Page images
PDF
EPUB

motion. It commences thus: "That it is the opinion of this House that the improved condition of the country, and especially of the industrious classes, is mainly the result of recent legislation, and especially of the Act of 1846, for the free admission of foreign corn." Now, when was the commencement of this improved condition?

It is admitted on all hands, even by the most ardent Free-Traders, that the year 1851 was almost without a parallel for commercial depression and disaster. In Glasgow, Liverpool, or Bristol, there is not a man engaged in trade who cannot give distinct evidence as to this; and the depression continued over the earlier part of the present year. 1850 will long be remembered for the depression in manufactures; to account for which, as our readers may remember, the FreeTraders were sorely perplexed. An able correspondent of ours, writing in April last, after showing "that the mercantile and trading interests were left poorer, at the close of the year 1851, than they were at its commencement, by twenty millions sterling and upwards," thus very clearly and succinctly described the amount of benefit which has accrued to the country: "Where, in the face of these facts, can be the prosperity' of which the Free-Trader has been drawing such glowing pictures? It is not gladdening the eyes of the merchant and importer. It has not rewarded the enterprise of the shipowner. It has not filled the pockets of the small trader or the shopkeeper. The mill-owner and the manufacturer have not only not felt it, but I am confident that the majority of this class have suffered severely, as the result of the year's operations. The labourer and the artisan, with the men of fixed money incomes, have been the only parties benefited by the cheapness of the past year." If these things are facts, not fictions, it will necessarily follow that the improvement to which Mr Villiers alludes, in so far as the greatest branches of industry within the country are concerned, can only date at the earliest from the commencement of the present year! That there is considerable improvement since then, we are exceedingly glad to believe;

but we cannot, for the life of us, understand how it can be traced to the operation of the Act of 1846. It is, moreover, remarkable, that the improvement takes place just at the time when the imports of foreign grain are diminishing-a circumstance which might very well afford the foundation for a strong argument the other way. But if it be true, as we say it is, that, until the commencement of the present year at the earliest, neither trade nor manufactures were in a satisfactory condition, how is it possible to connect their revival now with the Act of 1846? That the working classes have benefited by the cheapness of food, there is no doubt whatever; but that is not Mr Villiers' meaning. obviously intends that his motion shall have a wider scope, and embrace interests, in the condition of which, twelve months ago, there were no signs of improvement visible.

He

The amendment, on the other hand, appears to us unchallengeable in point of fact. Beyond doubt the condition of the working classes has been improved, and their comforts increased, by the cheapness of provisions, occasioned by recent legislation; but further than that we cannot go. And we must say this, that, in the face of such depression as is allowed on all hands to have existed so very recently, the House of Commons will take a most extraordinary and unprecedented step, if they adopt the resolution which Mr Villiers wishes them to accept without a searching inquiry. Their vote will not make that true which is wholly false, but it may have the effect of lessening their aggregate reputation for sagacity in a country wherein every man conversant with commercial affairs can form his own conclusions.

This singular anxiety, on the part of the Radicals, to get a sort of Parliamentary ratification and approval of an act in force and unmolested, leads us sometimes to suspect that they themselves are not quite at ease as to the working of their favourite measure. If they believe (which we hope they do, seeing that they are so anxious to obtain the assent of the House of Commons) that there is a distinct and intimate connection between the present improved condition

of the country and the Act of 1846, there is no conceivable use for the present motion. Regard it in what view we may, we cannot resist the conclusion that it is a purely factious assault, founded upon no patriotic motive, but intended to embarrass, and, if possible, defeat Ministers in the commencement of their career.

Faction has been well portrayed as blind, for it never calculates consequences. We can readily understand the case of a growing party in the State, strong in the sense of its power, its intelligence, and its popularity, under able leaders and in perfect organisation, giving early battle to the supporters of another policy, whose vacillating and feeble movements betrayed their inherent weakness. But in every such case which has hitherto occurred, the object was to win the field of battle, and to keep it. The assaulting army contemplated_not only victory, but occupation, and for that contingency they were prepared. We certainly know nothing of the councils of our political opponents, but nothing has transpired to make us suppose that Lord John Russell, or any other chief in opposition, is able to form an efficient Ministry, or command a Parliamentary majority, if Lord Derby were to resign to-morrow. Our own belief is that no such Ministry could be found: certain of this we are, that few men of intelligence in the country, beyond mere partisans, are desirous of witnessing the experiment. The old Whig party is in a worse position than it was when Lord John Russell left office. Without a clear coalition with the Radicals, they could hardly construct a Ministry, certainly not conduct with credit the public business of the country; and we have already stated our reasons for thinking that no such coalition will take place. One man of versatile ability they have apparently gained, and that is Sir James Graham; but his accession will not make up for the loss of Lord Palmerston and Sir George Grey. The Radicals, we doubt not, believe that they could form a government; but nobody else believes it. We can almost fancy that we see the consternation in the City, on the morning on which it is declared that Joseph Hume is

