The Press. — London, England, 1858-04-03 00:00:00

Nothing bat a Protectionist Government could ever have finally disposed of Protection, and Lord Derby must be allowed time enough to defttro y fur ever what remains of Derliyism. Most Ministers come into power for the pur pose of advancing the principl es of their party—the peculiar function of the present Premier is to take office for the more complete annihilation of his own. This of cou rse is a temporary work, but it is a necessary one. When Lord Derby leaves office, Derbyiam will have been ca tinguished by its own band, and when it has once been buried in the cross-roads with a stake through it, we shall bear no more about it.: - - These three great sections of the House of Commons are thus disposed of. The Russell Whigs are in a state of hopeless collapse ; the Palmerston Whigs and Liberals are found out ; " and the Derbyites are about to be self immolated. As these three classes embrace fully 500 members out of the 654 who consti tute the present House of Commons, in what way, or by what system, does the Saturday Riview propose, in its expected millenium, to carry on the Government? " The Liberal " party," we are told, will soon " resume the " power which of right belongs to it, with " fittinr , leaders and a disciplined army." This is to happen when the Derbys, Russells, Palmerstons, and all " the old set," have been got rid ofl Are these the day-dreams of schoolboys, or the serious projects of grown men? The " great Liberal party," with its " fitting leaders " and disciplined army," are at present in the position of the Armada in The Critic— " The Spanish fleet thou canst not see, because " 'tis not in sight." But, never mind ; it's coming. We bear of it in another quarter, and proofs from various quarters furnish the strongest corro boration of any fact. The " Birmingham Reformers' Union " issued, only last week, a circular descriptive of the political prospects of the present time. In that document they say : " The advanced party has no leader; at "present the majority cluster round the " standard either of PALMERSTON' or RUSSELL ; " but a large number believe in neither. One " other man they would follow; but this session, " at least, he will not take active means to " organize a party. We refer to our own " member, JOHN BRIGHT. His day will come, " we have confidence—but not yet." Here is the same yearning, the same expec tation, which we find in the Saturday Review. But if the Saturday Review means what JOHN BRIGHT means, why does it not say so ? And more. do not mean to imitate the ill-manners of the Saturday Review. or to hold up gentlemen, by name, to ridicule ; but universal report gives the proprietorship of that journal to an M.P. who has long been connected with the press, and who has already brought one daily paper to utter ruin and . destitution. In that paper the gentleman in question used to write long High-Church dia tribes: and in a well-known Kentish borough he exhibited himself in the character of a Conservative candidate. What means, then, the line of conduct taken in his present news paper, which eschews and ridicules everything savouring of Conservative principles, and de siderates the formation of a " great Liberal party," of which Messrs. BRIGHT, ROEBUCK, and MILNER GIBSON must be the leaders? How are we to understand all this? Amidst such contradictions, such unintelligible conduct, the only thing which seems quite natural, and, in short, inevitable, is, that which the Satur day Review frankly confesses—namely, that " the disorganization of the Liberal party is a " great fact." A great fact it certainly is, but one which it is not difficult to understand. If gentlemen choose to canvass a borough as Conservatives, and to carry on a newspaper as Liberals—if they quarrel with every man of any note in the House, except those few who take no pains to conceal their Republicanism—if they avow their disgust for Lord PALMERSTON, their contempt for Lord JOHN RUSSELL, and their pity for Lord DERBY; while the BRIGHTS and ROEBUCKS neither can nor will " organize a Party," what remains? The boasted " majo " rity of the House of Commons " can be, under such circumstances, nothing better than a well-dressed mob. It loses the reins of Government inevitably, because it has neither But we must not en- 37,1 M. Nothing ba have finally dii be allowed tine of Derby ism. purpnse of a( peculiar funct for the more ( course is a t 4 When Lord L extinguished I buried in the bear no more These tl: Commons Whigs are the Palmei out ; " and immolated fully 500 n tutu the pi way, or b, Review pro carry on " party," vv " power m " fittine , 1 This is to Palmerstoi got rid of Are thes, the seriou " great Lil " and disc position " The bpa " 'tis not ii But, ne' it in an various qu boration The " issued, onl the politic In that do "The i " present " standard " but a lar l " other mal " at least, " organize " member, " we have Hera is tation, whi But if the BRIGHT in( And mo ill-manner up gentle universal that jouri connected brought o . destitutior question u tribes he exhibi Conservat the line of paper, whi savouring sidertites I . _ •SS , •.t.caua . y, a policy, nor leaders. I 4 March 37, Pitt PRtSfii, APRIL 3, 1858. large on this topic in our present number : in our next we shall inquire, for a few minutes, into the causes of the " great fact" now universally admitted—into tho reasons assigned for " the disorganization of the Liberal party." Otort.esponYenct. INDIAN GOVERNMENT. TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS." Sir,—The " most momentous question," as in your last number you properly designate it, " ever submitted t.o a Legislative Assembly," is on the point of engaging the attention of Parliament. It will indeed be a calamity if its solution should be allowed to degenerate into a party struggle, and if the imperial interests it involves, together with the wel fare of the many millions of our fellow-subjects which is implicated in its decision, should be made the sport of politicians, instead of being determined by tho principles of statesmen. You have done good service by drawing public attention to some of those principles. Will you permit me to follow that course as introductory to a suggestion for giving to them a practical application—novel, perhaps startling—but which I am encouraged by deep re flection, as well as by some influential approval, to believe will be found not undeserving of serious con sideration. I assume it as admitted that absolute government, which the British Constitution repudiates, and the British people will not endure at home, should not be permitted to exist in our distant possessions one hour after it shall have been found possible to in troduce into their government the representative principle. In Canada, in -Australia, at the Cape of Good Hope, in Jamaica, even in the insignificant Island of Newfoundland, the absolute authority of the Sovereign has been superseded by representa tive institutions ; and Crown colonies, condemned by public opinion, though still tolerated where the elements of free government do not exist, are classed among the necessities to which circumstances com pel us temporarily to submit, but which, irrecon cilable with the genius of our institutions, are doomed to abrogation so soon as that necessity shall cease. It is in such a settled state of public con viction that an unexpected and awful event has thrown on us the inexpressibly responsible task of providing for the future government of the most magnificent dependency ever confided by Providence to the charge of any State. It is with some asto nishment I have observed that in almost all the suggestions advanced for the practical fulfilment of this duty—with the exception, I must admit, of those that have appeared in THE PRESS—the great popular objects which can be secured only by adherence to the representative principle, are either ignored alto gether, or sought through the inconsistent and absolute agency of projects, which, if adopted, would in effect reduce India to the position of a gigantic Crown colony, guarded only by feeble contrivances from all the abuses and corruptions inseparable from the exercise of absolute authority. 1 admit, sir, that the anomalies presented by our Indian empire will not allow the strict application there of that representative system which Englishmen so highly and so deservedly cherish at home. But 1 deny that because the native population are, and, as I believe, will ever remain, incapable of exercising the inesti mable privilege of self government, it is necessary that the destinies of India should be abandoned to Ministerial and party intrigue, parliamentary cor ruption, or aristocratic monopoly. It may be wise to abolish the double Government. It may be ad visable to substitute the authority of a Supreme Council for that of a Court of Directors, chosen by a limited body of commercial capitalists. But it is of the last importance that legislative and adminis trative powers, on the exercise of which the pro sperity and happiness of 180 millions of our fellow subjects, and the value of India to the British nation, will greatly depend, should not be handed over to a viciously-constituted authority. Against such a calamitous contingency I can perceive but one safeguard—the closest adherence that circum stances will permit to the representative principle of the British Constitution. The difficulty which obviously presents itself to the application of this principle, is that of finding a constituency to whom may safely be intrusted the power of election. This difficulty I propose to solve. I pass over, for the present, the consideration of the qualifications that should be insisted on as in dispensable for eligibility to the high and responsible office of Indian Councillor; remarking only that, consisting principally of individuals practi cally conversant with Indian affairs, the Council should be so composed as to include a fair proportion of individuals possessing a knowledge of finance, commerce, and the higher departments of statesmanship. Nor would it be now convenient that I should dwell either on the extent of power to be delegated to the Council, or the particular manner in - which it should be exercised ; on which points. 