90
CHURCHILL
League, which owed its origin to the happy inspiration of one of his own “fourth party” colleagues. In 1884 the struggle between stationary and progressive Toryism came to a head, and terminated in favour of the latter. At the conference of the Central Union of Conservative Associations, Lord Randolph was nominated chairman, notwithstanding the strenuous opposition of the parliamentary leaders of the party. The split was averted by Lord Randolph’s voluntary resignation ; but the episode had confirmed his title to a leading place in the Tory ranks. It was further strengthened by the prominent part he played in the events immediately preceding the fall of the Liberal Government in 1885; and when Mr Childers’s budget resolutions were defeated by the Conservatives, aided by about half the Parnellites, Lord Randolph Churchill’s admirers were justified in proclaiming him to have been the “ organizer of victory.” His services were, at any rate, far too important to be refused recognition; and in Lord Salisbury’s Cabinet of 1885 he was appointed to no less an office than that of secretary of state for India. During the few months of his tenure of this great post the young freelance of Tory democracy surprised the permanent officials and his own friends by the assiduity with which he attended to his departmental duties and the rapidity with which he mastered the complicated questions of Indian administration. In the autumn election of 1885 he contested Central Birmingham against Mr Bright, and though defeated here, was at the same time returned by a very large majority for South Paddington. In the contest which arose over Mr Gladstone’s Home Rule scheme, both in and out of Parliament, Lord Randolph again bore a conspicuous part, and in the electioneering campaign his activity was only second to that of some of the Liberal Unionists, the marquis of Hartington, Mr Goschen, and Mr Chamberlain. He was now the recognized Conservative champion in the Lower Chamber, and when the second Salisbury administration was formed after the general election of 1886 he became chancellor of the exchequer and leader of the House of Commons. His management of the House was on the whole successful, and was marked by tact, discretion, and temper. But he had never really reconciled himself with some of his colleagues, and there was a good deal of friction in his relations with them, which ended with his sudden resignation on 20th December 1886. Various motives influenced him in taking this surprising step ; but the only ostensible cause was that put forward in his letter to Lord Salisbury, which was read in the House of Commons on 27th LOUD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL. January. In this document he stated that his resignation {From a photograph by Elliot & Fry, London.) than oppose, reforms of a popular character, and to chal- was due to his inability, as chancellor of the exchequer, lenge the claims of the Liberals to pose as the champions to concur in the demands made on the treasury by the of the masses. His views were to a large extent accepted ministers at the head of the naval and military establishby the official Conservative leaders in the treatment of ments. It was commonly supposed that he expected his the Gladstonian Franchise Bill of 1884. Lord Randolph resignation to be followed by the unconditional surrender insisted that the principle of the Bill should be accepted of the Cabinet, and his restoration to office on his own by the Opposition, and that resistance should be terms. The sequel, however, was entirely different. The focussed upon the refusal of the Government to combine Cabinet was reconstructed with Mr Goschen as chancellor with it a scheme of redistribution. The prominent, and of the exchequer, and Lord Randolph’s own career as on the whole judicious and successful, part he played in a Conservative chief was practically closed. He conthe debates on these questions, still further increased his tinued, for some years longer, to take a considerable influence with the rank and file of the Conservatives in the share in the proceedings of Parliament, giving a general, constituencies. At the same time he was actively spread- though decidedly independent, support to the Unionist ing the gospel of democratic Toryism in a series of platform administration. On the Irish question he was a very campaigns. In 1883 and 1884 he invaded the Radical candid critic of Mr Balfour’s measures, and one of his stronghold of Birmingham itself, and in the latter year later speeches, which recalled the acrimonious violence took part in a Conservative garden party at Aston Manor, of his earlier period, was that which he delivered in 1890 at which his opponents paid him the compliment of raising on the report of the Parnell Commission. He also fulfilled a serious riot. He gave constant attention to the party the promise made on his resignation by occasionally organization, which had fallen into considerable disorder advocating the principles of economy and retrenchmentafter 1880, and was an active promoter of the Primrose in the debates on the naval and military estimates.
was an error, and the restoration of the Khedive’s authority a crime. He called Mr Gladstone the 11 Moloch of Midlothian,” for whom torrents of blood had been shed in Africa. He was equally severe on the domestic policy of the administration, and was particularly bitter in his criticism of the Kilmainham Treaty and the rapprochement between the Gladstonians and the Parnellites. It is true that for some time before the fall of the Liberals in 1885, he had considerably modified his attitude towards the Irish question, and was himself cultivating friendly relations with the Home Kule members, and even obtained from them the assistance of the Irish vote in the English constituencies in the general election. By this time he had definitely formulated the policy of progressive Conservatism which was known as “Tory democracy.” He declared that the Conservatives ought to adopt, rather