Prime Minister, Sir Joshua Walmsley Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr Cobden Secretary for the Foreign Department, M'Gregor President of the Board of Trade, Mr Bernal Osborne Home Secretary, Bright Secretary at War, Keogh at the Colonies, Kershaw Master of the Horse, and Lucas Secretary for Ireland! That would, indeed, be a glorious day for the bears upon Exchange! In such an event one might certainly, as Falstaff says, "buy land as cheap as stinking mackerel," and other securities besides. Even in the view that a coalition could be effected between a certain section of the Whigs and the Radicals, and something like a competent Ministry in point of talent and respectability formed what would be the result? An immediate attempt to force organic changes-whirlwind legislation, such as Mr Bright contemplates, directed against those portions of our national institutions which hitherto have been accounted most sacred; a long period of violent internal commotion, and that, too, at a time when our utmost vigilance is required to provide against external danger. What a triumph to those who detest liberal and constitutional government is conveyed in the fact, that, the very week after the great champion and peacemaker of England had been laid in his tomb with national honours and lamentation, the Parliament of Britain should assemble, not to discuss measures at a crisis foretold by the warning voice of the deceased, but to brangle about the words of a motion relative to a bygone act of the Legislature, which it was not proposed to disturb! And yet this act of insensate folly may be supported by those who ought to have known better-by men who have been Ministers ere now, and who hope to be Ministers again; but who, in acting thus, and in making themselves the slaves of faction, most grievously endanger the honour and the reputation of their names.

We care very little what construction may be placed upon our remarks; and we care the less, because, as we have already said, the House of Commons will probably have adjudicated on the matter before this Number of the Magazine can issue from the

press. That circumstance will at least save us from the charge of undue partisanship. But we do confess that we feel at the present time an anxiety far beyond that which we have felt for many years. Impressed by a strong sense of the wrong which we conceived to be done to the agricultural interest of Britain by the violent change which was effected some six years ago and not less impressed with the conviction, that the method by which the change was carried was not in accordance with what ought to be the honourable course of an English statesman-we have fought the battle to the last, with what ability we could command. Even now, taking circumstances as they were in 1846, we can acknowledge no change of opinion. With a restricted currency, causing periodical commercial convulsions, and an enormous debt, which necessitated the collection of a prodigious revenue, we could not conceive how the industry of this country would be able to cope, on equal terms, with the comparatively untaxed products of other more favoured countries. Since then, some portion of the difficulty has been removed, by means which certainly were not contemplated by the authors of the legislative measures of 1846. The discovery of the gold-fields has operated until now, and may operate still farther, if no insidious attempt is made to deprive the nation of the benefit, as a virtual abrogation of those wretched currency laws, which have been the curse of Britain since they were enacted, but which not many could be brought to understand. Even now, the effects of that discovery seem to be unappreciated by members of the British Legislature. A motion like that of Mr Villiers, which excludes all notice of the most memorable fact, financially speaking, which has taken place since the mines of the New World were first laid open to the search of the Old, argues the most consummate ignorance of all that relates to the working of the monetary system. But, making every allowance for this unexpected relief, our faith in the soundness of the protective policy remains unshaken. The day may 'not be far distant when public opi

nion, taught by experience, may undergo a remarkable change with regard to this important question. And though that remark may excite from our opponents an emphatic response of "Never!" we would pray them to remember that their triumph has been mainly owing to circumstances altogether beyond human control. But we have no wish to revive controversy. That the country may be prosperous under the accepted policy is our earnest hope and prayer; and it would very ill become us to assume a tone of stubborn dogmatism on a subject which, as we have already said, has assumed an altered aspect within a very short time, from causes which were not and could not be anticipated by the wisdom of man.

We await, with much anxiety, the announcement of the Ministerial measures. These will, as a matter of course, be subjected to the most rigid scrutiny, and we may be sure that an opposition so recklessly commenced will not be allowed to slumber. One section of the Liberal party, with a selfishness which really requires considerable hardihood to acknowledge, have avowed their determination to oppose any measure which may be calculated directly or indirectly to afford any relief to the suffering interests of the country. These gentlemen do not even pretend to respect the ordinary rules of justice. They have abrogated the Corn Laws, but they will not consent to remove or even to mitigate one of the peculiar burdens which was laid upon the landed interest, in respect of the existence of those laws. It is of no use demonstrating to them, that you might with equal justice deprive a man of half his income, and yet continue to levy from him the same amount of direct taxation as before. They will hear nothing of adjustment of taxation; and no wonder, because, as matters stand at present, they do not contribute their fair share to the public burdens of the country. They act, and glory in it, upon the old marauding principle that "might is right;" and they say, that belonging to a peculiar class, and representing a particular interest, they will care for it, and it only, irrespective of every other. It is highly discredi