317 important as they are, and prepared as I am to ex press an opinion, I earnestly desire to avoid all ap pearance of dogmatism. All I insist on is, I repeat, the adoption of the representative principle in the selection of councillurs ; and this brings me back to the specific proposition I desire to introduce, of a constituency to whom the task of election from a list of qualified candidates may be safely and con sistently confided. Such a constituent body I am about to suggest, consisting of individuals in whom an analogous confidence is now absolutely and un reservedly placed by the British people ; a body strictly harmonizing with those constitutional princi ples on which I have so strongly insisted ; too numerous and too higbminded to be corrupted; a body in which the unavoidable influence of personal and party predilections would be balanced and counterpoised ; a oody combining happily and in just proportions the popular and aristocratic ele ments ; calculated to prove progressive, yet cautious —reforming, yet safe. I propose, then, to give to every member of both Houses of Parliament a vote in the election, from a list of qualified candidates, of each member of the " Council of India," the Governor-General being of course appointed by the Crown ; the right not to be exercised by a majority in collective meetings, but individual votes, as in ordinary elections. The prac• tical application of this plan would present no difficulty whatever. Its advantages would be many —the valid objections to it, I believe, few. Pro foundly convinced that it merits at least an impartial consideration, I invoke for it a candid and dispas sionate examination, prepared if necessary to defend its principle and explain such of its details as have appeared to me sufficiently involved in its admission as to have claimed my attention before submitting it to public criticism.—l am, sir, your faithful and obedient servant, CMS ROMAN us. Reigate, March 24th, 1858. WHAT DID THE AN 11-CORN-LAW LEAGUE TEACH ? TO THE EDITOR OF " THE PRESS." Sir,—l have read with much interest the contro versy between yourself and the Globe as to the effects of Free Trade. Your contemporary writes : We never held out any exaggerated hopes; we did not promise low prices, kc. The Globe is quite safe in making any assertion most convenient for present circumstances. It was never recognized as an authority by the Free-trade party. The following extract from the official organ of the Anti-Corn•Law League is authoritative : The Association have procured wooden models answer ing to the respective sizes of the American and English eightpenny loaves, the former being one-third larger than the latter, which they fixed on poles to a van, or " moving advertiser," drawn daily along the public streets. To these loaves were attached labels : " English eightpenny loaf—wages, 2s. a day." "American eightpenny loaf— wages, 4s. a day." In addition to these, an immense placard is posted on each side of the van, with the follow ing words:— WHAT LOWERS WAGES? THE BREAD TAX. WHAT STARVES THE OPERATIVE ? THE BREAD TAX. WHAT RUINS MASTERS? THE BREAD TAX. DOWN WITH THE INFAMOUS BREAD TAX ! ! ! The novel sight attracts constant groups of onlookers, and it promises to be a very effective mode of agilalion. It is about to be adopted in London.—Anti-corn-Laia Circular. No. 58. The "wooden models" I saw paraded in all the principal towns in the north of England and through out Scotland. This was the logic of prophecy : that the logic of fact should be found on the other side is certainly no fault of yours. On the authority of the Free-traders, wages ought, under Free Trade, to have been high ; operatives ought not to have been starved ; masters ought not to have been ruined. Had Free trade theory and actual fact corresponded, pauperism would have decreased— bankruptcy would have been almost unknown. The Free-traders assumed to be statesmen of the very highest order—to know what would follow from measures they advocated. As successful agitators, their reputation has be'n established, and it remains unimpaired. Tried by the test of time—the only test by which modern prophets can be tried— their prophecies must, beyond reasonable controversy, be ranked among exploded delusions. It was an aphorism of Harrington, the author of Oceana, "that a people cannot see, but it can feel !" Under the instructions of the Anti-Corn-Law League the people have both seen and felt; they have seen the " wooden models," and under the operat►on of Free Trade have felt the want of their promised counterparts made of flour. The popular mind can not now, so far as Free Trade promise and practice are concerned, be further deceived. Facts cannot be changed, and these have written indelibly—" FREE-TRADERS ! TIME HAS PROVED YOU TO HAVE BEEN FALSE PROPILETS."..-I am, sir, your obedient servant, March 29, 1858. Fau TRADE.