The Press. — London, England, 1858-03-06 00:00:00

224 THE RE-ELECTIONS. THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY. Dkortwiert.—The Right Hon. Sir J. Pakington, Bart., First Lord of the Admiralty, was re-electe.l on Wednesday. Sir John Pakington, after thanking the doctors, proceeded to offer a few remarks upon the present political situation. Alluding to the recent attempt to assassinate the Emperor Napoleon having chiefly teen concocted in England, Sir John Pakington pointed out the critical nature of the cir• cumstances with which England had to deal. Never was a Government placed in circumstances demand ing greater care and circumspection. But instead of first investigating the state of the law, they pro ceeded at once to legislate : There, I think, they acted very indiscreetly. But that is not all. In the meantime there arrived a despatch from Count Walewski, complaining, in the name of the French people, of the state of things in this country, and of the English law. That despatch has, I believe, been the cause of more offence than it ought to have been. In the first place, I am bound to say it has not been con veyed to the English people very accurately, not having been very well translated, and I am quite convinced that the French Government intended no offence by sending it. But what was the course taken by onr Government ? They never answered that despatch, but forthwith, on the receipt of it, came down to Parliament with their bill ; arid, whether intentionally or otherwise, they held out to the British people and to the French people the appearance that they were legislating under foreign dictation. No policy could have been more unseemly or unwise. (Cheers.) And I think the feeling of national pride anti indignation which has been aroused, and has pervaded all classes, and which influenced the division of the House of Commons a fortnight ago, was directed not so much against the bill as an amendment of the law as against the impolicy and infatuation which induced the Govern ment to bring in their measure under circumstances which had at least the complexion of foreign dictation. (Cheers.) The Government, from whatever cause, from whatever motive, forlrot the honour and the interests of England in not sending a reply to that despatch. That document was inserted in the columns of the Monileur, the Government organ of France. No blame attaches to the French Government for that. But the despatch was circulated throughout Europe, and I say it ought not to have been circulated alone. It should have gone forth ac companied by the answer of England. That answer ought to have been clear and decisive, conciliatory to France, deprecating these foul crimes, but asserting with a dignity worthy of this country that we would never abandon that right ofasylurn which all the world has found in this free land. (Cheers.) The late Government, however, lacked the decision, the moral courage, and the wisdom to give that reply, and hence the difficult and delicate circumstances with which Lord Derby's Government had now to deal. Their duty might not be easy, but at least it was clear : That duty is twofold. We have first of all to proclaim and make it patent to Europe that we can not and we will not surrender the right of asylum to all the world in Eng land ; and aide by cde with that declaration we must make it equally patent that we will not sanction the concocting of these foul crimes in our land—that we will not allow our hospitality to be abused, but that those who seek our protection must submit to the condition that they shall abstain from crime and render obedience to our laws. (Cheers.) The second part of oar duty is to maintain as long as we can maintain with honour that alliance with France which is so conducive to the peace of the world, and which I hope may ever flourish in close and increasing friendship for the mutual benefit of both nations. (Cheers.) Sir John Pakington accounted as one of the principal causes of the fall of the late Government their having exhibited a want of decision, a want of opinion on questions of great social import, such as church rates and education, taking one course one year, another the next, and on the third half of its members abstaining from voting at all. With re spect to the policy of Lord Derby's Administration, Sir John Pakington said, that it was hard to expect a body of men suddenly called into power to decide upon a policy in it few days. But he frankly ex pressed his opinion that Lord Derby, in obedience to the expressed wish of the House of Commons, would introduce an India Bill this session, to place India under the direct authority of the Crown : I am sanguine in the hope that if we shape our measure with a •iew not tc increase the patronage of the Government, but for the welfare and happiness of India alone, we may be able to overcome this difficulty, and to pass during the present session a bill which shell pro. claim the authority of Queen Victoria throughout our Indian dominions, without in any way swelling unduly the influence of the Ministry. (Cheers.) There was another topic not to be passed over, Parliamentary Reform : Gentlemen, the won reform has two meanings. It is the word which for the last twenty or thirty years ha. perhaps been nlost fregaent on the lips of politicians. It has a conventional and a party sense. It has a sense in which those who use it are thinking of great democratic Innovations in onr Constitution. Taken in that accepts• THE PRESS, MARCH 6, 1858. tion, the party with whom I have the honour to act in public life never have proclaimed themselves ardent re formers. But the word reform has another, a better, and a more legitimate signification —the signification in which it is taken to mean careful revision and cautious improve ment of all our institutions, whether representative or otherwise. In that larger and better sense I think I am justified in saying the present