table to the age that language such as this should be tolerated by any auditory without marks of distinct reprobation. It amounts to a broad and plain acknowledgment that the public weal is not to be regarded when opposed to private interest-a sentiment certainly the reverse of patriotic, and equally opposed to the leading dogmata of republicanism. But all that matters nothing. As in commercial speculation no man cares for his brother, but rather tries if possible to outwit him, so do some of our commercial legislators maintain that all tricks are allowable in politics as well as trade, and that the game of "Beggar my neighbour" may be fitly played in Parliament. It requires no searching glance to discover in this the symptoms of profound demoralisation; but we should wrong the Legislature, and even the Liberal party, were we to assume that even a considerable portion of them sympathised with so sordid an avowal. There may be, and there is, great difference of opinion, both as to the extent of the claims for relief which may be urged on the part of any interest in the country which has suffered under recent legislation, and as to the nature of the means which ought to be applied remedially. These are fair subjects of discussion, and we trust they will be discussed in a becoming spirit; but, looking to the speeches which have already emanated from Manchester, we must be prepared for a violent opposition to every measure which has a tendency to heal the sores which the recent differences have engendered. It is in these discussions that the element of patriotism, where it exists, must show itself in opposition to the blind attacks of faction. Surely the welfare and the tranquillity of the country is a matter of far greater moment than any party triumph; surely it would be wise to reconcile classes which have been arrayed in opposition, not to irritate those who are still smarting under a sense of recent injury. Let the Ministry be judged by its acts and its measures. If the latter are not such as the country has good reason to expect, or of which it can conscientiously approve, then the reins of government must necessarily pass

into other hands. But, above all things, it is needful that discord should cease at home. Awful is the responsibility which those will incur who lend their countenance and aid to faction, at a time when foreign events of great significance have at last aroused the nation from its lethargic torpor, and dissipated the dream of fancied security in which we had so long indulged. Possibly the alarm may not be followed by any corresponding aggression, for a wakeful and watchful policy will ever be found the best safeguard against outward attacks; but for the maintenance of peace we have evidently no security. And very blind we must be if we cannot read, in the late history of France, a lesson of the most emphatic warning against a democratic movement. Mr Bright and his fellows are using just now, though perhaps unconsciously, the very same language which, from the mouths of the French democrats, led to the subversion of the monarchy, the disorganisation of society, the destruction of credit, and the reign of the barricades. And what has followed? Slaughter, rapine, almost civil war, the suppression of the liberty of the press, and the reign of a military dictator. Is it to accomplish such ends as these that we are asked to change our system, to give increased rapidity to the deliberations of our senate, or rather to dispense with any deliberation at all-to infuse more of the popular element, as it is called, into our institutions; to trust to the "instinct" of the masses of the nation, and not to the calm judgment of its wisest and its best? Never has democracy, though rebuked by Providence wherever it has reared its head, experienced a more signal rebuke than in this latest instance of France. is of no avail that the men who were themselves the chief instigators of the movement, rail in their exile against that tyranny which was the inevitable consequence of their misdeeds. Blind with faction, they could not see what they were doing-they could not perceive that each step made towards pure democracy was subversive of the nation's liberties. Long indeed may it be before our country, blessed with national liberty and free institu

It

tions, shall be led, by the instigation of demagogues, to plunge into a simi

lar chaos.

Where there are demagogues, faction is of course to be found. It is therefore not to be wondered at if it should show its head amongst us; but it is the duty of every well-wisher of the country to do his utmost to keep it down. It is far less open faction that we fear, than that kind of it which makes its approach under the more respectable name of party. Many men who would shrink from being broadly factious, and who would indignantly deny the charge, do nevertheless commit faction by trusting implicitly to their leaders, and by treading diligently in their footsteps. For even the leaders, when they act from what has very aptly been termed "mixed motives," are not unfrequently driven into faction, their own hearts too often deceiving them as to the purity of their conduct. There are many temptations in the way of a politician; and perhaps that man would be more than mortal who did not occasionally feel an impulse to take advantage of an adversary's un

guarded position; but there is a vast difference between that and a deliberate and preconcerted attack made, not for any real public end, but simply for the purposes of molestation. It remains yet to be seen how this debate will be conducted, and how it will terminate. For ourselves we have no hesitation in characterising this as a deliberate factious effort, and not as a fair and legitimate party movement; because we are unable to see any absolute advantage which could be gained by any party or any principle by the adoption of Mr Villiers' motion. If it is simply intended as a censure upon Protectionists, it is senseless and out of place. It has no proper reference to future policy, apart from the amendment; because that is as clearly expressed in the one as in the other. It gives no further secarity for the continuance of the present system of commercial policy, than is accorded by the general acquiescence of the nation, and the direct declaration of Ministers. In a word, it is factious; and, as such, we sincerely trust that it will not receive the sanction of the House of Commons.

« PreviousContinue »