This kind of sword-play went on day after day in the House, and it is
impossible to doubt that, although Mr. Labouchere was unquestionably
sincere in deploring the policy of the Government, he must have
greatly enjoyed the opportunity which it afforded him of displaying
his wit and humour. Mr. Gladstone did not always appreciate these
{219} qualities, and on one occasion, when Mr. Labouchere was
attempting to divide the House against the Government, his object
being, as he said, "not adverse to the Government, but to strengthen
the good intentions of the Prime Minister in future," that much
enduring statesman turned and solemnly rebuked him for making an
"inopportune and superficial speech."[21]
The case against the Government from the Radical point of view was,
of course, very obvious and easy to put, nor was there anything
particularly original about Mr. Labouchere's arguments. He rang the
changes incessantly on three points: the essential injustice of our
position in Egypt towards the Egyptians--the underlying venality of
the Government's position owing to their connection with the
bondholders--and the monstrous expense to the British taxpayer of
British military intervention. It was not the matter of his charges,
but the manner in which he made them that delighted the House.
Sometimes he would lay aside his dialectical weapons and let the
facts speak for themselves. One day he asks the Secretary for War if
his attention has been drawn to the following statements in the
_Times_ of May 7:
Daylight broke almost imperceptibly. We were nearer the village of
Dhakool, when the friendly scouts came running in with the news that
the inhabitants were at prayer, and that if we attacked at once we
should catch them. General Graham pushed on with a troop of the
Bengal Lancers.... The enemy fled on camels in all directions, and
the Mounted Infantry and Camel corps, coming up, gave chase. Some
two hundred attempted to stand, and showed a disposition to come at
us, but evidently lost heart and disappeared, not before having at
least twenty men killed.... It was curious to witness the desperate
efforts of the enemy to drive their flocks up the steep mountain
side, turning now and again to fire on the Bengal Lancers. The
"Friendlies" tried to cut off the flocks, and succeeded in catching
{220} some thousands of animals.... The village was looted and
burnt.... We also destroyed the well with gun-cotton.... But, for
our being unaware of the existence of some narrow hillock walks up
which the enemy retired, we might have exterminated them. Our loss
has been hitherto only two Mounted Infantry men wounded.... We have
done the enemy all the harm we could, thus fulfilling the primary
object of war.
Lord Hartington could find nothing to say, but that such incidents
were unfortunately inseparable from war.[22]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account