Last year, when he had faced his critics and obtained from his party, a convincing vote of confidence in his leadership, Mr. Baldwin received a notable tribute in the House of Commons. At the earliest oppor. tunity after this decision had been made he received in the House of Commors itself a stirring ovation in which Members of the Labour and Liberal Parties unreservedly joined. It Was not purely a recognition of Mr. Baldwin's personal popular~ ity' as a House of Commons man; it reflected the conviction that, in his stand against the impudent challenges of Lords Beaverbrook and Rothermere, Mr. Baldwin was fighting for the liberty of Parliament," Earlier in the year the development of that issue became clear and it may be recalled that so far back as June 24° the "North-China Daily News" pointed out that the struggle between Mr, Baldwin and the Pygss Lords was not merely on a matter of policy but on a grave constitutional principle affecting the stability of the Parliamentary system. Tt raised, in fact, the issue whether the country was to be governed by its" properly. elected representatives. in Parliament or by the arbitrary whim of the dictators of the popular Press. Since then the fight has grown in intensity.
Baldwin has preserved his nancy over his Party but, cynically "exploiting the com: plexity of current, political controversies and the anxieties produced by economic strain, the Press Lords have been able considerably to harass him, Neither of his antagonists "has displayed the slightest regard for consistency or common andards of political morality, They have made dupes of mediocre waverers in the Conservative ranks, of disgruntled die-hards and of cranks, whose vanity is in excess of their practical ability. Linked with
spend to the slightest whim organization disciplined to of the tyrant in control, these unpromising political elements have been given a power for mischief far beyond their slender intellectual merits, Sir Emnest Petter, entering the field at St. George's West minster against the official Conservative candidate may protest that he is no follower of Lord Beaverbrook or Lord Rothermere, although he chal longes Mr. Baldwin's leadership, cannot dissociate himself from the consequence of his actions. He has been forcibly adopted as the blue-eyed boy of the Press Lords. He must either be taken to acquiesce in that adoption surely defer his challenge till it-can be made in an atmosphere less equivocal. "As it is, all the resources of the owners of two big London dailies and of two, out of the three, evening papers are being pooled to convince the electors of this traditionally Conservative constituency that the Conservative should abandon the leadership of Mr. Baldwin. to become the pampered plaything of Lords Beaverbrook Rothermere whose chief claim to public attention is their successful development of the stunt system of journalism. The li tical history of the' two dictators even during the brief period of their interest in the affairs of the Conservative Party has shown that they possess a remarkable faculty for doubling on their tracks, breaking faith and making up their political creeds as they go along witl devastating effects—on the claims to consistency straight-forwardness, The 1 velations made by Mr. Spring-man and Miss Cazalet regarding Lord Beaverbrook's tergiversations in the East Islington election were sufficient to damn the reputation of any politician who sought serious support.
The gravamen of the charge against. Lords Beaverbrook and. Rothermere is that they deliberately refrain from using constitutional methods, for enfore-. ing their views. Their blatant use of their newspapers—purchased in the main for quite other than political reasons—as propaganda sheets of the most
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.