of England upon the maintenance of the integrity and independence of an unreformed Turkish Government. They would not treat the condition of those people and the relations of the Turkish Government to its Christian subjects as a matter which was only of interest to Russia and to Turkey, and in which we had no call to interfere except so far as certain definite interests of our own were concerned. They would not try to disturb and thwart the concert of Europe if by some happy providence Europe was united as to what should be done. On the contrary they would strive and do their utmost to promote that concert, and if that concert should again be happily established they would do the utmost that lay in their power to carry its resolves into execution." In Lord Hartington's opinion the Eastern Question would soon of necessity be reopened, and these were the principles on which he and his party would try for a solution.

On the subject of Afghanistan, Lord Hartington spoke at Bacup on the 29th. "He did not assert," he said, "that the Liberal party were prepared with a policy which would be satisfactory, nor which would at once undo all the enormous mischief done by the present Government. He would make a frank confessionIf the Liberal party came into power they would adopt the same policy which the present Government would, if they dared avow it, like to pursue-namely, retire as soon as they could with as little loss of credit as possible, and with as little sacrifice of our real Indian interests as possible, from the false position in which the blunders of the last five years had placed us."

With regard to the reform of the Land Laws, and questions more particularly concerning the farmers, Lord Hartington said that the Liberal party did not wish to represent themselves as having particular measures to propose for the benefit of particular classes. But he promised that one of the first things that they would do if they were sent into office would be to reform the county franchise, and they were also prepared to revise the land laws, with a view to making traffic in land as free as in anything else. They wished to give the farmer greater security for his capital, and they would readjust local taxation in connexion with an amended system of local government in the counties. "Whenever the Tories," Lord Hartington said in one of his speeches, "had been out of office, they had heard a deal about the repeal of the malt

tax and the relief of local taxation, but when they came into power he would like to know what they had done. No doubt it would be said that the Liberals had been in power far longer than the Tories, and it would be asked what had they done for the farmers. He wished them to remember, however, that the tenant farmers had always given their whole support to the Conservatives. All he asked was that if the farmers would give the Liberals their support for one Parliament, then, if in the end they could show that the Liberals had done as little as the Conservatives, they could go back to their old supporters."

Lord Beaconsfield's manifesto had an unexpected effect upon the Irish vote. A counter-manifesto was at once drawn up by the Home Rule confederation, calling upon all Irishmen to " oppose the Minister whose policy towards our country is summed up in coercion codes, and who would jest at the starvation of the western tenantry amid the toasts and feasting of the London Guildhall.""In presence," the manifesto ran on, "of the atrocious and criminal manoeuvre which has now been attempted, the duty is doubly imperative. Vote against Benjamin Disraeli as you should vote against the mortal enemy of your country and your race." No pledges were to be asked of Liberals at the hustings; the plain instruction was given to vote in every case against the Conservative candidate. The result was that the Liberal party, although its leaders held the most uncompromising language on the subject of Home Rule, had the solid Irish vote secured for them. In the course of the ensuing session, the new Government was taunted by a Whig supporter with having solicited support in order that the Liberal party in Parliament might be independent of the Home Rulers; but the truth was that in the course of his candidature, Lord Hartington, while strongly protesting against any concession to Home Rule, was no less energetic in repudiating the government of Ireland by rigid repression without inquiring into the reality of Irish grievances. "The Liberal party," he said at Burnley, on April 7, "had always felt that, looking to the great and deep misgovernment under which Ireland suffered for so many centuries, Irish agitation and discontent ought to be treated with great patience and forbearance, and that before we resorted to measures for the repression of Irish agitation, or while we resorted to those measures, we ought to do the utmost to see whether the causes which had produced that state of things still remained, or were capable of being removed."

Wednesday, March 31, was the first day of the polling, and the result was a startling surprise to both parties. The Liberals gained 24 seats, and lost 9,-a net gain of 15 seats, in 69 constituencies. Next day the Liberal successes continued in very much the same proportion, and on Friday, the same tale was repeated. A net gain of 50 seats was chronicled on Saturday; the ministerial majority was swept away, and all hope of a reaction which might restore it out of the question. But the polling in