Administration are ardent reformers. (Cheers.) In that spirit we are resolved under the circumstances of the case to give our best atten tion to the question of what changes in the representation of the people have really become necessary. If any idea could be more untenable than another, it would be to say, because twenty-five years ago the Conservative party were alarmed at the changes then proposed, and afraid that they might result in mischief to our institutions, that therefore we are disqualified from turning our attention to this sub ject now. 1, for one, repudiate such a doctrine. I will not be so fettered in my political actions. ( Cheers.) He held it, then, that it was "the duty" of the Go. vernment " to consider fully and fairly this question of a change in the national representation ": It has been forced upon us by the repeated declarations of successive Governments. Above all, we ought to be influenced by a fact to which I attach great weight—viz., that the Sovereign from the throne has recommended this subject to the consideration of her Parliament. No doubt, constitutionally, the language held by the Sovereign is dic tated by her responsible Ministers; nevertheless, when the Sovereign has been committed to declarations of opi nion on most serious matters connected with our institu tions, I think time declarations are entitled to most re spectful and deferential attention. Besides, we all know ' the circumstances under which the great Reform Act was passed, and no reflecting man will deny that great ano malies exist. Without meaning disrespect to any class, I may say one can hardly walk through the streets of this or of any other English town without meeting with men to whose judgment and studies even the most ardent re• former would scarcely think it safe to intrust the destinies of this country. (A laugh.) On the other hand, you will find other men who under the present law are without the franchise, hut who in common justice ought to possess it. I see an hon. gentleman below —a man of high scientific acquirements and great respectability, and holding an im portant position in this town, but who, not happening to be a ten-pound householder, has no vote. There is an anomaly which doubtless ought to be corrected. And, after all, what are the charm and sacredness of the ten pound vote itself? A ten-pound rating in Droitwich is a guarantee of respectability. In the large cities of the kingdom it will virtually give you household suffrage. It professes to secure miff. irmity, but fails to secure it. I%l:tether uniformity be desirable is another question. But one thing upon which I have been particularly careful is not to commit myself to the doctrine of finality in respect to any franchise or any representative system. The limit of the franchise must in the nature of things be a matter of degree. At one time it may be unwise to go beyond a certain amount. Spread education and intelligence, make a man fit for the duty, and in God's name why should be not enjoy the privilege? (Cheers.) On these grounds, then. I am not prepared, as a Minister who has been but a week in office, to pledge the Government to the intro duction of a Reform Bill. The subject requires mature deliberation. Moreover, gentlemen, we are candidates for public confidence, and that confidence we seek on the only grounds on which we can ever gain it. We ask you to judge of us partly by our words, but much more by our acts. (Cheers.) And if we wanted to forfeit public con fidence, and to proclaim that we had no right to it, we could hardly take a surer mode of doing so than before we have been ten days in office to come down and say we are prepared to deal with this most important question. In conclusion, SirJ. Pakingcon justified Lord Derby's acceptance of office—though he did not command a majority in the House of Commons, he was never theless at the bead of' a larger following than any other leader of a party—and claimed for the new Government a fair trial : We trust to the support of an unusually independent House of Commons, and alsa to the support of the public. We shall address ourselves to our arduous task with an anxious desire to consult, not the narrow interest of party, but the welfare of the country, and our earnest hope is that we may be enabled so to conduct public affairs as to con- ciliate and deserve the good opinion of the country. (Cheers.) THE SECRETARY FOR THE COLONIES. KING'S LYNN.—Lard Sum ley, NI P., Secretary of State for the Colonies, was re-elected for Lynn on Thursday last, without opposition. The noble lord, who was re ceived with great cheering, adc'ressed the electors at some length upon the political questions of the day. Alluding briefly to the few measures brought forward in the last session, Lord Stanley said that three great questions occupied the public mind at present — viz., the future government of India, parliamentary reform, and our relations with foreign powers. The transfer of the government of India from the Com pany to the Crown he looked upon as a necessary consequence, as the legitimate and natural conclu sion of former measures, and that whether the effect would be good or bad it. was a result out of our power to control. Lord Stanley did not enter into any detail of the measures about to be proposed ; hut, with respect to the religious aspect of the ques • tion, expressed a decided opinion in favour of a strict religious neutrality. On the subject of parliamentary Norm, Lord Stanley reowlied I believe there is no statesman now, in whatev er of either house he may sit, who considers or calls the Reform Reform Bill of 1832 a final measur e . ( Hear, bear one denies that some modification o f th at h i ll is re . u t q • But having said that, I am bound to a dd that the con. duet of public men—and perhaps I may say of Parr. meat itself—upon the question of representative reform has not been altogether satisfactory. I t i s now just seven