The Press. — London, England, 1853-05-14 00:00:00

//O • %, ° 4 , • " , . 40. , t $ irbt LONDON, SATURDAY, MAY 14, 1833. PRICE SIXPENCE. No. 2.—VoL. I. WHEN Lord Aberdeen accepted the Ultimata lit trust of forming an Adminihtration. he allAtleil in deprecation of the charge of undue ambi tion to his advanced age. His lordship sa id he had arrived Id that period which the royal and divine poet had fix ed upon as the fulness of the years of uuu► ; and then, with admirable consistency, he announced that his Govern ment was founded on a principle which would not be introduced to the notice of the country /or a year. Too old to be a minister, his policy was nevertheless postponed. Moreover, what was that policy ? The Reform of Parliament. Sir James Graham, the venerable father of the Coalition, and therefore a high authority, went breathless to the hustings of Carlisle, and proclaimed before he deigned to solicit a suilYage that ho had made the condition of his serving under Lord Aberdeen that there should be "a large ineamtre of Parliamentary Reform," and the populace of Carlisle loudly cheered. Lord T. Russell thought a measure of Par liamentary Reform so indispensable, even at the beginning of last year, that he introdulied it with all the authority of a Rime Minister. If it were urgent then. why is it postponed now? If demanded id —452, why is it to be realised only in —54 ? Lord John Russell cannot pretend that occurrences on the Con tinent have influenced his conduct and de cision. All these occurrences now conve niently referred to by uneasy consciences, to explain their false position, had taken place be fore the expulsion of Lord Palmerston from the Cabinet of Lord J. Russell in —5l; and it should be known, and at least will be known now, that Lord J. Russell, after the expulsion of Lord Palmerston, doubtless in consequence of it, made his projected Reform Bill infinitely more drastic, in a desperate effort to maintain a position which he has probably forfeited for ever, bemuse he has never comprehended the true interests of the Whig party. What is " Parliamentary Reform ?" Tamper ing with constituencies, meddling with the boundaries of boroughs, abridging the hours of voting, adding a little he re , and taking away a little there, giving members of Parliament to a learned society, or investing with the franchise a professor or a half-pay officer—this is not Parliamentary Reform, any more than white washing is architecture. It was a reform of Parliament when Lord John Russell, its the organ of Lord (hey, brought in the measure of —3O. The House of Commons was then reconstructed, but it was reconstructed in the spirit of our institutions, and in harmony with our national character. The great towns of England, the seats of newborn industry, were summoned to take their place in the free aris. toeracy of England, and add their sympathy and support to the system established in this country,—that all may aspire, and that that which is best shall be honoured. Those who now cry out for Parliamentary Reform, and who will hold Lord J. Russell to his reckless pledge—who will remind Sir James Graham of his audacious declaration—and dis- turb the dreams of Lord Aberdeen. want no reform in the fashion of —3O. They give no allegiance to the principles of our institutions. and they glepreciate our national character. , Far front aspiring in the spirit of our free aristocracy, they abhor it. They are, neverthe less, honest men, for they proclaim their pur pose, mid they are able and energetic and determined men, with whom such shuttling speculators on the eluuwes of hUlllitllitV as the grim Court ier who now presides at the 'treasury will find some difficulty to cope. These men are disciples of progress. and what they wish to advance to is the American system. They are against a free aristocracy, and, as they know the only foundation of a free aristocracy is the penal, they wish to cripple the fortunes us the surest means of diminishing and de stroying the authority of the land. What these men want is, that there shall be a new electoral scheme in which the landed franchise shall assume a subordinate part: Is that the scheme which Lord John Russell means to propose ? Is that " the large measure which Sir James Graham exacted from the illustrious legislator of the Set AA Kirk ? It was said the other night in the House of Commons that the policy of the English move ment, if carried into eomplete 'Mild, would chauge a first-rate kingdom into a alteoud-rate republic. We doubt not it is slimier to destroy a first-rate kingdom than to create on, but we entirely impugn the position that this country can ever become a republic of any degree. The honest but shortsighted politicians who are attempting to fitshion our future society on the American standard will find, though too late for their happiness, that there are certain inevitable conditions on which the government of the old European communities can alone be einTied on. It is possible to change all the forms of our polity ; convert a