Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

cumbrousness and volume of administrative work renders necessary, and without knowledge of which no fair judgment can be formed.

It may be useful to give an instance of this which came under the observation of the present writer some eighteen years ago exaggerated, indeed, but not without parallel at other times. A large sum of money had to be distributed amongst educational authorities in Scotland on principles which had to be determined. Various theories were put forward, and the Department issued a scheme of its own which was open to discussion. One Radical member-he has long passed away from the legislative arena— denounced the Department's scheme in terms of scathing eloquence. Other plans might be suggested or considered, but this particular scheme could not have reached its height of ineptitude had it been concocted elsewhere than in that chosen home of inefficiency, the Department. During the discussion the writer happened to be seated under the Gallery, where officials were then placed, and when the orator had concluded, he came to him and asked if he had a copy of the Memorandum in his pocket, because he had never read it. It may be added that the principles laid down in the Memorandum were adopted, after full consideration, by the House. We trust that no Scottish members now reach to such a height of purely abstract criticism. But we may be permitted to doubt whether they always sufficiently con

sider that detailed study might well precede a full-blooded condemnation of "Bureaucracy."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

But more absurdity remains. The Education Department is indefensible because, side by side with the Scottish Secretary's Office, it is fixed in London. But "the other Boards in Edinburgh are equally wrong, because they are "detached from the Scottish Office" in London. It seems a little difficult to win the approval of the co-signatories. These "other Boards are subject to other taints. They are without "Advisory Councils," and so "equally out of touch with the representative system.' What does this mean? Are we to assume that with Home Rule we are also to have a new type of administration, in the hands of the man in the street? Of all the ridiculous fads that have been suffered to grow up like weeds, this nonsense about "Advisory Councils" is one of the most senseless and pernicious. The Advisory Council of any Minister, if he is worth his salt, is the nation on behalf of which he governs, and whose opinions he must be able to gauge and to take at their true worth. To gather all the cranks and faddists into an "Advisory Council" is simply to weaken the responsibility of the Minister, to interpose a buffer against the retribution due to incompetence, and to give an undue weight to busybodies over the plain man of common-sense, who prefers to let his opinion be known otherwise than in futile chatter round a Committee table. If

Ministers cannot act without Advisory Councils, they had better retire from their responsibilities. Such Councils do not enhance the vigour of the representative system: they do their best to blunt and weaken it.

The Manifesto now breaks off on another line. "Scotland is frequently legislated for as an afterthought. Clauses dealing with her affairs are unexpectedly tacked on to Bills intended to deal with purely English questions." Perfectly true. But would the co-signatories not do better to resist, or to join in resisting, such slovenly methods, instead of issuing Home Rule Manifestoes? On more than one occasion during the present and last Parliament, Unionist members have spoken against flagrant instances of this kind; but no assistance has been given to the protest by the cosignatories either in the House or in the Division Lobby. In the Session of 1909, when the Scottish clauses of a Bill of vital importance came up for discussion, the Lord Advocate was absent on one of those oratorical missions for which he obtained an unhappy notoriety. Some time elapsed until he could be brought to the House; and it was soon apparent that he was absolutely unacquainted with the clause under discussion, or any of its bearings. The consequent wrangling was only composed by hurried patchwork, carried out under the supervision of the President of the Local Government Board. The Lord

Advocate's field of oratorical activity is more frequently in England than in Scotland. A Home Rule Parliament might increase the number of those rare occasions when his Parliamentary or official duties are permitted to interfere with his platform crusades.

The upshot of it all is, according to the Manifesto, that "the public opinion of Scotland should be definitely directed without further delay towards a practical scheme of Devolution." Would it not be just as well to call a spade a spade, and say "Home Rule"?

The final argument for this is amusing in its inconsequence. Scotland has, it appears, given an emphatic vote against the continuance government by an hereditary chamber. Therefore she is, we are told, "to pursue an ideal of Constitutional Revision which will include, so far as she is concerned, the concentration of her legislative and administrative machinery in Scotland, ... under such safeguards as may be necessary to retain the absolute supremacy of the Imperial Parliament." Observe what this means. Scotland, it appears, has to a decision which would be different from that of England if the Scottish and Irish votes were withdrawn. It is not, we must presume, intended that England is to be denied a measure of Home Rule equal to that accorded to Scotland or Ireland. Are the provisions for revenue, and the fiscal systems, to vary in the United Kingdom? May Tariff Reform

come

ious.

clature

be adopted for England and once undignified and pernicrefused in Scotland? May the Quarrels about nomenincidence of taxation vary for each country? If this is not to be so, how will the provincial Parliament of Scotland not be subject to a body of which the political complexion might be in startling contrast to its own? "The absolute supremacy of the Imperial Parliament" forsooth! Are our self-constituted champions afraid of the spectre that they have themselves conjured up?

