The Press. — London, England, 1857-03-07 00:00:00

MARCH 7, 185. their policy should be a national policy. But when we come to consider all that the word " national" means when applied to the inha bitants of these islands we shall easily see that a national Administration is not likely to be one of every-day occurrence—that, owing to a variety of intervenient causes, we are often governed instead by only a semi-national section of politicians, but that, w'nenever an opportunity shall present to itself for the accession to office of a really nationaljparty, it will probably•form an Administration of great strength and considerable duration. There are foreigners who tell us that England, after all, is the most aristocratic country in Europe. There are others who nickname us a people of shopkeepers. We are alternately taunted with X respect for rank amounting almost to servil l ity, and with a love of independence amounting almost to factious ness. But all this only points to the singu larly heterogenec us elements of which English society is composed, and the freedom with which all conflicting interests are allowed to express themselves. The character of the people is neither inconsistent nor unstable. It is, on the contrary, more than commonly single-minded and conservative. A Government, therefore, which shall com mand the permanent support of this country, must, we are confident, rest upon a truly broad basis. It must be a Government of gentle men ; it must be a Government of economists ; it must be a Government with common and well-defined objects. It must represent those old aristocratic and chivalrous traditions which we have been permitted to preserve through so many surrounding perils, and which are now the envy of the highest political philoso phers. It must represent, moreover, that por tion of English society which has resolved that self-government shall not be a farce, but a reality—which has determined that our national expenditure shall not form the only exception to our habits of commercial regu larity, and that the people shall not be taxed to support the demands of nepotism and sine enlists. It must represent, also, that love of fixedness, of law, of long-settled habits and institutions for which Englishmen are pre eminently conspicuous ; and this it must corn bine with such attention to existing wants as shall render impossible the perpetuation of abuses. Could such a policy be defined better than by the name of Conservative Progress ? It is clearly, however, not sufficient that a party should only represent these principles : it. must possess also the men who can carry them into effect. To descend to particulars, let us consider a little how far the leading statesmen of this country, on either side the House, answer to the character we have drawn. If we are looking for a statesman imbued with a sincere love for the ancient institutions of Great Britain, with eloquence to defend them when attacked, and truthfulness to make them all the more respected for the defence of such a man—a statesman whose foreign policy, if his past life can be trusted, would never be deficient in spirit, nor, if present conduct proves anything, be ever devoid of mode ration ; whose actions would never belie his words, because he is not such a slave to popularity as to be always promising impossi• bilities—if, we say, the country is looking for such a man as this, let them place Lord PAL MERSTON and Lord DERBY side by side, and make their own election. If, again, we are seeking for a Minister to whom the control of our disordered finances may safely be trusted—who to a knowledge of business unites , that native talent and power of addressing public assemblies which a Par liamentary leader must possess—would the choice of the county fall on Sir GEORGE CORNEWALL LEWIS? Sir GEORGE is a gentle man and a scholar, and that is high praise. But a gentleman may possibly be dull, and a scholar may possibly he heavy. The pages of a ()Lee popular Review are, we fear, sad evi dence against the present CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, whose Liberal friends would have smiled but a short time ago at the bare men tion of his elevation to such a post. ri/ 111 THE PRESS. The country demands a variety of domestic reforms. Among the most prominent subjects are law, education, and secondary punish ments. We need not employ many words in painting the contrast between Lord CRANWORTH and Lord ST. LEONARDS, nor between Sir RICHARD BETHEL!, and the most eminent juridical reformer of our day,Sir FITZROY KELLY. The people now know well that no practical measure of Law Reform is to be expected from the present Loan CHANCELLOR or AT TORNEY-GENERAL. After the Education Bill of Lord JOHN RUSSELL last year, and the pro posals of Sir JOHN PAKINGTON in the present session, few people, we imagine, can entertain any doubt which is the fitter man to carry through this great national requirement. Of the actual party in office, there is positively no one who even professes any acquaintance with the subject; and the only man, out of the Conservative ranks, who would have any pre tensions to bring in another Education Bill would be that very statesman whose lamen tations over his own failure still seem ringing in our ears. In regard to secondary punish ments, that Sir GEORGE GREY may have brought in a decently sensible measure we do not deny ; but his Bill is characterised by one or two grave defects, of which the chief is that it destroys the element of certainty in the award of punishment, and leaves a wide scope for the convict's imagination to revel in, which is sure to prevent his feeling that terror which the prospect of a positive and determined punish ment is sure to inspire. To say that Sir GEORGE GREY is the only man who could deal properly with the convict question is an outrage upon common sense. If we turn to the colonies wo see strongly the necessity for young blood and new ideas. Questions are there rising up which statesmen of the old regime are incompetent to solve. Incomparably the most promising young man of the present day is the eldest son of Lord DERBY. And it so happens that he is, even at this early