The problem of Liberal unity between 1870 and 1880, however,
has a general relevance to a general problem which the develop-
ment of the party system in the nineteenth century presents.
Could a party system based on two historic parties, which had
emerged from a very different past, adjust itself to the changing
social structure of Britain? A two-party system such as exists in
Britain depends on the existence of two parties with enough
organic unity to enable them to play continuous rôles. If a party
is going to maintain such a unity and to continue to play an
effective part it must not only support causes which are likely to
gain the assent of a majority of voters, it must not only develop an
organisation to deploy its political resources to the best advantage,
it must also be able to adjust itself to the social habits and relation-
ships of a sufficiently large section of the nation to give it a stable
nucleus of support. In aristocratic party politics this presents a
comparatively simple problem. The party must possess enough
influence through landowners and employers in a sufficiently large
number of constituencies to give it a good start in the competition
for power. But as wealth and political selfconsciousness increase
among the voters the problem becomes more complicated. The
methods of authority and patronage must be increasingly replaced
by the more exacting techniques of persuasion, and the organisa-
tion which a party provides in the constituencies, the type of men
which it puts forward as candidates, the language which its leaders
use and the objects and principles they support, must be so adapted
that they will remain congenial to the section of the country from
which it hopes to gain its main support. If they do not do so the
party will wither away, and another party will take its place.

Now, before 1830 politics had been a gentleman's game, a
game played by noblemen and gentlemen for the advantage of
noblemen and gentlemen. People from other classes had played
their parts, but they played as auxiliaries and for minor rewards.
The nobility and gentry took all the chief rôles and won all the best
prizes. If someone from outside were successful he became by that
action a gentleman, if he did not become a nobleman. This situa-
tion was traditional, but it also corresponded with the contem-
porary social structure of the country and with its political struc-
ture, since success in the constituencies largely depended on the

-xiv-