The plain truth is that this agitation about Home Rule, which has not the courage to call itself by its true name, is an artificial device to cover the lack of self-assertion and independence amongst the Scottish Radical Members. It is encouraged and fostered by a variety of more or less specious societies and associations, which take upon themselves the role of defenders of the liberties of their country. Some hesitate to condemn or ridicule such apparently laudable intentions: others are misled into thinking them worthy of encouragement. So far as they foster national pride, strengthen national bonds, or deepen what is most worthy in the national genius, they are worthy of such encouragement. But this ought not to prevent us from saying, with all boldness, that in some of their petty and parochial aspects, and in some of their more ridiculous manifestations, such perfervid assertions of self-advertising patriotism savour more of prejudice than national pride, and are at

are apt to be as ridiculous as quarrels about fashion in dress. But they may work much mischief: most of all if they attach to our country any taint of the ridicule that must follow such vagaries. It would be better that we should take at its proper value the cheap patriotism that goes into hysterics about names. Many of us cannot feel moved to indignation when we are spoken of by every European nation as "English." "English." We are content to refer to the language which we do our best to speak and write, by its usual name. We firmly believe that this proneness to be offended by unintentional affronts, and to be on the watch for their commission, may lead to serious evils, and that it is more frequently to be found absent from, than closely associated with, the most stalwart and most constant patriotism, or the warmest feeling for national aspirations. The constituency of the present writer contains twelve thousand Scotsmen who yield to none in their national pride, and whose chief aim is to enhance the place of their country in the Empire. They are scattered over every part of that Empire, and have learned to estimate its greatness, and how much that greatness has gained from, and has given to, Scotland. But one does not, in mixing with them, find that their national patriotism consists in quibbling about niceties of nomenclature, in

that

whining about their country's of Empire. And they will grievances, or in desiring for not thank that band of twentyone champions who-taking at a false valuation an obscure clique who masquerade as the sole guardians of Scottish patriotism, and play an easy game of self-advertisementhave issued a summons to Home Rule in order to divert attention from their own lack of independence, and their own obedience to the crack of the Government whips.

her a position of parochial
isolation. They insist
her proper place is as a strong
and independent member of
the Imperial Parliament. The
greatest of her sons must be
prominent members of that
Parliament, and she
she must
furnish her quota of the rulers
of the Empire, who will not
be content to be bounded by a
Parliament in Edinburgh, or
by sitting on any number of
Advisory Councils. They have
little patience with the local
busy bodies who travesty, by
petty irritability, this pride of
national patriotism which they
know how to unite with pride

There is no fear that Scotland should give serious heed to this new summons. The only danger is that a patient indifference may allow the agitation to rise into undue importance.

Printed by William Blackwood and Sons.

BLACKWOOD'S MAGAZINE.

No. MCXL.

OCTOBER 1910. VOL. CLXXXVIII.

SPORT ON THE ROOF OF THE WORLD.

"Hima-Ayala !

The abode of snow."

WHAT memories that most expressive name evokes!

Is it possible for the mind of man really to conceive that mighty tract of the "Great Unknown"? To those who have never been among the snows, it is quite beyond conception; to those who, like myself, have been "on the roof of the world," it is almost beyond it.

Take only what you are able to see of this vast range from Hindustan-a very small portion. Start with me from the plains. On a clear day, eighty to a hundred miles from the foot of the hills we see high up in the horizon, faintly visible, a jagged outline of white rising up into the blue.

I say, "Look! the snows!" You probably answer, "No, it's cloud."

VOL. CLXXXVIII.-NO. MCXL.

But I am right. Those jagged outlines are two hundred miles or more away from us, and are the snow-covered tops of the "roof of the world," the abode of eternal snow. As we approach nearer the foothills we lose sight of them, shut out from our view by the lower ranges, which stand out in their massive grandeur, generally in a blue haze, in front of us. Come along with me up to one of their peaked tops-say ten to twelve thousand feet,-noting on the way the lovely works of Nature through which we pass, the boundless stretches of beautiful forests and valleys, magnificent rivers, streams and waterfalls, and here and there a quiet placid lake nestling in fir trees and surrounded by gorgeous vegetation.

Then what do we see from 2 G

« PredošláPokračovať »