The Times of London once advertised itself with a series of photo-tableaux depicting famous scenes from history. The one I remember featured Julius Caesar, a smile of giddy ignorance on his face, entering the Roman Senate; behind him lurked Brutus, Cassius and the gang, with some obvious misdoing in mind. The slogan: "Have you ever wished you were better informed?" I was reminded of that look on Caesar's face this weekend, watching a bevy of alarmingly cheery Tory spokespersons pop up all over the TV screens to insist that the party was just fine, really, never better. No, they had no intention of merging with Reform. Yes, they would carry on, notwithstanding a $10-million debt and the loss of their only real electoral asset. Sooner or later, they all chirped, Canadians would want a moderate, national alternative to the Liberals.

That would be them, apparently.

If this sounds utterly daft, remember that the Tories have been saying more or less the same thing for most of the past century. It may require a more determined effort at self-delusion than usual to believe that you are a national party with just 2 seats west of Montreal, but the notion that the Progressive Conservatives are the natural governing party in waiting is imprinted in every Tory's genetic code. This self-image has persisted through every defeat, and the worse things have got, the more hardened to reality it has become; what remains of the party establishment is by now so far gone it is difficult to know whether it is safe to tell them Kennedy was shot.

This was perhaps tenable when the party could still pick up the western protest vote; when it could draw money and talent from the Big Blue Machine in Ontario; when, latterly, it could appeal to the more opportunistic brand of Quebec nationalist; and, if all else failed, when it could bank on the tribal loyalties of Tories in Atlantic Canada. At worst, the party could be an effective retailer of regional grievances; at best, it might even form a government.

But now? If asked -- what is a Tory party? -- what characteristics would one list? It has disappeared, for all practical purposes, from western Canada.

What remains of the Mulroney machine in Quebec has vanished, as quickly as it was assembled; Charest's departure deprives the party of any native-son appeal. And when even sixth-generation Tories in Atlantic Canada are voting NDP, as in last week's Nova Scotia provincial election, the portents are pretty grim.

If the Tories lack a geographic base, they are even less firmly rooted in any ideological soil. Reform has stolen much of their support to the economic and cultural right; the Liberals, by moving smartly into the territory vacated by the Mulroney Tories, have siphoned off many votes to their left. That leaves the party firmly in the grip of that peculiarly self-absorbed lot known as the Red Tories, less ruled by any coherent set of beliefs than by emotions, or even tastes: they are for the Queen, good diction, and the proper teaching of Canadian history in the schools, starting in 1066. After that, it all gets a little fuzzy.

This inability to think clearly the party establishment dresses in the conceit of pragmatism. Yet, oddly, there remains at the grass-roots level a more robust Toryism, with particular strength where Tory provincial governments rule: Ontario, Manitoba, and Alberta. It is simply not true, as the party's federal leadership tries to maintain, that anyone with a sympathy for Reform-style policies has already joined the Reform party. Old habits die hard: many right-wing Tories remain, out of hope, or loyalty, or just plain stubbornness. Some are hostile to Reform. But others are only too anxious for a merger.

While head office in Ottawa issues its ritual denunciations of Reform and all it stands for, senior Reformers and provincial Tories are holding telephone conferences, exploring how the two parties might be brought closer together.

The only question is whether the Tories will be eaten up, bit by bit, or swallowed whole. Much will be determined by the party's choice of leader.

If the party selects a western right-winger, a Jim Dinning, say, it might hope to obtain reasonably favourable terms in a merger. If it opts for a Red Tory from Ontario, it might remain a separate party for years to come, but as little more than an Eastern Canadian rump.

Meanwhile, the pro-merger forces continue plotting. If the party grandees think they can ignore these, they may come to wish they were better informed.