years since Lord J. Russell promised a new Reform Bin and, as far as one can judge, we do not seem to be nearer the result now than before. Considering th e l ength of time during which this question has b een , as it were, hung up, and considering—what I belie ve none of yet; will doubt—the utter unexpectedness of the events which have brought the present Administration into power, I think you will admit that it would be act i ng unreason. ably to call upon the members of the Government, en• gaged as they must be both in parliamentary and in depart. mental duty, to frame a plan for the alteration of the constitution of the country during the present session. I do not think it is too much, considering the magnitude of the change, considering that every step which you take in such a matter is one that cannot be retraced, to ask fur that amount of delay. Bat I do not hesitate to repeat here and now what I said upon a former occasion. think that in our present parliamentary constitution there are anomalies removable by legislation, and anima. lies of which the evil is not merely theoretical, but result; in practical abuse. I think that the excessive value which belongs to every single vote in very small constituencies has a direct tendency to produce corruption. Heir, bear.) I think that many districts of this country have reason to believe that they have not their adequate share of representation. ( Hear ) Although that state things has arisen rat her from accident than fiom any settled purpose, it is doubly unfortunate, because, apart from the practical inconveniences which it causes, it pr ). duces a suspicion—an unfounded, but, nevertheless. s very general suspicion —that our present representation is arranged in such a manner as to be rather delusive than real. But the whole subject is full of difficulty— difficulty which seems to increase in magnitude the more one considers it. Any plan that is proposed requires care and consideration, and I think, there fore, the demand which we make for time will not be held unreasonable. There is just one word of explanation which I should like to offer upon this subject. If any mo lions are made suggesting this or that partial alteration in the franchise, and not dealing with the subject as a whole, I repeat to you now, what I said befare, that I shall be bound to give my vote against any such propositions. I shall do so, not as necessarily condemning the proposals themselves, but simply because we should refuse to con sider in a fragmentary and partial way a question which, to be dealt with effectually, should be dealt with as a whole. ( Hear, hear.) It is quite idle to suppose that a question involving such important interests can be discussed with out a certain amount of excitement, and even of asperity. But I am confident that whatever discussions may take place on the subject, either in the present or in any future session of Parliament, will be carried on in a very different temper and with very different feelings from those of twenty-five years ago. I say that not merely on account of the gradual approximation of opinion among leading public men, which is one of lie most remarkable political phenomena of our time, bat also because I think—and you will not, I am sere, misconstrue what I say—the question itself has lost a portion of the importance which it for merly possessed. Fifty years ago Parliament had an almost exclusive power of forming public opinion upon all questions of the time. That state of things has changed. The vast development of the power of the press during the last quarter of a century has introduced into modern politics an entirely new element. ( Hear, hear.) It is impossible to sit in Parliament without seeing how far and to how great an extent modern journalism affects even our parliamentary debates. That power of the press is in it self a representation. (Hear, hear.) It is the best pro tection. as I believe, of the poor and the humble against the powerful. It is a protection which no legislation created ; it is a protection which no legi-lation can take away ; and it is not one of the least subjects of satisfaction to we, looking b .ck at the few years which I have passed in public life, to think that I was one of those who took part in a measure—l mean the removal of the stamp duty—which has given an increased development to journalism, and of which we have seen as yet only a small portion of the effects. (Hear, hear.) Lord Stanley then came to the question of our foreign relations, and especially those which we held with France. A close and intimate alliance between England and France he held to be essential to European civilisation : We are locally too near, we are too important among the nations of the world, we have been too long and too often rivals, to make a state of indifference possible- We want a close and intimate friendship as a guarantee against national jealousy and rivalry. (Hear, hear.) That a war between the two nations would be the worst evil that could afflict humanity is a proposition which, I think, needs no words to prove ; but I will go further, and say that a disunion between the two countries, falling short of war, would be in itself a great misfortune to Europe. It would leave European diplomacy without guidance, a nd . the weaker and inferior nations without an arbiter. for is this al. In every age that old question of the balance of power " assumes a new form. That question no longer concerns Western Europe alone. Two empires are springing up in the east and in the west ; they are ahead . y of first-rate magnitude, and both of them are increasing —not mainly or necessarily by aggression upon others, but simply by natural means—at a rate of progress which far exceeds that of our-elves. Looking merely at the matter of population, it is impossible not to see that. unless some unforeseen events take place, Ametica and Russia will 100 years hence, perhaps evert ft yews