[Footnote 77:  Ancient Gems in Modern Settings. By G.B.  Grundy.  Oxford:  Blackwell, 5s]

[Footnote 78:  [Greek:  Benthos echephrosynes]—­the depth of a man’s common sense.]

XII

LORD MILNER AND PARTY

"The Spectator,” May 24, 1913

The preface which Lord Milner has written to his volume of speeches constitutes not merely a general statement of his political views, but is also in reality a chapter of autobiography extending over the past sixteen years.  If, as is to be feared, it does not help much towards the immediate solution of the various problems which are treated, it is, none the less, a very interesting record of the mental processes undergone by an eminent politician, who combines in a high degree the qualities of a man of action and those of a political thinker.  We are presented with the picture of a man of high intellectual gifts, great moral courage, and unquestionable honesty of purpose, who has a gospel to preach to his fellow countrymen—­the gospel of Imperialism, or, in other words, the methods which should be adopted to consolidate and to maintain the integrity of the British Empire.  In his missionary efforts on behalf of his special creed Lord Milner has found that he has been well-nigh throttled by the ligatures of the party system—­a system which he spurns and loathes, but from which he has found by experience that he could by no means free himself.  As a practical politician he had to recognise that, in order to gain the ear of the public on the subjects for which he cares, he was obliged to do some “vigorous swashbuckling in the field of party politics” in connection with other subjects in which he is relatively less interested.  He resigned himself, albeit reluctantly, to his fate, holding apparently not only that the end justified the means, but also that without the adoption of those means there could not be the smallest prospect of the end being attained.  The difficulty in which Lord Milner has found himself is probably felt more keenly by those who, like himself, have been behind the scenes of government, and have thus been able fully to realise the difficulties of dealing with public questions on their own merits to the exclusion of all considerations based on party advantages or disadvantages, than by others who have had no such experience.  Nevertheless, the dilemma must in one form or another have presented itself to every thinking man who is not wholly carried away by prejudice.  Most thinking men, however, unless they are prepared to pass their political lives in a state of dreamy idealism, come rapidly to the conclusion that to seek for any thoroughly satisfactory practical solution of this dilemma is as fruitless as to search for the philosopher’s stone.  They see that the party system is the natural outcome of the system of representative government, that it of necessity connotes a certain amount of party discipline, and