RADICAL PLUTOCRATS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1676, 17 February 1913, Page 6

RADICAL PLUTOCRATS.

Sooner or later the British Radicals' policy of stirring _ up class hatred by representing their political opponents as callous capitalists of fabulous wealth was sure to call forth reprisals from the Unionists. Quito one half of Itadical apologetics consists of representing the Itadical leaders inside and outside Parliament as tho friends and comrades of the poor, and the Unionists as wealthy and heartless plunderers of tho working-man. The Unionist party has been very patient; its spokesmen, in Parliament and in the press, havo contented themselves with denying and . disproving the mean and untrue insinuations of tho Radicals. • But their opponents, made

bold by this forbearance, have become more vigorous than ever in their efforts to persuade the public that every Unionist is a duke or a roguo bent on picking poor -men's pockets. The patience of tho Unionists has at last given out, and they have decided that the public must be told plainly what the facts really are. Most of the plutocrats are. on the side that masquerades as tho Liberal party; just as in New Zealand the loudest and most persistent enemies of political reform aro backed by lextremoly wealthy men. On December 12 last a meeting of a Unionist committee, organised as the Radical Plutocracy Inquiry, was held in the Houso of Commons, and.an interesting report ;vas presented, of which the following is an extract:

.The man in the street can fully appreciate tho- absurdity of a plutocrat who tricvs to divide the'nation into "haves" and "have liots," who stirs, up the latter against the former class, to which he himself belongs, aud, gathers his reward in the shapo of a pririccly salary, if he bo a Minister, or in the form of peerages, governorships, baronetcies, knighthoods, and Pri\V Councillorships. Meanwhile these liiulieal plutocrats/ while thanking their stars that they are not as the wicked Tories, who aro represented by Mr. Lloyd-George as the party of millionaires, while tho Radicals are the professed champions of the oppressed, have made no effort to square their practices with his preaching. They aro not infrequently inoonsiderate and ■ neglectful landlords, hard-fisted employers, sweaters, offensive to tlieir so-called "inferiors," not infrequently cosmopolitan financiers of vast wealth, working against the interests, of a country in which they provide a minimum of employment.

It was decided at the meeting to take a leaf out of the enemy's book by instituting a searching inquiry into the administration of the numerous properties owutd by the Radical magnates.

It is not only in self-defence, but also in tho interests of truth, that tho Plutocracy Inquiry has resolved to expose the disgusting hypocrisy of those posing plutocrats who, as the Spectator puts it, "try to pass themselves off as earnest and simple-living working-men and wear the red cap studded with diamonds." Tho Radicals have only themselves to blame for the direction of- public attention to tho fact that their party is controlled by vastly wealthy men—such men as Lokd Pirmk, with his ring fences and private, motor road; or Lord Cowdray, with his splendid pheasantries and • ancient demesnes, or the'soap and alkali and palm-oil millionaires, or the landowner nt Hindhcad who is turning a large cultivated estate into a deer park.

the Unionists disliko is not that the rear leaders of tho Radical party aro' enormously wealthy mon (for most of them got their wealth decently), but that the Radicals should pretend that only the Unionists are wealthy and enjoy tlieir wealth. It is deplorable that thci things BhoUld have to be brought into the discussion of political questions, but the interests of truth, which are the interests' of the nation, 1 require that the people should not be misled. Of courso it is open to the: people to dccido that a Radical's wealth is a good and sacred thing,' even when it goes on,deer parks and private mote .roads ahd brilliant dinners, while a Unionist's wealth is a bad thing. in.itself, or that the wealth of the-.owner of a cityful of "tied" hotels is as good as tho wealth of a nian who.farms 1000 acvcs of land is evil. Ail-that thc'Unionists desire is that the.public should have the means .of deciding that point. Britain is not the only country in which tho Radicals and Jacobins make the foolish mistake of supposing that, they can indefinitely use as their chief weapon the fact that many of their opponents are well off.