age, so eminent for his acquaint ance with the colonial question, that even the Whigs did not scruple to seek the aid of his services. In 1852, Lord DERRY'S Admiralty appoint ments were the theme of general eulogy ; and it might have been well for the country had these, at all events, been permitted to retain their offices. We have as yet said nothing of the Church. The Conservative party has on this question performed its duty so well, that her enemies have lately begun to despair of undermining her. Thoroughly secured from assault by the ascendancy of a national party, she might pro bably be enabled to enter on the consideration of questions which, as long as the conduct of them must devolve upon Liberal hands, it is dangerous to agitate. We have now glanced briefly at the leading requirements of the period, and we cannot help thinking that the question which has recently been asked should have been con versely stated, and that, instead of saying does the country know the style of men it must fall back upon if it rejects Lord PALMERSTON, we should ask, does it fully appreciate the cha racter of the men it will have to fall back upon should it reject Lord DERBY ? A CHARGE OF HIGH TREASON. AN article of a most extraordinary kind has ap peared this week in the columns of a daily supporter of the Prime Minister. A charge of high treason (for it amounts to that) is made against some person or persons un known. In the leading columns of the Morning Post, it is stated : On the arrival of Feronk Khan in Paris, every attempt was made to circumvent and wheedle him by emisßaries from this country. The Persian wax implored not to yield. It was intimated to him a week or ten days ago that the days of Viscount Palmerston's ministry were numbered, and that a Coalition and a confederated Cabinet would come into office, from which he would obtain much better terms than from Viscount Palmerston's Government. That statement is either true or false If it be true, we cull at once upon the Government to do its duty, and to indict " the emissaries " who engaged in traitorous proceedings. If it be false, we say that the journal, in which such " an unfounded calumny " appeared, has 219 incurred heavy responsibility. It is utterly impossible that such an assertion made at this time, with such pointed preciseness of incrimination, can be allowed to pass without rigorous inquiry. " The arrival " of FEROUR KUAN is taken as the time when these (alleged) treasonable proceedings took place ; and in forwarding them, it is affirmed that "every attempt " was made by " emissaries from this country." The guilt and deep criminality of such conduct would be of the most flagrant kind ; and when so positively asserted, we are at once entitled to demand that the statement be either proved, or else be branded as " a flagitious falsehood." Who were the " emis saries " ? What were their names ? From whom did they proceed ? If such transactions took place with the privity of the parties who have recorded them in print, their guilt as connivers will be very considerable, unless they at once come forward and expose the actors in such heinous intrigues. The honour of our country, the reputation of her diplomatic establishment, the character of her political parties, are all compromised deeply by such a statement if true ; and if it be false, the responsibility of circulating such a calum nious statement is painfully onerous. Again, we imperatively call for the proofs of that statement. To make such charges in an eminent public organ, and to circulate them far and wide, while there was no evidence to support them, would be such a scandal to political literature, and to the profession of journalism, that we could scarcely believe it of any English newspaper. To make such charges without proofs would he a dereliction of all the first duties of a publicist. We are not here dealing with a dubious assertion about some matter involving no criminality. Quite the contrary. It is not a statement, but a charge, and the offence imputed is nothing less than TREASON. The leading article in which this charge is stated commences—" Never was a more un " founded calumny uttered than the one " that the Noble Lord who is the First Lord "of the Treasury delights in contention and " war." Now, we call upon those who so boldly wrote about " unfounded calumny " to prove their assertions when they circulate charges imputing to "emissaries from this " country " the highest offences against the Crown. If the charge turns out to be false, we must say that the conduct of those who can either invent or circulate such unfounded " calumnies" deserves indignant reprobation. INFLUENCE OF LAND SOCIETIES ON COUNTY ELECTIONS. THE electoral contests in West Kent and East Sussex have been hard-fought battles, and have brought into action the voters registered through the agency of the Freehold Land Societies. In the ger.cral election of 1852, Middlesex was lost to the Conservative can didate owing to the votes created by the National Land Society ; and to counteract the growing and dangerous influence, the Conser vative Land Society was established in the same year. It was in West Kent that its allottees had the first opportunity of recording their votes ; and the result was, that out of fifty-six on the register, only four persons who had thus acquired the franchise voted for the Liberal Member. In East Sussex eighty members were registered by the Society, and of these only six were found to poll against Lord PEVENSEY. Thus out of 136 shareholders who had obtained the freehold qualification in the two counties through the instrumentality of the Conservative Land Society, only ten were found to vote for the Liberal candidates. This remarkable result in the age of political tergiversation ought not to be lost sight of. The fact is indeed of no little moment in the present crisis. It shows that men have been brought together from all classes of the com munity, including the operative and the son of the peer, who, without any promise, pledge, or condition of any kind imposed on them, obtained county votes, and, when the elections took place, went to the poll and acted loyally 4 - ,