[Sidenote:  The bond of the Railway Rates.]

These are somewhat remote reflections from the squat figure, the harsh and grating voice, and the commonplace rhetoric of Mr. Bartley—­so far can fancy and insight lead one astray in that great stage of Titanic passions which is spread on the floor of the House of Commons.  And what significance of great historic issues and reminiscences there were in the scene were likewise lost on Dr. Hunter.  To him the universe at the moment—­all the tremendous destinies on the knees of Mr. Gladstone—­all the millionfold hopes and hungering longings that were involved—­were as nought in comparison with the fact that the motion of Mr. Gladstone deprived him of the opportunity of raising a debate on Railway Rates.  Coldly, calmly, self-confidently, Dr. Hunter attacked the Government in its weakest place, and drove the dagger home through the vulnerable side.  The weakness of the position was this:  there was a strong, vehement, and widespread revolt in the House against the exactions of the railway companies.  Liberal members had on the subject exactly the same feelings as Tories; nightly a score of questions were asked on the subject.  Altogether, indignation had broken down party lines, and against the railway companies Liberal and Tory made common cause.  Unfortunately, Dr. Hunter’s case had been strengthened by a somewhat weak yielding of Mr. Gladstone to a demand for a day on Bimetallism.  This demand had, it is true, been urged upon him from various parts of the House, including his own, and he seemed to be yielding to a pretty universal demand.  But Bimetallism was a craze with no chance of even distant success, while Railway Rates were at that very moment urgently calling for redress from hundreds of threatened industries.  It would be seen then what a dexterous weapon for striking the Government the selection of the day for Railway Rates was.

[Sidenote:  No Tory Leader.]

The Tories ought to have at once perceived the value of the weapon which a Liberal had thus placed in their hands.  Some of them did so, and, undoubtedly, if a man with the Parliamentary instinct of Lord Randolph Churchill had been at their head, they would at once have made deadly and, haply, destructive use of the opportunity.  But Mr. Balfour was away.  Lord Randolph sate, dark and solitary, at a remote seat, and Mr. Goschen can always be confidently relied upon to do the wrong thing.  It will be seen presently how he helped to save the Government it was his duty to destroy.  No; the danger of the situation came not from the Tory, but from the Liberal benches.  There are in the Liberal, as in every party of the House, a number of young and new members who have not yet learned the secret and personal springs of action, and who, moreover, do not at once realize the vast underlying issues on an apparently small question.  To them the Liberal intriguers against the Government had steadily and plausibly addressed themselves, and many of them were under the impression that the question raised by Dr. Hunter would decide nothing more serious than the special purpose to which one day of the Session could be devoted.