The Press. — London, England, 1857-09-05 00:00:00

THE PRESS, SEPTEMBER 5,1857. new neer has done enough for his party to entitle him to a seat in the Upper House. He has represented Leeds and Edinburgh; he has consistently supported the measures of his connection, and for some years he sat in the Cabinet. His name has been of consider able use to the Liberals, and a peerage to such a man is, therefore, a natural reward. He is unmarried, and of course the title will not descend ; and a large fortune will not, as in other cases, be required to give it social vogue. As to looking for deep or practical views of Indian policy from the new literary peer, we confess that we do not anticipate any sound advice from Lord MACAULAY. His mind has for many years been turned in another direction, and Anglo-India has changed much since he was at Calcutta. Such views as have been previously stated on India by this distin guished man have not been remarkable for ori ginality or loftiness of aitn. Even the favourable observer in the Daily News has remarked, " Of " the five years spent by him in India, as " Member of the Legislative Council, the less " that is said the better. The Macaulay code " remains, and will ever remain, an unattractive " fragment in the museum of British blunders " in India." Possibly on the new Reform Bill of the Whigs the opinions of the new peer will be of more weight and importance ; and although a strong partisan of the Whigs, there are large elements of Conservatism in the views of Mr. MAC.►CLAY. " Demagogues " have always been the particular objects of his aversion, and we do not think that he is likely to lend his repu tation to further changes of an extreme cha racter. PROSPECTS OF THE MILITIA. GOVERNMENT has now been compelled to ac knowledge what experienced military men have long foreseen, that either the Militia must be called out, or the regular army in creased to an unprecedented extent. When we first took up the subject in this journal, Lord PALMERSTON was repeating night after night in the House of Commons that he saw no necessity for the first measure. A large portion, however, of the Militia is now to be embodied ; and as that alone is a clear recognition of their ability and efficiency, it may not be premature to call our readers' attention to the general prospects of the force. We think it advisable that, for the sake of efficiency, her Majesty's Government should for the future have the power of calling out the Militia, say fur a certain limited time, without the necessity of - . an appeal to Parliament; and we think a certain number of militia regiments should always be maintained in such a condition as to be ready for service on a much shorter notice than is now the case. The fact is, we cannot reckon upon having our Temple of Janus closed for many years together. With our enor mous colonial empire, and the peculiar position of the Continent, the chances in favour of war are too great to admit of our calculating upon a tong period of peace. U nder thesecircumstances, we think the entire disembodiment of the Militia et the close of the Russian war was a very great mistake. In little more than a year it is again required And if the Indian mutiny were quelled to-morrow, the chances are some fresh disturbance would arise in little more than the same space of time. This perpetual embodiment and disembodiment of the Militia is mischievous in the extreme. It impairs the efficiency of the men, and seriously affects the prospects of the officers, who scarcely know whether to resign their commissions, and turn to something else or not. Now that we know to a certainty to what extent the Militia can assist us, it is time some decisive steps were taken in the matter, and that young men should be aware how far service in the Militia can be looked upon as a profession or other wise. Various schemes have been proposed for the employment and utilisation of this force. It has even been suggested that whenever we his observation of English life; and undoubt edly there are splendid prizes open to first rate talent in England. In the Church there are several life peerages attached to the Epis copal Bench; the Army, Navy, and the Bar obtain titles in due order; and occasionally peerages are conferred on eminent members of the House of Commons. The elevation of Mr. MACAULAY, though without any exact pre cedent, clearly falls within the line. It now seems just like a day to look back on the time when Mr. MACAULAY, and PRAED, and CHARLES BULLER, and many more were about town, after the starting of Knight's Quarterly Magazine. PRAED is now no more ; he was more of a poet than a politician, and he was not well suited for the struggle of life. Like CHARLES BULLER, he was of a weakly con stitution, and his brains were not supported by backbone. Of all that brilliant company Mr. MACAULAY alone has culminated. Both PRAED and CHARLES BULLER were prematurely cut off; and many others, with considerable talents, have pursued the " humdrum " course of existence—they married, got rich, and gained happiness without renown. Mr. MACAULAY, in Lord BACON'S language, never gave " hostages to fortune ;" and even with all the advantages of his splen did talents, his dazzling style, and his varied knowledge, the new literary peer has been singularly fortunate, so much so as to deserve his old name of " lucky Tom." He was " lucky " in having a father before him who had somas to all the high Whig circles. Old ZACHARY was not a bad progeni tor for an ambitious young orator. Many of the interesting social anecdotes which flow so rapidly from Mr. MAcAuLay's lips testify to the fact of his early initiation into political circles. WILBERFORCE, in his diary, speaks of young MACAULAY and his father, and young TOM'S old competitor, the present distinguished Greek scholar, Professor MALDEN. Earl GREY (then Viscount Howick) was one of the first who praised in high circles the eloquence of the young member of the Cambridge Union. Knight's Magazine introduced the charming essayist to the Edinburgh Review. The disser tation on " Milton " carried his name far and wide; and Lord LANSDOWNE gave him a borough at the exact time most suitable to the display of his powers. " MACAULAY, sir," said the late Mr. SHEIL, " is the cleverest man of the day ; he made " four speeches on the Reform Bill, and got " ten thousand a year." In nothing was Mr. MACAULAY more " lucky " than in the time when he was launched on the Reform current. He was not well fitted for breasting the stream. He could not fight a losing game, and he had not the vehemence and strenuous qualities which made BURKE, SHERIDAN, and BROUGHAM stand up session after session to encounter crowds of adversaries. The " House " was with him while he recited his essays ; the cry out of doors was with his party, and he had abundant success. Yet in the session of 1833, when O'CONNELL and SHEIL split the English Reform party, and when Mr. STANLEY (Lord Derby) showed uncommon powers, it was generally felt that Mr. MACAULAY failed to grap ple with the sturdy aasailants of the Whigs. And afterwards, when he returned from India, and when he became a " Cabinet Minister " of the Melbourne Whigs, it was soon felt that Mr. MACAULAY could not stand in debate against Sir ROBERT PEEL or Lord STANLEY. He could deliver essays, but he could not follow an antagonist through the sinuous wind ings of an argument. He advanced a a few showy generalisations ; he then illus trated them with rhetorical art, but he never impressed one with the idea that ho had capacity for affairs. , We agree with an able writer in the Daily iNeits in thinking that the peerage to Mr. MACAULAY must be accepted as a tribute to his brilliant literary talents. Of these talents, so well tried, this is not the place to speak. Yet we may admit our concurrence with the opinion that Mr. Macaut.ay's admirable essays, rather than his " History of England," «tuu his "Bataviad," will shed most perma nent lustre on his name. That, however, is matter of opinion, on which sentiments may differ. Independently of literary exertion the may have leisure for the remodelling of our military system, it might not prove inexpe dient to intrust our entire home service to the Militia, reserving our regular army for colonial service and for war. The objection is that this arrangement would be hard upon the regulars, who would always be employed abroad. For it must be remembered that if they suffered all the inconveniences they would likewise reap all the honours. However, the time has not yet arrived for the full discus sion of such a subject. But we have no doubt that the Militia will establish by their good conduct at the present crisis their claims to a more worthy consideration than has hitherto been accorded them. THE MEMORY OF PEEL. Is a recent number of the Saturday Review there is a vigorous arti3le discussing an essay called " The Reaction against Peel," which appears in the current New Quarterly Review. Our attention was directed to the essay in ques- tion by the following most remarkable promul gation of opinion from the Saturday Review : We have long ago expressed our opinion that the time is come when the immediate followers of Sir Robert Peel, having fulfilled the special task assigned them, can no longer be grouped together as a distinct party. They were called on to shape and carry out a great scheme of financial policy inaugurated by Sir Robert Peel. Now that this policy is triumphant, and its operation nnassailed, they are no longer held together. The essay in the New Quarterly (with which we differ in many important respects) has not been without effect, since it has extracted so decided an opinion from au organ of such peculiar consideration as the Saturday Reciow . Here we have it distinctly propounded that " Peelites" should not be grouped together as a party. In this respect the essayist in the New Quarterly and the Saturday Review concur. The essayist concluded his paper with a dis tinct assertion that PEEL was not the type of statesmen who should be selected as the re presentatives of a great political school. It was otherwise in the case of Pirr. Down to 1330 there were " Pittites," and Mr. CAN NING, pointing to the picture of Pen, which always hung in his room, used to affirm that Pm was his political master. The " Can ningites " were only modified " Pittites." The Governor-Generalship of India was assigned by Viscount PomaxasToN to Lord CANNING (BO it is understood in political circles) on account Qf GEORGE CANNING having first given a seat in the Cabinet to the present Premier. The pre sent Speaker of the House of Commons was also proposed for the Chair on account of the old tie of " Canningism " CANNING died in 1827, and we are in 1837. Sir ROBERT P&EL died in 190, and will great places and high stations be accorded in ISSO out of deference to " Peelisin"? Not if the dictum of the Saturday Review be held good. "Pittism lasted for a lona time, and so did, and does, " Faxism." But, for want of profound senti ment and for deficiency in high representative significance, " Peeliom " seems, even in the opinions of its ablest and most philosophical supporters, to lack cohesive power. In this conclusion the essay in the New Quarterly seems to be thoroughly sound. There are many parts of the essay in ques tion which we do not like. It is unequal in composition, and it is difficult to say what purpose guided the writer's pen. Some parts rise into strong invective though balanced by a circumspective style, and others sink into the dawdling tone of an anecdotist. We agree with the Saturday Review in thinking that the essayist " speaks from a long Parliamentary " acquaintance with the object of his invec " tive," and the part in which he best succeeds is in his attempt to show that PEEL never stood alone, and that he had always " WEL LINGTON " to his back. In his comments on the memorable crisis of 1834 the essayist is artful in showing that " the Duke" bore the weight of that critical period, and we observe that in " Raikes's Diary " the Duke of WELLING TON dwelt with marked complacency on the part that his Grace acted in the lioYeru•