Bread & circuses.

Republicans have kept control of Congress for the first time in almost seventy years. The GOP is today the natural majority party in America, confirmed by two successive elections and in spite of a clear victory for a Democratic President. And because of the changing of the generational guard, especially in the Senate, the Republican majority is also a conservative one. This should be a moment of triumph for the man who, more than anyone else, made it possible. But Newt Gingrich is forewarned that his own share in this victory will be short-lived. On election eve, the Washington Post revisited an old story under a headline declaring "Ethics Probe Reaching Critical Stage for Frustrated Gingrich." The ethics charges against Gingrich, originally filed as payback for his campaign against Speaker Jim Wright, now provide Democrats and their media friends with a much-needed diversion from the Clinton scandals.

Veterans in the ways of Washington predict that Democrats' efforts to "get Newt" will escalate. Former White House Counsel Boyden Gray explains, "The way ethics wars work is that the hotter things get for Clinton, the hotter things get for Gingrich, regardless of what he might have done." And there is little evidence that he has done anything to warrant the blizzard of charges filed against him. Gingrich reasonably points out that more than seventy complaints against him have been dismissed or rendered moot. "This is an effort to destroy me by exhaustion," he complains.

A recent Congressional Quarterly suggests that Republicans commit "regicide" and depose the Speaker. That will not happen. Apart from the GOP's traditional loyalty, Gingrich was held in sufficient esteem, even before Tuesday's victory, not to need fear a rebellion. But if he is not to be bled to political death by Democrats using ethics charges as leeches, he will have to come up with a dramatic response. He should be particularly anxious to avoid collateral damage to other Republicans following the surprising difficulties of Nancy Johnson, chairman of the House Ethics Committee, whose challenger hammered her on Gingrich's ethics charges.

Newt Gingrich is one of the oddest men in modern American politics. He has a deep knowledge of history, a quirky passion for technological futurism, and an abiding belief in his own destiny. He has always been underestimated by his enemies and he has always surprised them, notably when he challenged a feeble House leadership to make the dream of a Republican Congress a reality. Now that the Gingrich majority has withstood a barrage of attack ads, can he pull off a final surprise? Might he decide to strengthen that majority and confound his enemies once again by stepping aside as Speaker to concentrate full time on clearing himself of all ethics charges?

The Speaker knows that, contrary to Scott Fitzgerald, there are plenty of second acts in American politics -- Nixon after 1962, LBJ after Dallas, Grover Cleveland after Harrison, even Clinton after Flowers. Two of his heroes, Churchill and de Gaulle, owe some of their greatness to years in the wilderness. And he is painfully aware that a man who is clinging to power can achieve nothing impressive; the public sees everything he does as an attempt to survive. The man who resigns in his own good time for the sake of the party, however, changes the public's view of him. And he is better placed to re-enter the game after memoirs, or a Big Book on The Future (very Gingrichian, that).

At once politics would be transformed. Washington scandals depend on the oxygen of media coverage. But Democrats would no longer be able to shield the President by making Newt Gingrich the issue. Indeed, Mr. Clinton would be doubly on the defensive.

But how would the House majority operate in even the temporary absence of Newt Gingrich? There is a man uniquely qualified to emerge as a caretaker Speaker: Henry Hyde of Illinois.

A year younger than Bob Dole, Hyde is held in such high regard by his colleagues that he was long thought to be the logical successor to Bob Michel as Republican leader. Instead, he chairs the Judiciary Committee as a loyal Gingrich team member. Despite his own objections to term limits, he shepherded the bill to the floor in order to fulfill the Contract with America, which he otherwise enthusiastically supported.

Most recently, Hyde accepted the unenviable task of chairing the Platform Committee in San Diego, where he disappointed the media by averting the anticipated bloodbath and uniting the party behind the conservative document. Although best known for his principled opposition to abortion, he has been called "indispensable" on defense and foreign policy, and the party's "most impressive spokesman" for any conservative initiative. Hyde holds rock-solid beliefs but displays no hard edges in advocating them. And his courtesy is a by-word on both sides of the aisle.

THE Almanac of American Politics reflects this view, citing Henry Hyde as "one of the most respected and intellectually honest members of the House." Gary Bauer of the Family Research Council believes he is held in bipartisan regard because "he represents conservatism of the heart like Ronald Reagan."

The face of House Republicans as they solidify their congressional majority would be that of the erudite and genial Hyde. It would be impossible to portray Henry Hyde as either an ideological zealot or a wild-eyed partisan seeking the President's ruin through the investigation of his scandals.

Nor, finally, would his elevation disturb the ultimate line of succession among younger members -- including, of course, a returning Gingrich himself. Already, Republicans owe Newt Gingrich a profound debt of gratitude. Should he engineer the election of Hyde, the debt would be greater still.

But there is always a fly in the ointment. One of Henry Hyde's countless conservative fans, glumly contemplating the re-election of Bill Clinton, objects to the Hyde scenario because "Hyde would be a better Speaker than the country deserves now." -- KATE O'BEIRNE