Page:Life·of·Seddon•James·Drummond•1907.pdf/132



A PROMINENT LIBERAL LEADER.

As the session of 1890 approached there were many rumours about Sir Harry Atkinson’s ill-health. It was the subject of inquiries and conflicting bulletins. On the one hand it was stated that he was strong and brisk, and that his sufferings had never been acute. On the other hand there were harrowing accounts of a wasted and shattered invalid clinging desperately to an office with the duties of which he was quite unable to cope. There were reports of anxious consultations among his friends and among the leading members of his party. Friendly newspapers openly discussed the question of his successor, and expressed their opinion as to whether it ought to be Mr. Bryce, Sir John Hall, or Sir William Russell.

The truth was that he had been very unwell for a long time. He ought to have retired from politics instead of taking the lead of the House on the dismissal of the Stout-Vogel Government. It would have been better for him if he followed the course adopted by Sir John Hall, who retired from the head of affairs when he found that his health would not stand the severe strain placed upon it by the vexations not so much of ruling a young nation as of conducting incessant party fights.

Sir Harry clung to his public duties. Although some members of his party often told him that it was not he they wanted, those who were not in the party, and who took a clear view of the position, knew that he was the only possible leader. There were good men among his supporters, men who were very well liked, and men with progressive ideas, but they were not in touch with the majority in the House, and would have commanded only a small following. From the Conservative point of view, although there were many Conservatives who did not realise it, it was Sir Harry Atkinson or nobody.