Page:Blackwood's Magazine volume 137.djvu/852

846 eign policy since 1880 so tarnished the name and fame of the British Empire, and of having so embarrassed the Empire by feeble and meaningless campaigns in Egypt, as to have made ready for, and invited, the injurious action of Russia.

2. Of having, in spite of the plainest warnings of what was coming, neglected to take effectual steps, during the last five years, for defending the north-west boundary of British India; and of having cancelled or destroyed the provisions for defence which had been made by the Government which preceded his.

3. Of having, since he first admitted that the advance of Russia in Central Asia called for interference by our Government, suffered himself to be tricked out of, or rudely driven from, positions which had been taken up in defence of British rights and honour, and which it was his duty to have maintained.

4. Of having scandalously deceived the country by a speech made in Parliament, whereby he made it appear that he was about to make a determined stand against the encroachments and affronts of Russia, yet having in the event made no stand at all, but having made a complete surrender to the enemy.

5. Of having obtained from Parliament a vote of eleven millions of money by false pretences, as shown in article 4.

The things brought to Mr Gladstone's charge in the first article have been often discussed and proved in this Magazine. They are matters of notoriety, and need not, it is presumed, be investigated at present.

As to the second count, it is most grave, and its importance to the nation can hardly be overrated. Lord Beaconsfield's Government had certainly been alarmed at the rapid advance being made by Russia towards Afghanistan. It had projected for us a military station at Candahar, and had commenced a railway to connect that station with British India, the intention being, of course, to lie within supporting distance of Herat, which is considered by our greatest strategists to be the key of Hindustan. Had the intentions of the late Government been carried out, the crisis which has just occurred with Russia would have been rendered improbable, or, if it had occurred, would have found Great Britain, and not Russia, on the ground of vantage. But what did Mr Gladstone do as soon as he had displaced Lord Beaconsfield and obtained possession of power? He gave up Candahar to the Afghans; he withdrew our forces to the Indus; he stopped the construction of the railway, and sold the rails which had been provided. This proceeding, as one would think, must have been the product of either treason or dementia! Many motives have been assigned for it; but the excuse which Mr Gladstone's friends would probably make for him is, that he was unable to comprehend the extent and proximity of the danger – a view which is supported by the words of Mr Gladstone's own mouth, who said in 1879, "I have no fear myself of the territorial extensions of Russia – no fear of them whatever. I think such fears are only old women's fears." Allowing then, for a moment, that this shows the real reason of Mr Gladstone's in-