Evening Post. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1930. "THE BEAVERMERE ARMY"

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 44, 21 February 1930, Page 8

Evening Post. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1930. "THE BEAVERMERE ARMY"

The "Daily Herald," which is usually too much in earnest to be gay, is to be congratulated upon the very cheerful way in which it has made fun of the latest "phase of Beaver-broolt-Rotherinere politics. It gives the new United Empire Party which these two noblemen have launched a mock-heroic welcome in an article well worthy of its happy title "The Beavermere Army." The composite name, well illustrates the inseparableness of these twin brethren of the Press and the outsider's difficulty, where two hearts beat'together in such perfect unity, of teing quite sure which is which. So. thorough a Damon-Pythias combination has not been seen in British politics since the fall of the Gladstone 1880-85 Cabinet was being hastened by the Chamber lain-Dilke combination of its two Radical members. The loyalty of Sir Charles Dilke, then member for Chelsea, to, his more powerful colleague. was celebrated at the time by H. D. Traill in the "Saturday Review" under the title,' "A Modern Pythias": No rivalry of private ends Divides this pair of faithful friends, Though Charles is rarely dumb When Joseph speaks r but promptly then Eeiterates to Chelsea men What Joseph says at, Bruin. The conclusion at which Traill arrived was That Pythias has met his match And Pylades is not a patch On this devoted Charles, Whether in turn Dilke's loyalty was not a patch on this devoted Rothermere may still be an open question, but it is at least appropriate that the man who has taken, up Joseph Chamberlain's fiscal running should have inspired a comparable devotion. It is of course beyond dispute that, as Lord Beaverbrook, was first in the field, he is to be regarded as the Damon of the firm; and it is not a Rotherbrook but a Beavermere Army that he leads. The , contempt with which "the Shah of Shoe Lane" —a title derived from the street in which the offices of the "Daily Express" are situated —regards the party leaders, or perhaps one should say the other party leaders, is fully reciprocated on their behalf by the "Daily Herald": Lord Beaverbrook summons a noble army to battle. Destiny calls the Shah of Shoe Lane to high adventure. All the other leaders are but sounding brass and tinkling cymbals. Mr. Mac Donald is. only interested in pauperising the nation. Mr. Lloyd George is a mere musio hall artist dressed up as a statesman, and Mr. Baldwin a dangerous halffriend, more dangerous than a foe. Lord Rothermere alone - welcomes Lord Beaverbrook as the onlyi, statesman to grapple with the country's grave situation. Whatever may be one's view of the merits of Lord Beaverbrook's Empire Free Trade policy, Lord Rothermere's unqualified support of it does more credit to his heart than his head. Though these two hearts beat as one, their heads are divided on a point which is (probably to ninetenths of the House of Commons and of the nation the most important and the most perilous of all. - The thing that after their experiences in 1906 and 1923 the, Conservatives are most afraid of, the thing that gave the Liberals their overwhelming victory in 1906, and gave them unity for the first time after they had been divided, defeated, and demoralised by Mr. Lloyd George's War Coalition, the thing that makes the Labour Party just as enthusiastic Freetraders as the Liberals, is the taxation of food. In the economic policy which he launched at the beginning of the year1 Lord Rothermere differed on this vital point from the Empire Free Trade for which his friend had declared six months previously. Food taxes were expressly excluded from that policy, yet such is his admiration of Lord Beaverbrook and such his ignorance of practical politics that he accepts the Empire Free Trade programme as a whole and swallows even the food taxes, rather than miss the.chance of getting such a heaven-born leader.

The foundation by Lord Beaverbrook of a new party to push his crusade finds Lord Rothermere still loyal.- Declaring "that none of the existing parties are big enough to embrace an Empire Free Trade doctrine," Lord Beaverbrook announces the formation of a "United Empire Party." which he expects to be big enough for the purpose. As he has been able to enrol 200,000 crusaders within ten weeks, a simple rule-of-three sum shows that there ought to be a million of them within a year, and at this rate the ultimate victory of Empire Free Trade is as obvious as mathematics can make it. But it may betaken for certain that Lord BQaverbrook's- enrolments would proceed much more rapidly if he left party politics alone, and that at the

General Election, if the United Party has not previously fizzled or been bought out, as the "Daily Herald" predicts, the only effect of its intervention will be to make the confusion of British politics worse confounded, to render the chances of stable and efficient government more remote, and to damage most severely the very party which is most in sympathy with Lord Beaverbrook's ideals. But his Lordship is nevertheless prepared to take the risk, and, despite such a negligible trifle as the food taxes Lord Rothermere is prepared to take it too. .Finding himself in complete agreement with 90 per cent, of Lord Beaverbrook's schemes, as outlined iv his manifesto, Lord Rothernicre pledges the support of himself and his newspapers to the United Empire Party, aays the "Daily Express," which, on its front page, prints a message from Lord Eothormere. The tender regard which Lord Rolhermere. shows for the dignity and independence of his own editors is worth noting. They and all that appertains to them—"will, conscience, honour, honesty, And things of that, description"—are publicly pledged in advance to the support ,of a particular policy and a particular person, and even "as the horse or as the mule, which have no understanding," are held as bound to do their master's bidding without question. It may please Lord Rolhermere's vanity to issue these public edicts, but would not even his own purposes be better served by a decent regard for the feelings of others? ■ • The sarcasm of the "Daily Herald" at the expense of the United Empire Party is well supported by the serious but biting judgment of "The Times." After commending Lord Beaverbrook's useful work in concentrating attention on Imperial opportunities "The Times" adds: But when it is converted into a party programme it flaunts its pretensions with some absurdity. Its "new live policy" is anything but new. The remainder is not even on the threshold of life. Tho cause of Empire Free Trade must be won or lost finally in tho Dominions. What is possible at this end fiscally or otherwise is already embodied in the programme of one of the three political parties. Lord Beaverbroolc's party competing at the polls with friend and foe can only overwhelm a good cause with confusion.