July 16th, 1880:THE EFFECTS of Ireland on Britain's 19th century imperial adventures in Afghanistan might not be immediately apparent but formed the basis for a (somewhat convoluted) leader in The Irish Times on this day in 1880. It was commenting on the previous day's session of the House of Commons where the policy and progress of the Second Anglo-Afghan War was questioned and much time taken up with a prolonged debate on the Irish Compensation for Disturbance Bill which proposed compensation for small tenants unable to pay rents in distressed areas.
A moment was with difficulty snatched last night from the weary controversy on the Disturbance Bill for an inquiry as to the position of England in Afghanistan. The reply of the (Liberal) Government to Mr Onslow will by nobody be regarded as satisfactory. The question was a double one – first, as to the policy adopted towards the Afghans, and, second, as to the cost of the war. The policy was stated some time ago to be that of evacuation at the earliest possible date, but statements have since been made that create a doubt whether a change of plan has not been determined on. Lord Hartington slides away from the interrogatory as to policy with a general remark, and as to expenditure says that no estimate can be attempted until the troops shall have been withdrawn – sometime in the autumn. It is plain that he knows as little as any of us when the conclusion will be reached. The outlay, he intimates, will be “enormously” in excess of what had been proposed, and it is the view of the Government that a portion of the charge must be borne by England . . . There is growing uneasiness as to the course of affairs in Afghanistan. There is more than fear that the Government have busied themselves too much and unnecessarily with home legislation, which could have well been postponed until next year, and have not had the time or repose of mind to devote to the greater affairs of foreign interest which is demanded by their intricacy and gravity. It may well be asked how a Cabinet can manage soberly and efficient the complicated affairs of an Empire whose leading Ministers are occupied 14 or 15 hours of the 24, week after week, in a petty wrangle in Parliament, and whose minds are given, rather than to the principle and considerations which govern larger problems, to the mean shifts of a preternaturally ingenious attempt to reconcile Irreconcilables (in Ireland) and earn the applause of those who declare it to be their game never to be appeased . . . If German statesmen also begin to show alarm at the pre-occupation of the British Government, and to doubt the value of an alliance conditioned by such a qualification of the attention required for the business which it involves, and if so believing they should seek to initiate a policy of their own in Turkey – as rumour says indeed they have done – would that be not a natural course as taken by them? The Government have burdened themselves with a vast deal more than they need have undertaken, or can well carry much further.
It is Gladstone’s pride which stands in the way of an abandonment of one-half of the load rather than any difficulty which his followers would present to an effort to relieve the Cabinet from some of its embarrassments. If the increasing complexity of affairs should very soon compel the Minister (Gladstone) to yield to his colleagues and be content to govern more and legislate less for a few months, we believe that the compulsion to this change of method and spirit in the Government will come from the growing danger of our relations both to the Afghan and Turkish peoples.