Monarch into a President ; to substitute an elective for a territorial Senate ; to transform a House of Commons into a national Assembly; to dissolve the ties of Church and State ; to destroy the rights of inheritance ; in short, to produce on the surface of our society the semblance of a transatlantic commonwealth. But it will be only forms that are changed or established. The elements of society, whether material or sentimental, will be unaltered. The only change will be that their influence, instead of being orderly and conservative, will, under the new scheme, become destructive and disturbing. Subvert a dynasty, and a princely pretender will challenge the authority of your president ; confiscate an aristocracy, and you establish Iteredibu factions ; plunder a church, and an impoveris hed priesthood will whisper rebellion to the tender consciences of millions. These are constituents of disorder which are not found in American eommuni ties. Prescription will defrat the most power ful statesman ; outraged Tradition will battle even Committees of Public Safety and Reigns of Terror. What is called revolution in Europe is the destruction of those traditionary in fluences which have governed a country : suc ceed in destroying them, and the traditionary influences take the shape of disturbing elements. After a cycle of convulsions the agitated community calls upon tinve to ensure order; the sole conditions On which Europe can be governed are then recognised. and we shall discover that if we will not submit to traditionary influences we must bow to military power. THE ituDifi...T "AS A WHOLE." 'rum budget ' as a whole" is a ea rieature and exaggeration of Nlr. Disraeli's financial pro jects and speeches. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer made a statement of five I l eum' length, in OM' opinion much too long. and sa vouring somewhat of the. Yankee school of rhetoric, but he lead some excuse in the eie cumstance that he had to dissent on certain distressed and SiWeittl interests—sugar and shipping, and so on—which he was bound to review, and in some degree to assist. These specialities were not the awkward inheritance of Mr. Gladstone. Shipping one of this class —had been previously disposed of by Mr. Cardwell, in H sermon not unworthy of that Free Kirk called into existence by the statesmanlike adroitness of the " travelled Thane," " Athenian. but not Attic." Mr. Glad stone had only his own department to develop, and proved himself et stump orator far exceed ing the Brother Jonathon tendencies of his predecessor. Mr. Disraeli's position was, that in conse quence of the revolutions of our tariff it was necessary to adapt our fisted to out eonnuercid system. and that, in this adaptation, relief from the undue pressure of taxation would be ultimately found by those iqterests which had previously been reconciled to thikupflua WPM sure by artificial prices. Blight or wrong, Mr. Disraeli had been preaching this doctrine for years ; and when he had the opportunity he tried to practise it. Mr. Gladstone, on the contrary, had been propagating for an equal term of tune a doctrine exactly contrary, — namely, that the interests deprived of 'artificial prices would find, and had found, an ample compensation for the loss of their privileges in the superior cheapness and abundance of all the articles they consumed and required. With these views, Mr. Gladstone was quite justified in opposing the financial propositions of his predecessor. According to Mr. Glad stone and his school, no revision of our taxa tion was required ; our financial and our con. Inertial systems were in harmony ; deficits ought not to be created to 1w supplied by new taxes ; and the prudent administration of the passing hour was all that rats required. Having turned out Mr. Disraeli on these principles. Mr. Gladstone out - hero ded Herod. Ile created a deficiency treble the amount of that contemplated by Mr. Disraeli ; instead of one new tax. he proposed three ; and instead of limiting his arrangements to one year, as he was hound to do, or to two years, as Mr. Disraeli presumed to do, he tied up the hands of Parliament fin. seven. Attt.tupting to mitigate the vast burden of indirect taxation, which presses on the culti vation of the soil in the shape of spirit and malt duties, Mr. Disraeli would have adroitly reconciled the commercial classes to this act of justice and policy, by dealing for the first time with the Tea duties. 'this was an attempt from which every Chancellor of the Exchequer —Mr. Gunflint-ft, Sir It. Peel, Sir C. Wood — had alike shrunk. We have ourselves con• siderable doubts as to the expediency of this measure ; but it must be agreed that, if it were to lee effected, the measure proposed by Mr. Disraeli was both bold and prudent. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer, confident in Lis .judgment as to the resources of China, but deferring wisely to the fears of some as to sufficient supply, and as to the disturbed of that country, proposed a term of six years . 17V4 1