Ar no period since the Revolution, were the lights and shades which distinguished the parties in and out of power more indistinct and fadé, than they have been for some years past. Indeed, since the last accession of Mr Canning to power, there has seemed to be an almost complete obliteration of ancient party distinctions. Ministers, by very rapid strides, had liberalized their whole system; but, above all, they had succeeded in convincing the people of their anxious desire to lessen the public burdens, by every safe and practicable measure of economy and retrenchment. Real practical evils, whether in the administration of justice, or in the collection of the revenue, instead of being defended or palliated, were discouraged or remedied by them; and, instead of resisting every proposed measure which partook of the nature of change-fixing the country down to a point beyond which it could not advance, they gave full scope and encouragement to the temperate spirit of real improvement. By their measures, in short, so congenial to the feelings of the well-informed

of all classes, they had conciliated and gained the support of public opinion; and, as a consequence, in the midst of distress, arising from the depression of trade, more general and intense than had ever before afflicted the nation, not a murmur of disaffection was to be heard from one end of the kingdom to another.

A Ministry so popular had nothing to dread from the efforts of Opposition. It had long been apparent that, from causes which already have been sufficiently investigated, the Opposition could have no rational hopes, either from its connexion with the aristocracy, any hold it possessed of the public mind, or any possible parliamentary strategy, of supplanting the party in power. So conscious was the Opposition itself of this, that in 1819, in an evil hour, it formed an alliance with the Ultra-Reform or Radical party, with the idea that popular fury might effect for the party what the inclinations of the Monarch, and the good sense of the nation forbade. But, since then, the paternal spirit of the Government had operated a mighty

change in the minds of the populace,. who had deserted the standard of the Opposition, and gone over to that of the Ministry; and the former party now stood alone, without a single effective ally. Its occupation, as an Opposition, was confined to urging sweeping improvements, which could not be undertaken without imminent hazard, and to claiming credit as being the originators of every liberal measure brought forward under Ministerial auspices. In general, however, the Opposition gave a cordial, and, at least apparently, disinterested support to Ministers; to account for which, we must notice a great political change which, ever since the peace, had been silently operating in the opinions of the people.

While ancient distinctions were fast disappearing, the nation at large was gradually dividing itself into two new and very opposite parties, which we, in conformity to common parlance, shall denominate the Liberal and AntiLiberal party; the former being intent upon such changes in our institutions as, in their judgment, would be prudent and salutary; the other having a more than Locrian antipathy to, and a sort of instinctive dread of all changes whatever. The latter are, necessarily, the champions of every existing abuse, and of every antiquated absurdity, no matter how revolting to the common sense of mankind; and apply, in all cases, the poet's maxim with regard to the dispensations of Providence, "whatever is, is right," to the political arrange ments of society. In their horror of innovation, they forget that the institutions and usages they defend are only innovations upon others still more ancient; that but for changes society never would have been moulded into its present form; and that if maxims are to be venerated in proportion to their antiquity, we must seek for the beau ideal of government in the savage

state. They deride, too, all theories in government and political economy; 'forgetting that there is no existing positive law or rule whatever, which is not bottomed on some theory or other. Before any society became artificial, its members must have been theorists; for why did they subject themselves to regulations at all, but upon the theory that such regulations would conduce to their common advantage? It is very remarkable-and we would have the Anti-Liberals to reflect upon it-that when a nation first ventures upon experiments in political economy, to procure to itself advantages which would not accrue to it in the natural course of things, it is sure to err more egregiously than if it trusted to the suggestions of its own common sense. This is very easily accounted for. The rulers of a semi-civilized country are very apt to imagine, that there are arcana in the art of governing beyond the ken of ordinary mortals; and, on the most crude and undigested speculations of utility, they set about constraining everything out of its natu ral channel, in order to produce artificially most mighty results. Consider what were the commercial regulations of England, in the time of the Plantagenets, and say, whether the most savage tribe of South Sea islanders, who barter their pigs and poultry for the veriest baubles, are so absurdly governed, in matters of commerce, as England was at the period we have alluded to! However, it is the very theories founded in semi-barbarous times, that our Anti-Liberals, by decrying all theories, would wish to perpetuate. If the political economy of modern times has credit for any one thing in particular, it is for having uprooted the theories engendered by the pseudo-wisdom of barbarous ages, and the equally spurious philosophy which succeeded it; and for having referred the utility of all regulations to the

standard of common sense and experience. That modern political economy is marked by a certain degree of fanaticism and folly, we do not deny that it is so marked, we shall soon have occasion to assert; but here lies the most extraordinary error of the AntiLiberal party, that, while at perfect liberty to reject both, they, while affecting to contemn all theories, most pertinaciously and bigotedly (reason not in the least influencing their choice) adhere to such only as were elaborated, when governments, most imperfectly informed, began, for the first time, and without the necessary data, to speculate upon the subjects which pertain to the science of Government, and absolutely reject those which persons in modern times, availing themselves of the accumulated experience of ages, and with more matured reflection, have attempted to establish—not that such theories are false, but simply because they are new.

It may be seriously questioned, whether a party, professing dogmas so irrational and hostile to the spirit of advancement, which is the animating principle of a free state, would ever have attained much consideration, had it not been that it had its representatives and champions in the Cabinet, as the Liberal party had also its. In truth, between the two parties the Cabinet was fairly divided; and the preponderance of either had become an object of the same importance and concern to the nation, as the relative strength of the Whig and Tory parties used to be formerly. It was evident that the two Ministerial parties could not long cohere; and that on either obtaining a decided ascendency, the one set of principles would necessarily vanquish the other.

Of the Anti-Liberal party in the Cabinet, at the head of which was the Lord Chancellor, it may be observed that most of its members were men

who had been adopted into office since the breaking out of the French revolutionary war, with the stupendous incidents connected with which, and calculations regarding its final result, their minds had been wholly engrossed. Even had they had any natural aptitude for acquiring the art of governing, which is much to be doubted, the nature of their education had perverted or destroyed it. Their maxims of government, whether in peace or war, seemed to be summed up in the single word COERCION. Certain it is, that in no single instance did they ever display the slightest acquaintance with the science or the systems which it was their custom to deride; and it could not but be remarked by the public, that, with all their horror of innovation, they had never resisted, but, on the contrary, been at all times the foremost to propose and advocate any change (whether salutary or not, is not at present the question,) which had a tendency to impair a popudar privilege, however ancient, or to give a new increase to the Crown's influence or prerogative. Add to all this, the whole of them, with the exception of Lord Eldon, were men of the slenderest natural talents: and the all-engrossing cares of his judicial office, it must be admitted, had disqualified him for being a statesman, and made him a bigot.

The Liberal party in the Cabinet, again, included and was headed by individuals of the most distinguished talents the nation could boast of Mr Canning and Mr Huskisson, men of comprehensive and vigorous minds, exempt from the common prejudices of caste and party; and whose bearings were all towards the side of civil and religious liberty, the connexion between which and a nation's prosperity, they perceived and were sensible of. In short, their principles and sentiments may be described as being truly and essentially English.

It was objected to these statesmen,