CHICOUTIMI -- This particular MP, more than any other, nailed it.

After much searching of his conscience, he decided that he owes his loyalty to Jean Chrétien. He has even promised the Prime Minister's organizers that he will deliver two-thirds of the vote in his riding in support of Mr. Chrétien at February's leadership review. "But it's going to take every ounce of political capital I have. And this isn't something I should be spending my capital on."

Did Mr. Chrétien know last night how much trouble the Liberal Party is in when he told a rally that "I don't think Canadians like what they have seen from us this summer"?

Did he know about the large suburban riding in the Greater Toronto Area where the question is not will the membership vote for Mr. Chrétien or Paul Martin but why has it dropped to 150 from 450?

Did he know about the idealistic young pro-Chrétien organizer -- one of those kids who live on nerve and ambition, the front-line workers of any political party -- who downs another beer and says, "Just think how much fun it's going to be, spending the next three months signing up memberships for a lousy review"?

Did he know about the member of cabinet who feels estranged from his own riding, because he is obliged to publicly support the Prime Minister even though his staff is convinced that 90 per cent of the membership will vote for review?

It is beyond doubt that almost every Liberal MP wants Mr. Chrétien to step down before the next election. Many will support his right to choose his timing, but virtually no one wants to go into the next campaign with him at the helm. What concerns the caucus as it mulls over its future in Chicoutimi is how much psychic damage the party must endure before Mr. Chrétien makes his decision or has it made for him.

The optimists believe we are already in the endgame. "The story isn't about the review," one Ontario MP insists. "There isn't going to be a review. This isn't even going to go to December." Mr. Chrétien, he says, will announce his decision to retire before the last leaves have fallen.

Another MP, from a nearby riding, believes it may take until December, when the delegate selection process will convince Mr. Chrétien that he has no hope of surviving a review. "He doesn't know what the situation is. His people aren't telling him the truth."

But what worries them all is that the time and money being spent could be going toward a proper leadership race, or an election. Workers are putting in hours, combing lists, manning the phones. Friends and colleagues are twisting arms, pleading, resorting to veiled threats -- for what? To determine whether a prime minister who everyone knows is going to retire can win a confidence vote?

This is what so enervates the Chrétien camp. Mr. Martin's supporters at least are fighting for the idea of Paul Martin and his ideas (whatever they might be). But Mr. Chrétien's supporters are campaigning only for negatives: Don't do this to him. He'll leave, just give him time. These are not slogans that put fire in the belly of a campaign volunteer.

One close adviser to Mr. Chrétien believes his boss will go all the way to the February vote, that if the Liberal Party is going to unseat a sitting prime minister, then it is going to have to do it to his face.

Leaders have done this before. Richard Hatfield, knowing his party faced oblivion in New Brunswick, chose to face the electorate rather than resign. John Diefenbaker knew in his heart he had lost the Conservative leadership in 1967 but tried to stare down the traitors anyway.

And we should not forget Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Mr. Chrétien's political idol. At 70, after 15 years in office, Laurier staked his and his party's future on free trade with the United States. The policy was deeply controversial; many Liberals opposed the deal and warned the prime minister of the danger it posed to party unity.

But Laurier refused to compromise, and the party split down the middle. Eventually, the Conservatives were able to force an election on the issue, and the Liberals went down to defeat.

How fully has Mr. Chrétien absorbed the Laurier myth? Would he risk the party and power over the principle of loyalty to the chief?

Mr. Chrétien would laugh it all off as he did yesterday when he reminded his audience of the phenomenon of Kim Campbell's -- and, by inference, Mr. Martin's -- "shooting star."

And he promises, as he promised at last night's rally, that his decision to leave would be based on his sense of duty "to the Liberal Party, which is my family."

In private, he is far sterner, even bitter. The party has its traditions, he tells his aides, and one is that the leader, when prime minister, always chooses the timing of his departure. He'll be damned if he'll let Mr. Martin usurp that tradition. He'll fight it, he says, to the end.

There is something Shakespearean about this: An aging leader, hubris blinding him to a rising threat, is confronted by a rebellion, and chooses to fall in battle rather than surrender. The Tragical History of King Jean.

But this is not theatre. This is a political party, one that happens to be governing the country. No one wants to wait around for the final act, especially not rank-and-file Liberals, who would rather do anything than cast a vote against their leader, but many of whom are prepared to nonetheless.

Laurier ended his life a sad and defeated man.
jibbitson@globeandmail.ca